I think moves are afoot to oust Johnston so I'd say we don't have long to wait. There's a lot of speculation on who will replace him.Jdsk wrote: ↑22 Jan 2022, 6:55pm"Pressure is building on the Metropolitan police from Tory MPs who want the force to investigate Downing Street’s lockdown parties regardless of the findings of the Sue Gray report this week.":Bonefishblues wrote: ↑15 Jan 2022, 9:17pmI agree. I think that even Canute Johnson is failing to stop the tide of public opprobrium from rising this time.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -partygate
Jonathan
Boris's Brain is missing
Re: Boris's Brain is missing
I am here. Where are you?
Re: Boris's Brain is missing
The senior civil servant investigating allegations of at least nine lockdown-breaking parties at Downing Street has been given access to a detailed log of staff movements in and out of the building from security data including swipecards.Psamathe wrote: ↑12 Jan 2022, 5:25pmEvidence for any of these parties will take them 30 seconds to obtain - CCTV. If they are close surveilling and recording the inside of Hancock's office I'm sure the rear garden to No 10 is well monitored. Or if Johnson has had the recordings wiped, just ask any of the officers providing security at the time (those witnesses to offences in one of the most secure buildings in the country but who failed to report those offences!)
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... f-building
Jonathan
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: 5 May 2009, 6:32am
Re: Boris's Brain is missing
As always if you don't look you'll never find it.
I wonder how much of Sue Gray's report we'll actually see. Maybe a redacted form?
I wonder how much of Sue Gray's report we'll actually see. Maybe a redacted form?
Re: Boris's Brain is missing
I'm no expert of procedures and how far Ms Gray can go "having her name removed from a report she considered changed by redactions". But if Johnson decides what to redact then if the report effectively finds him guilty he has a choice to resign or redact and then try and smirk away the outcry over his redactions. Redacting gives him a further delay and opportunity to cling on.francovendee wrote: ↑23 Jan 2022, 12:33pm As always if you don't look you'll never find it.
I wonder how much of Sue Gray's report we'll actually see. Maybe a redacted form?
Ian
Re: Boris's Brain is missing
Edited: Crossed with Ian's.
Follow by both an outcry and legal attempts to force disclosure.
Then probably a leaked version.
Jonathan
I expect that we'll see the findings but not the full report. (That's what's specified in the terms of reference.)francovendee wrote: ↑23 Jan 2022, 12:33pm As always if you don't look you'll never find it.
I wonder how much of Sue Gray's report we'll actually see. Maybe a redacted form?
Follow by both an outcry and legal attempts to force disclosure.
Then probably a leaked version.
Jonathan
Re: Boris's Brain is missing
Raab must be reading what you're writing!francovendee wrote: ↑23 Jan 2022, 12:33pm As always if you don't look you'll never find it.
I wonder how much of Sue Gray's report we'll actually see. Maybe a redacted form?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... minic-raab
Jonathan
-
- Posts: 36776
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Boris's Brain is missing
The only thing I get from that is that Dominic Raab has no idea what will happen because nobody has told him. It's being managed by Boris Johnson's people, not his fellow Cabinet members, and those people will be busking - making it up as they go along
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: 5 May 2009, 6:32am
Re: Boris's Brain is missing
Thinking like Raab, Oh! Please don't let this be true.Jdsk wrote: ↑23 Jan 2022, 12:44pmRaab must be reading what you're writing!francovendee wrote: ↑23 Jan 2022, 12:33pm As always if you don't look you'll never find it.
I wonder how much of Sue Gray's report we'll actually see. Maybe a redacted form?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... minic-raab
Jonathan
Re: Boris's Brain is missing
(My bold)thirdcrank wrote: ↑23 Jan 2022, 12:51pm The only thing I get from that is that Dominic Raab has no idea what will happen because nobody has told him. It's being managed by Boris Johnson's people, not his fellow Cabinet members, and those people will be busking - making it up as they go along
As per usual!
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
-
- Posts: 11010
- Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
- Location: Near Bicester Oxon
Re: Boris's Brain is missing
I read this morning that so far there's no commitment to publish the full report, when it's eventually finished.
Re: Boris's Brain is missing
From what is expected there is no way the entire report will be published as some details ought to be redacted e.g. names of Ciil Servants and special advisers who broke rules and who will thus be subject to employment disciplinary proceedings. But that is very different e.g. redacting "Mr Johnson was invited to and attended an illegal party gathering that was not a work meeting". But how will we know what is in the redacted sections? Hence the need for a Police inquiry.Bonefishblues wrote: ↑23 Jan 2022, 3:42pm I read this morning that so far there's no commitment to publish the full report, when it's eventually finished.
Ian
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: 5 May 2009, 6:32am
Re: Boris's Brain is missing
I'm sure anything redacted will be explained away by: 'It was a security issue'.
I believe in the general public's mind he's guilty no matter what the report says.
This won't stop them continuing to support him, at least not for the next few months.
I believe in the general public's mind he's guilty no matter what the report says.
This won't stop them continuing to support him, at least not for the next few months.
Re: Boris's Brain is missing
Ianhttps://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/partygate-boris-johnson-sue-gray-investigation-b1998921.html wrote:No 10 officials admit holding back information from partygate inquiry after being ‘frightened into silence’
Officials working in No 10 claim they have held back information from Sue Gray’s investigation into the partygate scandal due to a “culture of fear” surrounding the probe.
Three sources told The Independent they have not divulged messages and pictures on their phones after a senior member of staff told them to remove anything that could fuel speculation in the wake of the first party revelations.
Messages in a WhatsApp group were said to contain photographs of people drinking and dancing, as well as references to how hungover people were the next day.
The messages are from the eve of Prince Philip’s funeral, when there were two parties, one to mark the departure of a No 10 photographer and another to mark the departure of James Slack, Downing Street’s director of communications. Mr Slack has since made a public apology.
One source claimed that after being asked to remove information, they subsequently deleted evidence of that party.
They said they were also fearful that, having removed material, they could face censure: “I did the wrong thing and actually deleted stuff.”
“Everyone’s terrified. It’s a witch hunt,” another source told The Independent. “There’s been a culture of fear [in the office] every day since the first party story broke.”
Another source added: "I’ve held back from sharing evidence, it’s too risky. And I’d have to explain why I’d deleted some stuff, which would mean saying I’d felt intimidated."
...
Re: Boris's Brain is missing
The terms of reference don't mandate it. And there has been no official statement that they will.Bonefishblues wrote: ↑23 Jan 2022, 3:42pm I read this morning that so far there's no commitment to publish the full report, when it's eventually finished.
So beyond that it will be pressure and leaks and legal action.
FoI? (Unlikely to succeed.)
Judicial review?
Jonathan
-
- Posts: 11010
- Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
- Location: Near Bicester Oxon
Re: Boris's Brain is missing
Tory MP pressure was mooted in the Observer article - but IIRC it was Andrew Rawnsley, so may not be the most reliable indicator?Jdsk wrote: ↑23 Jan 2022, 4:32pmThe terms of reference don't mandate it. And there has been no official statement that they will.Bonefishblues wrote: ↑23 Jan 2022, 3:42pm I read this morning that so far there's no commitment to publish the full report, when it's eventually finished.
So beyond that it will be pressure and leaks and legal action.
FoI? (Unlikely to succeed.)
Judicial review?
Jonathan