Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Boris - new low

957 replies

daimbarsatemydogsbone · 01/02/2022 16:50

Obviously he's running scared from his own side as well and Labour and the excellent contribution from Ian Blackford - no doubt Dennis Skinner would have done the same if still an MP.

However, there was no need for Johnson to stoop to the level of more lies - this time trying smear Kier Starmer with untrue allegations about Jimmy Savile.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/60213975

OP posts:
Thread gallery
11
Peregrina · 05/02/2022 11:06

We need stability, but whether that will ever be provided by Johnson is debatable.

At the beginning of the War when things were dire, they decided that the best option was to change leader. I can't think that anyone in Johnson's Cabinet would cut it as PM, but I am sure that the Tory Party could still muster an MP who could step up and would rise to the job.

ancientgran · 05/02/2022 11:14

@FatFredsFriedEgg

Finally I would still like to know why his wife was sitting at a business meeting in the No 10 garden on I think 15th May?

Surprisingly there was no law preventing gatherings in a private place on 15th May 2020 so the excuse that it was a work gathering isn't needed.

The law at the time prevented gatherings in a public place and leaving the home for anything except a valid reason - going to work, getting essential supplies etc. There was no law about gatherings in a private place - because nobody would have been able to leave home to attend such a gathering anyway.

It's been acknowledged that the garden of 10&11 Downing Street is primarily for the use of the PM and his family, so she had every right to be there. The 'workers' who were there weren't breaking any law because they'd left their homes to go to work and weren't 'gathering' in a public place.

The law was changed on 1st June 2020 to include gatherings in a private place.

She had a right to be in the garden. She didn't have a right to be taking part in a govt business meeting. It's a big garden but there she sits with the PM and his top advisers. Why?

I'm not talking about covid rules, I'm talking about unelected people who aren't in the employment of the govt being involved in running the country. Did anyone vote for that?

FatFredsFriedEgg · 05/02/2022 11:25

She had a right to be in the garden. She didn't have a right to be taking part in a govt business meeting. It's a big garden but there she sits with the PM and his top advisers. Why?

I think it was probably one of those social gatherings where a bit of work is discussed rather than a 'govt business meeting'. I think the 'work gathering' excuse was probably just an unnecessary lie to make the situation look better.

I assume that previous PM's spouses were at times present when government business was discussed. Wasn't Denis Thatcher well known to become involved?

Obviously I'm not defending anyone or their behaviour, just pointing out that it appears to me that no laws were being broken at the May 15th gathering. It's one of those which weren't referred to the Met so it appears that someone agrees with me.

Peregrina · 05/02/2022 11:29

I assume that previous PM's spouses were at times present when government business was discussed. Wasn't Denis Thatcher well known to become involved?

I thought that it was more that Mrs T used him as a sounding board, rather than his gatecrashing meetings. He did have his own business interests to attend to.

ancientgran · 05/02/2022 11:30

@FatFredsFriedEgg

She had a right to be in the garden. She didn't have a right to be taking part in a govt business meeting. It's a big garden but there she sits with the PM and his top advisers. Why?

I think it was probably one of those social gatherings where a bit of work is discussed rather than a 'govt business meeting'. I think the 'work gathering' excuse was probably just an unnecessary lie to make the situation look better.

I assume that previous PM's spouses were at times present when government business was discussed. Wasn't Denis Thatcher well known to become involved?

Obviously I'm not defending anyone or their behaviour, just pointing out that it appears to me that no laws were being broken at the May 15th gathering. It's one of those which weren't referred to the Met so it appears that someone agrees with me.

As I said I'm not talking about covid laws but I think we have a right to know if anyone can just go and join in govt meetings, not being elected or employed doesn't seem to be necessary so if I feel like sitting in on a discussion about the NHS or education can I go and sit in? No, I thought not and she has no more right than you or me.

If it wasn't a work gathering then she shouldn't have been sitting there anyway due to covid rules.

Either way it isn't right. Why are we bothering with elections, let the Great Dictator invite friends and family in to sort out govt business. That's what he'd like I'm sure.

Blossomtoes · 05/02/2022 11:31

my point on all threads has always been we need stability in the covid recovery stage not leadership contests.

Of course it has. Do you really think this shambles is stability or likely to become so while Johnson’s PM?

In other news it seems Johnson’s personal whipping operation has identified 80 MPs ready to hand letters in according to The Times.

FatFredsFriedEgg · 05/02/2022 11:35

If it wasn't a work gathering then she shouldn't have been sitting there anyway due to covid rules

As far as I can see there were no rules which would have applied on May 15th. As I said, the law at that time applied to gatherings in public places, not private.

I agree that it seems wrong having family sit in on government business; I don't really know what is or isn't accepted practice though.

cakeorwine · 05/02/2022 11:46

I wonder at what point a work meeting becomes a social gathering?

If one of the Civil Servants had discussed classified material at the meeting and Carrie was there - would that have been allowed?

I know people discuss work at parties with colleagues and spouses there - a work night out for example. But I wouldn't define that as a meeting. More a social event with work colleagues and spouses.

You wouldn't have a work meeting with spouses present.

You could discuss work when spouses are around - but then it's not a meeting. Just having a chat about work - but it's not minuted or anything like that. And you certainly wouldn't talk about anything confidential.

cakeorwine · 05/02/2022 11:49

agree that it seems wrong having family sit in on government business; I don't really know what is or isn't accepted practice though

If someone's family member sat in on one of our meetings about work, I think there would be eyebrows raised.

If a family member was at a party and there were work colleagues there as well and the subject of work came up, I think it would depend on the nature of the conversation. I certainly hope they wouldn't be discussing classified information.

ClaudineClare · 05/02/2022 11:50

In other news it seems Johnson’s personal whipping operation has identified 80 MPs ready to hand letters in according to The Times

If that us true,does that mean a VONC has a good chance of succeeding, given Johnson's majority is now less than 80?

FatFredsFriedEgg · 05/02/2022 11:51

We don't know that there was any business being discussed. If Johnson claims it was a work meeting then there was probably nothing at all work-related being discussed.

FatFredsFriedEgg · 05/02/2022 11:54

@ClaudineClare

In other news it seems Johnson’s personal whipping operation has identified 80 MPs ready to hand letters in according to The Times

If that us true,does that mean a VONC has a good chance of succeeding, given Johnson's majority is now less than 80?

A VONC in Johnson as leader of the party (and therefore PM) is a very different thing to a VONC in the Government.
cakeorwine · 05/02/2022 11:54

@FatFredsFriedEgg

We don't know that there was any business being discussed. If Johnson claims it was a work meeting then there was probably nothing at all work-related being discussed.
I don't know if anyone remembers Yes Prime Minister with Sir Humphrey criticising Jim Hacker for meeting an adviser without telling him.

Minutes need to be taken. We need to know what was decided for future purposes. For evidence. As he said - and it came back to bite him.

Were minutes taken at these work meetings? Or is that an old fashioned way of working?

cakeorwine · 05/02/2022 11:56

@ClaudineClare

In other news it seems Johnson’s personal whipping operation has identified 80 MPs ready to hand letters in according to The Times

If that us true,does that mean a VONC has a good chance of succeeding, given Johnson's majority is now less than 80?

The VONC in Johnson would be a secret ballot of Tory MPs. All done by paper ballot in the 1922 commitee.

All depends on how many of his MPs express confidence.

I predict 52% / 48% which means that Johnson would claim overwhelming support for him. Grin

ClaudineClare · 05/02/2022 12:06

A VONC in Johnson as leader of the party (and therefore PM) is a very different thing to a VONC in the Government

Yes, I think I may be getting the two muddled up.

Blossomtoes · 05/02/2022 12:09

Under current rules, if more than 50% of all Conservative MPs (181 MPs) vote in support of the prime minister, they can stay as party leader and prime minister and no new vote can be triggered for 12 months.

So, if 80 are prepared to submit letters to the 1922 committee, they need to be joined by at least another 101 to get rid.

ClaudineClare · 05/02/2022 12:12

101 is a pretty big number.

FatFredsFriedEgg · 05/02/2022 12:13

@Blossomtoes

Under current rules, if more than 50% of all Conservative MPs (181 MPs) vote in support of the prime minister, they can stay as party leader and prime minister and no new vote can be triggered for 12 months.

So, if 80 are prepared to submit letters to the 1922 committee, they need to be joined by at least another 101 to get rid.

Well here's something I didn't realise:

Any leader who loses a confidence vote is not allowed to take part in the subsequent leadership contest.

inews.co.uk/news/politics/no-confidence-vote-how-many-letters-tory-1922-committee-boris-johnson-explained-1397123

cakeorwine · 05/02/2022 12:14

And if a leader wins a VONC, then there can't be anymore challenges for another year.

Which brings us nearer the election

Blossomtoes · 05/02/2022 12:32

@cakeorwine

And if a leader wins a VONC, then there can't be anymore challenges for another year.

Which brings us nearer the election

I can’t decide whether that’s a good thing or not.
ClaudineClare · 05/02/2022 12:44

I suppose he will have more time to drag the Tories deeper into the mud if he wins a VONC. But we would have to suffer him in the meantime.

cakeorwine · 05/02/2022 12:49

I can’t decide whether that’s a good thing or not

Local elections in May.

Timing is everything. Lots for MPs and Labour to think about.

cakeorwine · 05/02/2022 12:52

If he narrowly wins a VONC in March and the Conservatives get a drumming in the May elections, then the MPs can't do anything.

cakeorwine · 05/02/2022 12:56

Can Johnson call for a VONC himself - to call people's bluff?
And if he wins, then there would be no more challenges to him for a year?

Blossomtoes · 05/02/2022 13:00

@cakeorwine

If he narrowly wins a VONC in March and the Conservatives get a drumming in the May elections, then the MPs can't do anything.
Very true. Perhaps May will be the tipping point. Yes he can no confidence himself - Major did that in 95.