Boris Downfall Part 5

[Rinoachicken]

…

@Florianus

Alexandra2001: Bojo 's problems are because he has lied and lied again and again - that is why he is under scrutiny and as the PM, the buck stops with him, no comparison with how well Starmer did as a DPP many years ago.

If you believe that the buck stops with Johnson, then it is only logical to say that the buck stopped with Starmer when he was DPP.

As I said, I think that is wrong. As far as I know, the Savile decision was taken by one of Starmer's staff at the time and I don't see why he should be blamed for it.

Similarly, if parties were organised by Johnson's staff, I don't see that he should be blamed for them.

Lying is a different matter and is, regrettably, something that most clueful people would have expected upon the election of Johnson.

Boris Johnson is the fucking Prime Minister so let’s hold him to the highest standard ffs. Stop letting him off the hook.

@Florianus I'm not sure you can quite compare how the buck stops at the top.

As the person at the top, did Johnson/Starmer set the tone and put in place the structures for proper conduct and decision making?

In Johnson's case the answer is clearly no, so yes he absolutely can be blamed for his staff partying.

In Starmer's case, I don't know the details, but from what I can gather, a decision was taken with regards to Savil following a proper process. Not the same thing.

.

Attorney General superintends CPS (and therefore DPP) so I guess the buck stops there.

Duncin - I'm just catching up. Apologies- I got my Julian's muddled earlier! As regards final report status I also need to apologise. I misread a tweet from DAG - he said the final report would be legalled and independently vetted by a QC. He also said that given the checking there would be zero reason to publish in full.

@countrygirl99

Johnson may not be responsible for other people's action but he is responsible for the lies he told both in Parliament and to the Queen.

Absolutely this.

@countrygirl99

Johnson may not be responsible for other people's action but he is responsible for the lies he told both in Parliament and to the Queen.

Exactly this. He needs to and should resign.

@countrygirl99

Johnson may not be responsible for other people's action but he is responsible for the lies he told both in Parliament and to the Queen.

Indeed, but his MPs don't seem to want to take action on the matter, and the Queen certainly won't.

Iggly:
Boris Johnson is the fucking Prime Minister so let’s hold him to the highest standard ffs. Stop letting him off the hook.

It is neither in my power nor yours to "let him off the hook". That is up to his parliamentary party.

@Florianus

Iggly: Boris Johnson is the fucking Prime Minister so let’s hold him to the highest standard ffs. Stop letting him off the hook.

It is neither in my power nor yours to "let him off the hook". That is up to his parliamentary party.

Individual voters let him off in their minds. That’s what I mean and you know it.

@VikingOnTheFridge

Yes, the two simply aren't comparable.

Absolutely. The tactic is clearly to double down on the Saville smear though. Disgraceful.

CSWife:
As the person at the top, did Johnson/Starmer set the tone and put in place the structures for proper conduct and decision making?

This is like the argument that officials who wrongly tried to send Windrush generation people off to the West Indies were only doing so because Theresa May had "set the tone". People do not seem to realise that most ministers do not have time to spend more than a few minutes a week in their departments - basically to check that government policy is hopefully being implemented. Tone (whatever that is supposed to be) is usually set by the Permanent Secretary or (in the case of Downing Street) the Cabinet Secretary.

Whether or not the proposal for a "Prime Minister's Department" will sort out the mess of unclear command that Sue Gray identified is yet to be seen.

Iggly:
Individual voters let him off in their minds.

Still meaningless. Only his parliamentary party can do anything about him for the next two years.

CryingAtTheDisco:
Absolutely. The tactic is clearly to double down on the Saville smear though.

So you think that saying that the Savile smear was wrong is "doubling down on it"? How does that work, then?

The trouble is, those who claim that Johnson must be responsible for everything that goes on under his watch can't really claim that the same doesn't apply to Starmer.

There's a difference between saying that Johnson is responsible for what actually happened and lying about something that didn't.

@Florianus

Yes lets look at current child sex abuse which we can do something about now.. the reports into child abuse are beyond shocking, 12yo's passed around by up to 20 men at a time, a kidnapped, charges dropped police failed to investigate or lacked interest.. then there is County lines.

All happening now - lets not look at todays report into a Met police station and string of racist/sexist abuse they shared and took part in.

If you want to engage in a bit of Whataboutery, have look at what else Boris is xxxxing up now, not how Starmer did his job many years ago.

Bojo and the Tory party are beyond useless, Peoples Priorities its beyond a joke how people have been brain washed into accepting this.

Plus, of course, ultimately it was the Attorney General who was responsible for decision-making about Savile. But the buck stops fairly and squarely with Johnson in relation to the allegations about him.

@Florianus

CryingAtTheDisco: Absolutely. The tactic is clearly to double down on the Saville smear though.

So you think that saying that the Savile smear was wrong is "doubling down on it"? How does that work, then?

Who said it was wrong? has BJ withdrawn the comment? nope thought not. Raabs remarks were designed not to criticise but to add more fuel to the fire of what would be slanderous if BJ said it outside of the 'commons.

@Florianus

CryingAtTheDisco: Absolutely. The tactic is clearly to double down on the Saville smear though.

So you think that saying that the Savile smear was wrong is "doubling down on it"? How does that work, then?

Raab said that Starmer's record as DPP required further scrutiny. That's hardly saying that the smear was wrong.

The tactic is to create a false equivalence between Johnson's lies/responsibility for parties, and Starmer's responsibility as DPP. A bit like the Keir beer but on steroids.

The Saville smear has already been thoroughly debunked. No self respecting or honest govt minister would be raising it in the context of current discussions, or indeed at all.

Similarly, if parties were organised by Johnson's staff, I don't see that he should be blamed for them.

He can most certainly be blamed for ones held in his own flat.

This is like the argument that officials who wrongly tried to send Windrush generation people off to the West Indies were only doing so because Theresa May had "set the tone".

But I recollect, in connection with Windrush, from memory without looking it up, that there was something about targets having to be met in the Home Office. Amber Rudd said initially that there weren't, presumably not knowing the details. She found out there were; she did the honourable thing and resigned.

x post @Alexandra2001! Yes, completely agree

@Florianus

CSWife: As the person at the top, did Johnson/Starmer set the tone and put in place the structures for proper conduct and decision making?

This is like the argument that officials who wrongly tried to send Windrush generation people off to the West Indies were only doing so because Theresa May had "set the tone". People do not seem to realise that most ministers do not have time to spend more than a few minutes a week in their departments - basically to check that government policy is hopefully being implemented. Tone (whatever that is supposed to be) is usually set by the Permanent Secretary or (in the case of Downing Street) the Cabinet Secretary.

Whether or not the proposal for a "Prime Minister's Department" will sort out the mess of unclear command that Sue Gray identified is yet to be seen.

None of that changes the fact that the Cabinet Minister is responsible for what his or her department does.

Honestly, the notion that any Minister could stand up and say "Nothing to do with me, I hardly spend any time in my department" in relation to anything their department does is absolutely bizarre. By that token, they should all shut up when it comes to claiming the credit for anything that actually works out OK.

The trouble is, those who claim that Johnson must be responsible for everything that goes on under his watch can't really claim that the same doesn't apply to Starmer.

And this comment of yours, @Florianus, aligns very neatly with that false equivalence tactic

The only thing required of Johnson yesterday was contrition and remorse, but instead he reached for debunked Internet conspiracy theories.

It’s insulting to the public. How much lower can he stoop?

Jim Pickard @PickardJE

Breaking:

the prime minister’s spokesman has just said Downing St may never admit if anyone working there - including the prime minister - gets a fixed penalty fine from the police over partygate

@merrymouse

The only thing required of Johnson yesterday was contrition and remorse, but instead he reached for debunked Internet conspiracy theories.

It’s insulting to the public. How much lower can he stoop?

Everyone who’s known him well has the same opinion of Johnson, from the master at Eton, to Max Hastings, to Dominic Cummings. He’s incapable of contrition or remorse. The closest I’ve seen him come is looking like a child who knows it’s been found out when Kay Burley interviewed him last week. That didn’t last long.