Just because there's a photo of him holding a drink doesn't mean it was a party .... or does that defence only apply to Starmer and Rayner?
No. But the 8 opened bottles of champagne, wine and gin on the table…Just because there's a photo of him holding a drink doesn't mean it was a party .... or does that defence only apply to Starmer and Rayner?
Time spent potentiallyNo. But the 8 opened bottles of champagne, wine and gin on the table…
Also according to the Met it was a party, hence people in attendance received FPN. The only real conundrum is how the Met could conclude that some of those present were at a party while others present apparently weren’t. Explain that one if you can.
Also the defence of Starmer is in your head. You’ll struggle to find anyone who says that if the police deem it a broke the lockdown laws at that time and issue Starmer with a FPN then that’s OK, nothing to see, trivialise the law etc etc. I’ve only seen people on here and other platforms say that he must resign in that scenario.Just because there's a photo of him holding a drink doesn't mean it was a party .... or does that defence only apply to Starmer and Rayner?
Also according to the Met it was a party, hence people in attendance received FPN. The only real conundrum is how the Met could conclude that some of those present were at a party while others present apparently weren’t. Explain that one if you can.
Isn’t there a sliding scale of FPN’s for breaking lockdown laws? Ie the amount goes up each time whet a repeat fine?Time spent potentially
The Met if necessary will try and pin the overall decision on Dick seeing as she’s recently been disposed off.Either Johnson was questioned about it and lied, or he didn't lie but the Met were happy to cover it up.
Either way it stinks.
Well as Mr Starmer says if there is not a penalty notice the law says there is no crime committed
Can’t see Gove so nothing probably went over the lineI'm holding my judgement back until V.A.R. has had a look!
I’m sure it’s just a coincidence that the Mail has started attacking Sue Grey on the day photos start coming out. Apparently she’s playing politics.It's also clear evidence that he lied to parliament so it should be the end of him.
Well see...
Maybe it was just a case of the meeting was less controversial than the photos and they were looking to draw our attention away from the photos. Leak the story of the meeting, deliberately create confusion about who requested the meeting and what was said at the meeting. Don’t look over there.Starting to think it suits the government to keep this story rolling on
What do you think was in Boris’ red ministerial briefcase that was visible in the photos.How many briefcases of booze did Mr Starmer order to be collected?
Come on, it might be true for some people but not everybody. In the same way that working in offices / on client sights is made advantageous to some (by their own actions) but not others.I don’t think people who work from home are especially concerned about productivity but prefer the lifestyle
I count 7 bottles of booze (orange circles) and also a green drink that looks distinctly like absinthe (green circle).Just because there's a photo of him holding a drink doesn't mean it was a party .... or does that defence only apply to Starmer and Rayner?
This is a big problem isn't it and, tbf, not just lockdowns, but any civil group law is a gonner, isn't it.Additionally, if it comes around again and there are lockdowns imposed, I suspect they'll have a really hard time imposing them. Not because I believe most of the general public are bad people, but how on earth do they expect anyone is going to respect or listen to them?
I count 7 bottles of booze (orange circles) and also a green drink that looks distinctly like absinthe (green circle).
We also know it was the date of an advisors leaving do, and that at least one person attending it was issued a FPN for being st the party.
The whole "it was a works do" is nonsense, the rule at the time was "is this gathering reasonably necessary for work purposes?"
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
Currently just one person confirmed was fined from that party? How pissed off would that make you?
Find the whole partygate stuff pretty immaterial given everybody is taking an ongoing axe to their standard of living.
This. The notion that a government who are actively taking the decision to not tackle the cost of living is somehow distracted by their own behaviour rings hollow. Partygate or no partygate isn’t going to change how they govern, if anything it’s the perfect example of how they govern. Missed cobra meetings at the start of the biggest crisis the world has faced since WW2 but doesn’t miss an illegal lockdown party. Boris is not a man for a crisis.I'd disagree. If we want to get out of the current mess then we need trustworthy, competent, leadership. This goes to the heart of that.
These people were partying whilst other people couldn't see their dying relatives in hospital or go to their friends funerals.
They broke the very laws they were on telly every night telling us that it was vital we keep, no matter how painful.
It's not trivial.
If you're looking for a political solution to the cost of living crisis, or indeed anything else, then you'll need to find politicians who care more about the country and less about themselves.
I don't think he should resign!Also the defence of Starmer is in your head. You’ll struggle to find anyone who says that if the police deem it a broke the lockdown laws at that time and issue Starmer with a FPN then that’s OK, nothing to see, trivialise the law etc etc. I’ve only seen people on here and other platforms say that he must resign in that scenario.
It's not a case of breaking the law and getting a fine, it's lying to parliament which in most cases is a resigning matter, but bunty boy has no shame and will just deny deny deny an d then move on, and the public will just get bored with it and move on tooI don't think he should resign!
If he broke the law he should face the consequences, the same as every one else, which is a fine as I understand it.
Are you going to force everyone in public office who attended these so called parties to resign? If so there wouldn't be many of the fuckers left. (possibly a good thing)
The while sad debacle is now overshadowing every issue that now faces us, such as the increasing reliance on food banks, and the increasing numbers who can't heat their homes. Not to mention rapidly rising inflation, the imminent recession, and the ongoing war in Ukrain etc etc.
I'm bored of it already, and I'd suggest every fucker in Westminster is a lier, in fact politics IS the art of telling lies!It's not a case of breaking the law and getting a fine, it's lying to parliament which in most cases is a resigning matter, but bunty boy has no shame and will just deny deny deny an d then move on, and the public will just get bored with it and move on too
Joking apart I wonder if the police have made their decisions based on timing and number the photos, as well as eye witness testimony. If there was just the photos around the toasting of Cain leaving, it might be tricky for the police to argue a party, if there were various at different times then it would be a lot easier. It might just come down to strength of evidence and this is the problem with retrospective fining, it’s going to be imperfect. If the one person fined had, for example, admitted to bringing the booze in, or were not due to be working in the building at the time, then again that would maybe make more sense.
Just guesswork obviously
I'm bored of it already, and I'd suggest every fucker in Westminster is a lier, in fact politics IS the art of telling lies!
I'd also add, that while we are being distracted by party gate, there's very little focus on applying a windfall tax on the excessive profits made by the energy corporations.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?