On the subject of fascism please listen the the chemical warfare expert banned by the government for criticising them it is an eye opener as how low the government have sunk :- https://youtu.be/TjJzfaLtKc8
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
pwa wrote: ↑24 May 2023, 7:02pm
I don't think Braverman will be brought down over this speeding thing. She plainly didn't try to dodge the penalty for her offence, she just sought a private session rather than a group session. And if, as reported, she drags a contingent of body guard with her wherever she goes, that makes sense. She may have been wrong to ask civil servants to make enquiries about that for her, but surely that is debatable, given that it affected her diary. And in the end she just took the points and fine, like anyone else who could not attend the course. If she slipped up, it was in a small and technical way.
As yet I have no idea of the extent of her speeding, or the road conditions where it happened, so I'm not going to pass judgement on that beyond saying that as she admits the offence she rightly paid the penalty and carries the points on her licence.
What should sink her is her daft policy on small boat migration.
The point is she is Home Secretary, responsible for law and order in the UK. She's been caught breaking the law, and for that reason should be sacked.
Mmm. Where do you draw the line on that one? We currently have a Health Minister here in Wales who has got to the point where she has had her licence taken off her. And kept her job. In comparison, three points for a one-off seems mild.
She enquired about claiming speeding fines on expenses. This was a speeding fine. Work it out.
Nonsense. The original claim was "She did enquire about claiming the fine on her parliamentary expenses..."
It clearly relates to the current offence and is not true. Note the definite article.
Work it out.
She enquired about claiming speeding fines on expenses. This was a speeding fine. Therefore it was an enquiry about claiming this and any other speeding offences.
You're clutching at straws in trying to defend the woman. (deleted by moderator)
I haven't defended her. She's despicable.
Think about why you posted your misogynist deleted insult.
pwa wrote: ↑24 May 2023, 7:02pm
I don't think Braverman will be brought down over this speeding thing. She plainly didn't try to dodge the penalty for her offence, she just sought a private session rather than a group session. And if, as reported, she drags a contingent of body guard with her wherever she goes, that makes sense. She may have been wrong to ask civil servants to make enquiries about that for her, but surely that is debatable, given that it affected her diary. And in the end she just took the points and fine, like anyone else who could not attend the course. If she slipped up, it was in a small and technical way.
As yet I have no idea of the extent of her speeding, or the road conditions where it happened, so I'm not going to pass judgement on that beyond saying that as she admits the offence she rightly paid the penalty and carries the points on her licence.
What should sink her is her daft policy on small boat migration.
The point is she is Home Secretary, responsible for law and order in the UK. She's been caught breaking the law, and for that reason should be sacked.
Mmm. Where do you draw the line on that one? We currently have a Health Minister here in Wales who has got to the point where she has had her licence taken off her. And kept her job. In comparison, three points for a one-off seems mild.
She's not responsible for law and order ie preventing law breaking,
Last edited by pete75 on 27 May 2023, 12:28am, edited 1 time in total.
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
pete75 wrote: ↑25 May 2023, 4:25pm
She enquired about claiming speeding fines on expenses. This was a speeding fine. Therefore it was an enquiry about claiming this and any other speeding offences.
You're clutching at straws in trying to defend the woman. (deleted by moderator)
I haven't defended her. She's despicable.
Think about why you posted your misogynist deleted insult.
(deleted by moderator)
I really don't see what the problem is, she done a bit of speeding, something that probably 95% of drivers do on every single journey they make, she got a ticket which is remarkably unlucky, she then enquired if she could do the awareness course in private, what exactly was wrong in asking that question? She then paid the fine and took her three points. She sounds like a regular person to me....
Jdsk wrote: ↑26 May 2023, 5:53pm
The Home Secretary has been found to have unlawfully detained two women and their children while applying a secret policy:
That policy predates Suella Bravermann. I know because my wife got detained for an allegedly unpaid NHS debt when we flew back from Spain. I think it was 2017. Fortunately I had a copy of the payment receipt in my cloud so we were soon on our way. There's a story around how vigorously hospital finance officers were pursuing debts at that time, probably under instructions from the home office. I was quite taken aback by intrusive questioning by NHS finance staff .
Think about why you posted your misogynist deleted insult.
(deleted by moderator)
I really don't see what the problem is, she done a bit of speeding, something that probably 95% of drivers do on every single journey they make, she got a ticket which is remarkably unlucky, she then enquired if she could do the awareness course in private, what exactly was wrong in asking that question? She then paid the fine and took her three points. She sounds like a regular person to me....
(deleted by moderator)
The problem is it appears that she asked the Civil Servants to investigate the "private speeding course" and using Civil Servants for personal matters is against the Ministerial Code and breaking that code is a resignation/sacking offence.
That said seems it isn't the first time she's broken the Ministerial Code and she seems to regard herself as "above" such rules and reality is, weak leadership seems to mean she is.
pete75 wrote: ↑27 May 2023, 12:28am (deleted by moderator)
I really don't see what the problem is, she done a bit of speeding, something that probably 95% of drivers do on every single journey they make, she got a ticket which is remarkably unlucky, she then enquired if she could do the awareness course in private, what exactly was wrong in asking that question? She then paid the fine and took her three points. She sounds like a regular person to me....
(deleted by moderator)
The problem is it appears that she asked the Civil Servants to investigate the "private speeding course" and using Civil Servants for personal matters is against the Ministerial Code and breaking that code is a resignation/sacking offence.
That said seems it isn't the first time she's broken the Ministerial Code and she seems to regard herself as "above" such rules and reality is, weak leadership seems to mean she is.
Ian
I would like to see more context around this. Did she simply say to someone in the office "do you know if you can have a one on one course?" or did she demand a full written report into all the possibilities of what would be least damaging. If the later, then I would agree that would be wrong.
It appears the long knives are out for her, and everything she does or says is blown out of all proportion. She is being relentlessly bullied so care needs to be taken into what to believe.
Pebble wrote: ↑27 May 2023, 1:02am
I really don't see what the problem is, she done a bit of speeding, something that probably 95% of drivers do on every single journey they make, she got a ticket which is remarkably unlucky, she then enquired if she could do the awareness course in private, what exactly was wrong in asking that question? She then paid the fine and took her three points. She sounds like a regular person to me....
(deleted by moderator)
The problem is it appears that she asked the Civil Servants to investigate the "private speeding course" and using Civil Servants for personal matters is against the Ministerial Code and breaking that code is a resignation/sacking offence.
...
Ian
I would like to see more context around this. Did she simply say to someone in the office "do you know if you can have a one on one course?" or did she demand a full written report into all the possibilities of what would be least damaging. If the later, then I would agree that would be wrong.
It appears the long knives are out for her, and everything she does or says is blown out of all proportion. She is being relentlessly bullied so care needs to be taken into what to believe.
I've spent too much time recently Googl'ing for others google.co.uk.
Either way, Civil Servants are not provided for advice on personal matters and taking their time on such issues is against the Ministerial Code.
Ms Braverman has been evasive but, report in the Times
And when Braverman asked about it she just gets evasive and fails tom answer the question - so one must assume that if she didn't she's just say "No I didn't" rather than just evade the question and fail to answer.
Braverman had made the request to another senior civil servant who “had concerns about whether it was appropriate”, it is understood, so had reported it to the top official.
If the press reports are untrue then Braverman would explicitly state they were wrong and she didn't do what is reported but she just get evasive and doesn't answer which to me increases the reliability of the reports.
Psamathe wrote: ↑27 May 2023, 10:44amAnd when Braverman asked about it she just gets evasive and fails tom answer the question - so one must assume that if she didn't she's just say "No I didn't" rather than just evade the question and fail to answer.
Exactly. It's enough to give disingenuousness a bad name.
When questioned in Parliament, she simply repeated ad nauseam "I got a speeding ticket, I paid the fine, I took the points" - none of which was being disputed. She failed totally to address the question about what she had asked the civil servant(s) to do before she decided to pay up.
Pebble wrote: ↑27 May 2023, 1:02am
I really don't see what the problem is, she done a bit of speeding, something that probably 95% of drivers do on every single journey they make, she got a ticket which is remarkably unlucky, she then enquired if she could do the awareness course in private, what exactly was wrong in asking that question? She then paid the fine and took her three points. She sounds like a regular person to me....
(deleted by moderator)
The problem is it appears that she asked the Civil Servants to investigate the "private speeding course" and using Civil Servants for personal matters is against the Ministerial Code and breaking that code is a resignation/sacking offence.
That said seems it isn't the first time she's broken the Ministerial Code and she seems to regard herself as "above" such rules and reality is, weak leadership seems to mean she is.
Ian
I would like to see more context around this. Did she simply say to someone in the office "do you know if you can have a one on one course?" or did she demand a full written report into all the possibilities of what would be least damaging. If the later, then I would agree that would be wrong.
It appears the long knives are out for her, and everything she does or says is blown out of all proportion. She is being relentlessly bullied so care needs to be taken into what to believe.
Not bullied but held to account.
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker