Why so much fuss over Stella Braverman?

[lastminutepanicking]

I’m just wondering who on earth cares? Can’t understand why this is such big news.

Big girl pants means a woman. You might use it for men but nobody else does.

there's a problem with the civil service though because surely briefing against ministers they don't like is against their code of conduct

Misusing the civil service is against the ministerial code of conduct so there’s also a problem with at least this minister.

Why are we making up wild scenarios? Again, there is absolutely no indication that Braverman was trying to evade a speeding fine outside the fevered, wildly overactive imaginations of some posters on here because they dislike her so much they lose all reason

Which is why I said, you don't know, I don 't know. I clearly stated that. Just asking seems odd to me when she is a capable woman who can sort out her own speeding offence.
Many others either side of the chamber have managed it quite successfully.

would there be as much professional outrage if eg Angela Rayner asks a civil servant something, or even a leak?

Yes. If Angela Rayner was the Home Secretary and did this, I'd think 'you idiot, what the hell did you do that for, I want my Home Secretary to have a clear demarkation between private and political life'.

as was catering around Whitehall with suitcases full of ale for lockdown parties.

It came from the top. From the PM at No. 10 and Chequers. As we well know now.

of course they should not have been doing that, but there was a culture of partying and no one stopped the TGIF parties...

The reason it happened fro what we know is pretty obvious. Whoever Suella Braverman did ask, that civil servant or servants come to that, knew that if they did do anything to assist, it would look like they had given her some assistance that an ordinary member of the public would not get, irrespective of how the course was delivered. That would have breached the Code of their conduct and so they asked the Cabinet office.

As for leaks, well, a government that doesn't leak has yet to be invented. It's an important part of the system for politicians. Also leaks are about government policy. If the Home Secretary gets a speeding fine, it's personal. She was extremely stupid to ask her office. They never had to know, so again, a problem she made for herself!

Exactly. Well said 👏

'She was extremely stupid to ask her office'

She was yes. I wonder why Minsters trust civil servants at all.

My fundamental rule of life is if I don't wouldn't want my friends and family to read it in the papers I don't do it. A maxim a few cabinet ministers would do well to consider.

Ah yes and we are back to the Blob bringing down the Government. Rather than the Government bringing it on themselves.

I suppose we could just bin off the Ministerial Code altogether - its not like they take any notice of it. Let them all fire off secret information to their mates and their wives. What does it matter?

Talking of getting a grip @Janiie any chance of a gripping explanation of why a 56 year old needed a birthday party but not millions of children?

Braverman wasn't getting special treatment though so I have no idea why we keep returning to that silly idea

you’re the one who’s brought it up again.

She was considering the option of a speeding course (over 1.5 million taken every year in the UK) if a 121 was available (yes and taken by an unspecified number of high profile people every year) but was told no, the reasoning behind that would be interesting, so she paid the fine. At no point is there any intimation she tried to escape the standard consequences of incurring a speeding fine. People have made plenty of great points against her competence on this thread but making up false reasons to be offended really undermines their arguments. After all, if she was that bad why would anyone have to pretend she's done anything out of the ordinary here?

As for whether I want my taxes spent on PAs doing a personal errand for a minister, I genuinely couldn't care less if they do and I'd be very surprised I they didn't for minister from all political parties

Prepare to be amazed and shocked then… CS have been pretty clear about their roles and undermining of that from people who don’t understand it. The civil service are there to enact legislation or advise on barriers across political colours - their creation was in pursuit of maintaining democracy. A minister unilaterally deciding that’s not how it should work is upholding a very different political aim.

That's definitely not the only complaint people have though as shown by other replies

No it isn’t. Suella is a destructive character but further blurring of issues isn’t helpful either. I don’t think I’ve read/heard anything about her actual speeding offence and the conversation has been around her conduct.

Working in a publicly funded office requires transparency and if a minister can’t work within those constraints then it’s fair to question whether they’re suited to the role at all.

This

You’re remarkably patient to keep up with explaining the definitions of commonly used phrases

And if it is possible and usual to arrange 121 courses for certain people under certain circumstances why did the Home Secretary who is also a lawyer and ex general attorney need to ask if it's possible.

She should be all over her brief and know these things.

No one is making up scenarios.

Braverman asked a civil servant to see if she could have have a 121 speed awareness course.

Braverman - like all ministers - isn't allowed to ask civil servants to do personal favours because they are funded by tax payers.

Whether others have had that privilege, whether she did one and whether who chose a fine instead are irrelevant.

What she did at the beginning of that decision making progress broke ministerial code.

And if they are sure by asking she didn't make ministerial code why did they deny frequently she had the fine or refuse an investigation.

Most innocent people want to be proven innocent.

As I said, can be used for any gender. Nothing patient about being corrected.

For males I use "man up".

For females "big girl pants".

Personally I find it quite easy to separate the sexes and make comments about either one 🤷‍♀️

Although I'm not a fan of the insinuation of either I'm as human as the next person when my fuse is short 🫣🤣

If that makes you happy.

I thought Tories know what a woman is. Clearly I was wrong.

Has no one noticed I was replying to a poster who repeatedly said there was no reason not to think Braverman wasn't trying to wriggle out of the speeding fine? Unless their posts have been deleted of course, cba to look tbh.

At what point are civil servants responsible for their own behaviour? Why would a junior CS think it's okay to get bladdered in work and why would experienced senior staff allow them to? I know some posters have said it's top down but this can't be blamed on Johnson because he'd only been PM for 3 months before lockdown inc recess breaks so hadn't had time to influence the culture, I don't see May as the type, Cameron was only PM in his own right for a short time, although Sasha Swires' book about him was an eye-opener, so where do we stop?

We're talking about a widely used lighthearted phrase. You mistakenly thought I'd assumed the junior was a woman but I had said 'they' and 'their'. You're now back peddling.

But yes, Conservatives do know what a women is unlike Labour and the Lib Dems who think a woman can have a penis.

No Janiie, I’m not back pedalling. We’ve got you bang to rights and you haven’t got the grace or decency to hold your hands up. Just your middle finger like the rest of your ilk.

Has no one noticed I was replying to a poster who repeatedly said there was no reason not to think Braverman wasn't trying to wriggle out of the speeding fine? Unless their posts have been deleted of course, cba to look tbh.

I hope you don't mean me. I repeatedly said we don't know what it was she wanted. And repeatedly said how odd it was she had to get civil service advice when everyone manages to sort their own life admin out themselves.

I know some posters have said it's top down but this can't be blamed on Johnson because he'd only been PM for 3 months before lockdown inc recess breaks so hadn't had time to influence the culture,

This was me. Seriously? He hadn't been there long enough to influence the culture. I cannot get into all the partygate nonsense again.. but really...

Anyway, let's see what comes out with his socials at Chequers. He's a bit busy at the moment meeting Donald Trump, and former Sec of State Mike Pompeo, plus various Republicans in Texas and Las Vegas.

Is he still an MP, does anyone know?

Why are people sticking up for her in on one breath then saying they no nothing about her in the next 🫣? This hurts my head.