Part 7.5

[jgw1]

AIBU to still be enjoying falls?

So taxpayers are required to pay for an official photographer to take photos of lawbreaking in no.10, but are not permitted to see the photos because the evidence of lawbreaking would be detrimental to those concerned..
Yeah ok.

The test isn't whether it was reasonable to meet - though I am sure Johnson's lawyers will be trying their hardest to wriggle their way towards such an "interpretation". The test is whether the gathering was reasonably necessary for work.

@CryingAtTheDiscotheque

The test isn't whether it was reasonable to meet - though I am sure Johnson's lawyers will be trying their hardest to wriggle their way towards such an "interpretation". The test is whether the gathering was reasonably necessary for work.

The presence of cake, booze and singing rather gives away how necessary it was for work.

@CryingAtTheDiscotheque

The test isn't whether it was reasonable to meet - though I am sure Johnson's lawyers will be trying their hardest to wriggle their way towards such an "interpretation". The test is whether the gathering was reasonably necessary for work.

As has been said a trillion times workplaces up and down the country will have had nibbles and booze at work (Starmer approves as we know) during restrictions.

Where's Dom's 'waayyyy better pics including the flat' scoop!/bombshell! He needs a PR assistant really to assist, he kind of lacks momentum and impact if you ask me.

And Keir's beer is back

So the defence of Johnson is now, well everyone else was breaking the law so that's ok.

@DuncinToffee

And Keir's beer is back

Yes I can see how it is inconvenient but the argument that you can't drink and have nibbles at work but Starmer had booze and nibbles at work and that's fine is a weak one tbh.

Well if you say it a trillion times it will come true

I think the test is actually whether the meeting (of 2 people) was essential (essential wasn't defined).
Certainly the purpose of the legislation was to reduce meetings - and to require social distancing when meetings were essential.

@DuncinToffee

Well if you say it a trillion times it will come true

It is true no matter however much you wish it wasn't.

Drink and food at work and gatherings were allowed.

If and how much they overstepped the line is what the Met will decide. Not us.

Media's moved on now. I bet Crerar and Brand are busy scraping a barrel somewhere trying to find a 'scoop'.

Keir Starmer isn't being investigated (Durham Police have already confirmed no action required) so he's not relevant.

As has been said a trillion times workplaces up and down the country will have had nibbles and booze at work (Starmer approves as we know) during restrictions.

As has also been said countless times, no-one is saying you couldn't eat or drink at work. Obviously. What the rules said was that you couldn't have gatherings unless they were essential for work. Self-evidently winding down in the garden on a Friday evening with BYOB, or gathering (with your wife and your interior designer) around a table laden with party snacks, lager and birthday cake are not essential for work.

@JaniieJones, you obviously know this as you've been told it so often, and I know you like to ignore inconvenient facts, but it's worth putting them on record again.

Drink and food at work and gatherings were allowed.

Only if essential for work purposes.

@Notonthestairs

Keir Starmer isn't being investigated (Durham Police have already confirmed no action required) so he's not relevant.

Oh but it is relevant because it proves the point, booze and food and mingling at work went on, was actually ok. Again if lines were crossed then those civil servants allegedly partying at 1am will no doubt face consequences. Indeed some already have been shown the door.

The real clincher will be the “Fuck off Dom” party. There’s absolutely no way that can credibly be excused as work. It happened in a private residence, outside office hours. Johnson trying to claim he wasn’t there just doesn’t wash, it was in his house and I bet there are some excellent pictures if the Met decide not to prosecute. It’s pretty obvious Cummings is keeping something back to drop if that happens. Or maybe just for shit and giggles.

The alcohol and food aren't the point - the point was whether the gatherings were essential for work purposes.

Starmers meeting was considered essential for work purposes despite the food/drink.

Johnson's meetings will similarly need to be judged on whether they were essential.

You may think a birthday event in the Cabinet Room was essential (complete with M&S party food, event staff and a photographer) - others may disagree.

The Cummings party doesn't pass any sort of test.

'The real clincher will be the “Fuck off Dom” party. There’s absolutely no way that can credibly be excused as work'

Yes I agree with you there. But why the delay in leaking actual incriminating snaps not just a 3 person zoom. Why the very slow drip drip drip?! The impact is diluted and lost as many people just couldn't care less at this stage.

@DePfeffoff

Drink and food at work and gatherings were allowed.

Only if essential for work purposes.

We have been around this cul de sac a few times already.

It is quite clear that it is essential for booze, cake, wife and so on to be present for Johnson to do any work, and therefore permitted within the rules.

Also it has recently come to light that Johnson's presence at a party, immediately changes it to very hard work for everyone else.

Here we go again.
If food and drink and gatherings were allowed, why did communal work areas such as canteens close?
Are you saying that the CEOs and executives of companies across the country aren't clever enough to have understood that they could have kept these open?
I would love to know what those in charge of supermarkets, banks, distribution, NHS etc think of that. Let alone all of the smaller businesses that didn't survive.
Pretty sure the countries hospitality company execs might have something to sat about that as well.

We could have had work meetings in the pub...

'If food and drink and gatherings were allowed, why did communal work areas such as canteens close'

They didn't. Some might have but the nhs did still keep feeding its staff and folk would sit in communal areas.

Anywayyyy. I'm interested to know if there really are 'waaayyyy better pics' then where tf are they? Surely Dom must know he's left everyone hanging far too long. He's missed his moment.

@JaniieJones

'The real clincher will be the “Fuck off Dom” party. There’s absolutely no way that can credibly be excused as work'

Yes I agree with you there. But why the delay in leaking actual incriminating snaps not just a 3 person zoom. Why the very slow drip drip drip?! The impact is diluted and lost as many people just couldn't care less at this stage.

Actually it’s the reverse. Just as everything seems to be calming down and all concerned are getting a false sense of security, then boom - another bombshell. There’s a reason for the saying about keeping your powder dry. This is a classic PR strategy.

I suspect DC will want to contradict the SG report when it finally comes out so I wouldn't expect anything until then.

Surely Dom must know he's left everyone hanging far too long. He's missed his moment

Or choosing his moment. Johnson squirms out of it all. Big Dog appears to be saved. And then...

Surely everyone can see that a meal between meetings while you are spending a long day working hundreds of miles from home is exactly the same as birthday cake with your wife and interior designer in the same complex of buildings that you live in. Jeez, are you lot thick or something?

@countrygirl99

Surely everyone can see that a meal between meetings while you are spending a long day working hundreds of miles from home is exactly the same as birthday cake with your wife and interior designer in the same complex of buildings that you live in. Jeez, are you lot thick or something?

No, not all of us - or even most 😉