Gavin Williamson “swearing on his DCs’ life”

[Loopytiles]

Sacked defence secretary says he didn’t leak from the National Security council, and reportedly “swore on his DCs’ life”.

I’m generally cynical and am no fan of Mr Williamson, but if he said this tend to believe him. It’s a rarely used phrase and not one I imagine parents would use if lying.

Am I being naive? Suppose that unless you’re superstitious, nothing bad will happen to your DC if you say it about a lie.

I think there should be a criminal investigation.

its a thing that manipulative people say.

it makes me less inclined to believe him.

He’s a tit of the highest order.

Aye. It’s hard to feel sorry for him either way.

I have never known anybody with any integrity to use that awful phrase.

I am no fan of Theresa May (understatement) but I do not believe for a moment that she would have sacked one of her most loyal and senior colleagues, and effectively announced to the nation that a member of her government had undermined national security, unless she was as sure as can be that she was right. I wonder what details will emerge. There really ought to be a full criminal investigation.

His response reminds me a bit of Jonathan Aitken’s indignation and his “sword of truth” campaign against the Guardian in the 1990s. He furiously launched libel proceedings as his career was threatened by serious allegations. They didn’t go well. He ended up in prison for perjury and conspiracy to pervert the course of justice.

Obviously that doesn’t tell us anything about the present situation, but if GW and his supporters are going to press for a full and public investigation they may want to be careful what they wish for.

The only person I've heard use that phrase irl was lying, and people believed him over me. I knew I was telling the truth but would never have used a phrase like that. The truth eventually came out in the end and everyone was shocked as he had sworn on his family's life. From that experience I assume that anyone who says that tends to be a liar. Same as people who tell you to trust them because they're an honest and decent person. My experience has been they've always proved to be the opposite of trustworthy.

Think it comes back to the age old wisdom of the emptiest vessels make the most noise/ he doth protest too much.

I don't think he will go back to his golden life. Normally these people take up well paid non executive director roles when their politics, career is over , but no one is going to take on a shamed defence secretary. It will bring their own company into disrepute. He really will struggle to get decent employment.

I'd also assume he was able to defend, it would be like any gross misconduct investigation at work. They will have procedures that were tightly followed.

They are calling for a police investigation but the reality is the police have less investigative powers than those who actually investigated him. Those guys are the ones we trust every day to keep us safe from terrorist attacks. They are the best and most powerful we have in the country.

What the police do have though is the ability to press criminal charges. And I'm not sure of the necessity of that. He's been publicly fired and the prime minister her self has publicly stated he is guilty. In reality this is a huge, huge punishment, I'm not sure sending him to jail, wasting court time and public money serves any benefit.

I have heard that many times, it’s a common one in DHs family. They are liars, it’s a horrible expression and I feel so sorry for his children having to hear.

Yeah well he promised his wife he’d be faithful and look how that turned out.

The Alan Partridge of politics.

It’s a meaningless oath. If you lie to me in those terms I’m hardly going to come round and kill your kids. I suggest anyone who hears a man/boy saying that says “oh, don’t do that. Swear on your Merc/iPhone/XBox. If it turns out you’re lying I’ll come round with a claw hammer”.

I do think that the popular conviction that politicians are all barefaced liars is at odds with the huge social taboo against telling flat out lies, and the reputational consequences of getting caught out in such a lie. Have you ever noticed that in a murder mystery if someone says “I know it looks bad but I swear I never done it. You gotta believe me!” then they never have done it. The real killer may lie by implication “how can you say that? What reason would I have to kill him?” or about the minor details but they are incapable of lying about their guilt. I can’t think of any example where the killer protests their innocence in black and white terms. Once you’ve noticed it it’s a bit distracting.

I hope he is prosecuted for breaking the official secrets act.
Massive media whore who was more interested in posting photos on social media with animals than interest on defence.

Gosh, I'd no idea what people thought of this phrase! I've certainly used it, and have genuinely meant it, and I'm not a liar or manipulative. If someone was in discussion with me and swore on their child/mum/dad's life I would assume that they were telling the truth as I wouldn't use that expression unless I was being honest and wanted to be believed.

I learn something new every day on Mumsnet!

I am no fan of Theresa May (understatement) but I do not believe for a moment that she would have sacked one of her most loyal and senior colleagues, and effectively announced to the nation that a member of her government had undermined national security, unless she was as sure as can be that she was right

On the contrary I think she’s absolutely capable of it. If she’s sure she’s right then bring on the police investigation.

@barbarianmum it wasn’t a criminal investigation because it wasn’t a process to determine whether he should be charged with a crime. It was an internal process as to whether May wanted him to remain in his Ministerial role. All that’s happened is that he’s lost his place in the cabinet. He’s still an MP (and paid accordingly).

in a murder mystery
You do know those are fictions? What you are describing is a literary trope, not actual life!

It's indicative of his immaturity and lack of talent imo. He could have made it work for him by admitting it and explaining that he did it because the implications of allowing Huawei into our 5G network are far reaching and not positive for our relationships with some of our most important allies. That the PM is the only person involved in the decision around this to think it's a good thing, and that her reasoning needs to be scrutinised.
But no - instead of that debate, we get "I swear on my child's life I didn't do it". This incident is typical of the whole bloody shitshow of incompetence that is our government.

I thought it was interesting that John Crace (in his own irreverent style) told Guardian readers as long ago as 25 April that GW was prime suspect. Perhaps indicative of what was being circulated in journo-land.

I'm another one who thinks "liar liar" when someone uses it, mostly because I have heard the "mums life" one fall glibly from year 5 and 6 lips when I have seen their owners do stuff with my own eyes!

Nope, that doesn't convince me. Thinking logically, if he is guilty then he has to double-down on a strong denial. His career and reputation are on the line and all he can do is deny, deny, deny! There is literally no other course of action available to him.

He won't get his cabinet job back but he will still have to fight for reelection in his seat and any hope of a cushy "golden parachute" job in the city also depends on there being some doubt as to whether he did it.

On the other hand, he is openly demanding a police investigation which is interesting, unless he's confident that a police investigation won't find evidence against him it does sound more like the language of an innocent man.

I'm still coming down on the side that it was likely him since he's known to not be very clever and as a loudmouth (apparently most people in Whitehall had already assumed it was him just by guessing how was likeliest to have done it). Maybe he didn't realise how seriously a security leak would be taken. Also, he did have a phone conversation with the journalist who broke the story, it's hard for that not to look highly suspicious and again, he's not exactly mensa material.

As the police know well, the person who is most likely to have committed a crime usually IS the person who committed the crime, still I hope there is a criminal investigation.

I think Theresa May has the proof it was him which is why he was sacked and good riddance too.

I've been very aware of Gavin Williamson since the first day he was in the job and I've always thought he was a dick and worried about what he was going to say next. I didn't trust him at all and have never understood why Theresa May gave him such an important job where he was obviously so far out of his depth.

I don’t think we need to be told GW was a prime suspect, that was bleedin’ obvious.

But it’s always been possible that the leak came from outside the cabinet in the interests of national security.

Afaik the evidence against him is that he had an 11 minute phone conversation with a journalist. That he spoke about Huawei seems to be an assumption rather than a certainty.

Well unless his children will be killed if it comes out he is lying then it is just and empty stupid thing to say.

He’s just another power hungry man who will say anything to retain his position.
Swearing on people’s lives is up there with Trust Me and To Be Completely Honest.

I imagine that he is just watching his chances of being PM slipping down the drain and is doing all he can to cling on.

I don't believe him at all, he is not remotely trustworthy and is well known in Westminster circles to be a very dishonest, manipulative man.

It is rather a childish thing to say. I swear on this or not sounds ridiculous coming from a grown man. Particularly one that is supposed to be the defence secretary. You would expect in that particular role that confidentiality and the ability to be discreet is categorically non negotiable.

Ugh. It makes him sound like Phil Mitchell, not someone you'd trust with state security decisions.

On the contrary I think she’s absolutely capable of it. If she’s sure she’s right then bring on the police investigation

This is illogical as the police have less investigative powers than our security councils, who are the people who investigated.

That he spoke about Huawei seems to be an assumption rather than a certainty

I think you're going on gutter media reports, clearly the prime minister or our security councils have not stated the full details, which I wouldn't expect them to. I strongly strongly doubt that this was an "assumption" if it was she'd just if fired him and said he was running a loose ship.

The attorney general, who is effectively Teresa mays lawyer, as well as other legal council, will have reviewed the evidence from the security chiefs and advised her.

Rhe police investigation is something different. It's to press criminal charges, to send the man to jail. This is where their powers lie. They don't even come close in terms of investigative powers to our security councils like mi5, nor do they have the legal advisory fire power.