Page 15 | Boris Downfall Part 5

Clavinova · 01/02/2022 13:28

This should be interesting

Perhaps not - from your link;

Well, that was utterly pathetic. The Speaker has no spine whatsoever.

Opportunity to uphold HoC standards completely missed.

A “nicer parliament” clearly needs to be enforced, not drearily wished for.

Peregrina · 01/02/2022 13:30

No idea - I have only read media reports - not facts.

Yet the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral was televised. We could see pictures of the Queen sitting alone and others socially distanced.

Notonthestairs · 01/02/2022 13:30

Should not mention the Queen.

But absolutely fine to mislead Parliament (re party on 13/11 and Savile)

Peregrina · 01/02/2022 13:33

Like it or not, he achieved high office through a series of democratic votes.

Most definitely not the best argument to employ, because so did Hitler, and we know how his monstrous regime eventually ended.

DuncinToffee · 01/02/2022 13:33

Clavinova, did you miss the words 'defective' and 'not fit for purpose'?

CryingAtTheDiscotheque · 01/02/2022 13:38

There is something seriously wrong with a system that allows the PM to lie and peddle far right conspiracy theories from the despatch box, but sanctions anyone who points out the lies.

I see the squirrels have been released.

Clavinova · 01/02/2022 13:38

All the more critical to ensure that you buy what you need and will use.

We don't need to keep a stockpile of PPE for the next coronavirus then? I thought the government were criticised for not having a stockpile? And didn't France have a large stockpile of PPE which they threw away not long before the pandemic? They were criticised for that as well.

CryingAtTheDiscotheque · 01/02/2022 13:40

£8.7 billion is a mind-blowing amount of money to waste.
Is that in addition to the written off frauds?
We have been let down so badly in every way

Notonthestairs · 01/02/2022 13:41

@CryingAtTheDiscotheque

There is something seriously wrong with a system that allows the PM to lie and peddle far right conspiracy theories from the despatch box, but sanctions anyone who points out the lies.

I see the squirrels have been released.

Yes.

And yes! 🐿 🐿 🐿🐿🐿🐿🐿

Clavinova · 01/02/2022 13:42

Clavinova, did you miss the words 'defective' and 'not fit for purpose'?

My posts relate to -

£0.75 billion of PPE which is in excess of the amount that will ultimately be needed; and • £4.7 billion of adjustment to the year-end valuation…

Florianus · 01/02/2022 13:42

DePfeffoff:
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.

Probably so. Not only do their constituency and parliamentary duties mean that ministers have very little time to even go into their departments, let alone "run them" in a commercial sense, but most ministers have no experience of the type of work done by the department. Gavin Williamson (former Education Secretary) for instance had no experience as a teacher or lecturer - his experience was running a 220-year old pottery firm into the ground. Matt Hancock (former Health Secretary) had no experience in medicine or public health - his prior experience as an economist in the Bank of England.

AdamRyan · 01/02/2022 13:44

And that's the trouble with the whole system. Civil servants can run rings around their minister, bring in suitcases of alcohol, undermine policy - knowing that they will never be named and that their minister will take the blame.
This is utterly bollocks. Civil servants are subject to the same kind of employment law as everyone else. They have a code to comply to.
They haven't run rings round the prime minister. He allowed them to party in his garden.

Notonthestairs · 01/02/2022 13:46

Pretty certain we can get rid of all ministers now. They clearly aren't leading anything at all. Plus that will save money.

Clavinova · 01/02/2022 13:47

Full Fact

Full Fact reached out to Labour and the CPS to see if they could give any further information about the case and if Mr Starmer had any involvement beyond his role as head of the CPS.

A spokesperson for the CPS said that, “in line with the established data retention policy”, none of the records for the decision not to charge Savile in 2009 were kept.

He added: “There is no reference within the [investigation] report to any involvement from the DPP in the decision-making in the case. The reviewing lawyer at the time set out their own reasons for the decisions they took, which are reproduced in the report.”

A spokesperson for the Labour party said they could not comment on individual cases, but insisted Mr Starmer “put victims at the heart of the judicial system” during his time as DPP, including improving support for victims of sexual and domestic violence and introducing a right for victims to challenge CPS decisions.

fullfact.org/online/keir-starmer-prosecute-jimmy-savile/

Florianus · 01/02/2022 13:47

@Peregrina

Like it or not, he achieved high office through a series of democratic votes.

Most definitely not the best argument to employ, because so did Hitler, and we know how his monstrous regime eventually ended.

I don't think so! After Hitler found that he still not have a parliamentary majority in 1932 he contrived to get the Enabling Act passed in order to transform the Weimar Republic into a one-party dictatorship. There was nothing democratic in that.

Peregrina · 01/02/2022 13:48

Civil servants can run rings around their minister, bring in suitcases of alcohol, undermine policy - knowing that they will never be named and that their minister will take the blame.

On the contrary, Civil Servants bringing in cases of booze and drinking whilst working would know that they faced the sack.

Notonthestairs · 01/02/2022 13:49

The Prime Minister said he hadn't had a party in his flat on the 13th November. Pretty certain the CS didn't make him do that.

What else has he lied about?
What else will he lie about?

AdamRyan · 01/02/2022 13:50

Democracy says the prime minister shouldn't lie to parliament.
He does and there is fuck all we can do to stop it

Florianus · 01/02/2022 13:52

@AdamRyan

And that's the trouble with the whole system. Civil servants can run rings around their minister, bring in suitcases of alcohol, undermine policy - knowing that they will never be named and that their minister will take the blame. This is utterly bollocks. Civil servants are subject to the same kind of employment law as everyone else. They have a code to comply to. They haven't run rings round the prime minister. He allowed them to party in his garden.

Wait for the SG report. It has already been said by the Met that the event in which the PM is seen drinking in the garden does not meet the standards for investigation. Other events probably will, of course, but it seems probable from what SG has already said in her preliminary fault that civil servants may well have organised some of these, and that there is no clear structure of command in No.10 that would necessarily make them regard the PM as the boss.

Florianus · 01/02/2022 13:52

"report" not "fault"

Florianus · 01/02/2022 13:54

@Peregrina

Civil servants can run rings around their minister, bring in suitcases of alcohol, undermine policy - knowing that they will never be named and that their minister will take the blame.

On the contrary, Civil Servants bringing in cases of booze and drinking whilst working would know that they faced the sack.

So have they been sacked?

Clavinova · 01/02/2022 13:54

Peregrina
Yet the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral was televised. We could see pictures of the Queen sitting alone and others socially distanced.

Did you see the DJ in No 10? And I seem to remember that you were one of the posters who claimed that Boris Johnson had an affair behind his ex-wife's back when she was receiving treatment for cancer - not true because they had been separated for almost a year when she was diagnosed.

Peregrina · 01/02/2022 13:55

So Florianus, you are saying that after a party is elected, and form a Governement, that if they change laws that is not democracy?

I am not sure that your argument stands up.

AdamRyan · 01/02/2022 13:56

From your link clav
In January 2013, after Savile’s death and when his abuse had been revealed, an investigation into whether the CPS had been right not to charge Savile in 2009 was published by Alison Levitt QC. She was asked to investigate this by Mr Starmer.

Ms Levitt said she had “reservations” about the prosecutor’s decision not to press charges.

She said: “On the face of it, the allegations made were both serious and credible; the prosecutor should have recognised this and sought to “build” a prosecution.”

The prosecutor was not Starmer.

He asked for this review to happen after Saviles death in 2011. The original prosecutor reviewed evidence in 2009.

He then published the review in full, and changed the way the CPS worked as a result (a lot of which has been undone by the Conservatives)

Hes done nothing wrong.

Florianus · 01/02/2022 13:56

Even the preliminary version of Sue Gray's report says "Steps must be taken to ensure that every Government Department has a clear and robust policy in place covering the consumption of alcohol in the workplace".

It should be clear from that that drinking at work has been going on in some departments.