The Conservative Party - Part Two.

[RollingJ 1,993]

1 minute ago, Mister M said:

Quite the opposite, some actually said that these 'gatherings' are against the rules.

The commentary over the last couple of days has picked up very clearly the anger of some junior staff who were fined, but the senior staff not fined.

There is much more to this 'investigation', and the press know it. They smell that something is not right.

If they attended these 'gatherings', then they broke the rules-apparently.

[Mister M 1,605]

1 hour ago, melthebell said:

According to 'insiders' none of them they attended were work dos

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61566410

 

Working class Tories need to understand, stop making excuses and demand that mps and the government work for us, not despite us

Sadly Mel, for some of its voters, they're beyond that, and enjoy the fact that Johnson is getting away with breaking the rules and laughing at people. 

I cannot for the life of me understand it, but it's Trump territory of 'owning the libs'. 

Even though some of them are being financially hit, the 'sugar rush' of annoying others is too much for them to resist.

 

Just now, RollingJ said:

If they attended these 'gatherings', then they broke the rules-apparently.

Only some did: that's the point

Downing Street fines 'disproportionately affect women and junior staff' | The National

[Mister M 1,605]

48 minutes ago, alchresearch said:

Do civil servants get subsidised meals and alcohol?  

Remember, these are full time civil service staff working in No 10 - staff who stay no matter which party is in power.

And "we voters" don't have much of a say of the civil service.   We can't vote them out.

 

I'm not sure about their terms and conditions.

However, I think it's a strength of the system that we have a civil service that's, as far as I'm aware, politically neutral. It also ensures continuity when administrations change.

Most civil servants don't work in No 10, but in benefit offices, home offices up and down the country, and do not have any input into policy at all. It's only the very top division that work with Ministers on policy

[melthebell 862]

1 hour ago, RollingJ said:

So these un-named 'insiders' knowingly broke the rules, then?

it states some were fined, also some were security inside the building that got laughed at when they tried saying these gatherings shouldnt be happening

[Mister M 1,605]

1 hour ago, West 77 said:

Absolute nonsense.  Boris is clearly seen holding a glass containing alcohol  in the air which he did to say farewell to a work colleague.  No rules were broken by Boris otherwise he would have received a fixed penalty notice from the Met police.

 

As it not crossed your mind the bottles of booze as you commonly call them were blanked out in order not to give the drink manufacturers free advertising?

The labels on the bottles were not clear enough to identify brand, all you could see were bottles of wine and spirit. That the Mail and Express chose to crop these and images of other people present was for a reason. I've given a reason, you haven't.

 

Other newspapers have shown the full image with faces blurred out so as not to identify the identities of others.

Why the Mail and Express chose to crop the images  - well you explain the motivation then

[Guest sibon]

5 minutes ago, Mister M said:

The labels on the bottles were not clear enough to identify brand, all you could see were bottles of wine and spirit. That the Mail and Express chose to crop these and images of other people present was for a reason. I've given a reason, you haven't.

 

Other newspapers have shown the full image with faces blurred out so as not to identify the identities of others.

Why the Mail and Express chose to crop the images  - well you explain the motivation then

They won't be cropping the images for long.

 

Pretty soon  they will turn, as the Times and the Telegraph have turned.

 

Panorama is going to be a hoot this evening. I have a suitcase full of wine ready to help me watch it.

[Mister M 1,605]

1 minute ago, sibon said:

They won't be cropping the images for long.

 

Pretty soon  they will turn, as the Times and the Telegraph have turned.

 

Panorama is going to be a hoot this evening. I have a suitcase full of wine ready to help me watch it.

I didn't even know the Telegraph had turned. That is quite something. Though I suspect they'd like to differentiate themselves from Johnson on grounds of him being a 'high taxer and high spender' and because its reader are angry that they were in lockdown while he was partying. No fundamental change of opinion I suspect.

The Mail seems to change it's mind.

The Express is slavish to the degree of Stockholm Syndrome.

Thanks for the heads up about Panorama. Nice to see the BBC countering the belief that its fearful of Government threats

[Mister M 1,605]

8 minutes ago, West 77 said:

I've already given a possible explanation which you disagree with.

 

One of your many problems is you look to discredit any organisation or individual you don't like.  The Mail and Express could have chosen not to show the images in any form and not acknowledge the existence of them.  

I couldn't give a toss about discrediting the Mail and Express, they do such a good job of it themselves by virtue of their inconsistencies.

In fact it would've been more honest had they ignored the party gate story completely, and given its readers an unleavened diet of royal news stories, stories about asylum seekers and the latest on house prices. 

[Guest sibon]

23 minutes ago, Mister M said:

I didn't even know the Telegraph had turned. That is quite something. Though I suspect they'd like to differentiate themselves from Johnson on grounds of him being a 'high taxer and high spender' and because its reader are angry that they were in lockdown while he was partying. No fundamental change of opinion I suspect.

The Mail seems to change it's mind.

The Express is slavish to the degree of Stockholm Syndrome.

Thanks for the heads up about Panorama. Nice to see the BBC countering the belief that its fearful of Government threats

You've hit the nail on the head with the Telegraph. Johnson is far too left wing for them.

 

I guess that relentlessly attacking the BBC and C4 will eventually reap its own whirlwind.

[Anna B 1,401]

1 hour ago, Jim117 said:

A few points as I’m tired of hearing the press and public banging on about “cushy”civil service jobs. For the lucky ones at the top maybe but not so much for the ones at the coal face. My missis is a civil servant and I can assure everyone there’s no free booze and food in her office. The only exception was if a team member handed round sweets, buns etc which they had brought in themselves. I say was because this small morale booster bit the dust due to Covid. She deals with everything from suicide calls to abuse from entitled idiots who are on more money in benefits than her wages amount to. They have had a large electronic display mounted in the office to remind them of the crushing volume of calls waiting in line, no doubt recommend by some consultant genius. Promotion is virtually nonexistent, line management don’t like losing their best staff. So definitely not a cushy job and there will be thousands of people nationally putting in a similar graft.

I'm sure that's correct. She has my sympathy. I think we are talking about the Sir Humphries in the Westminster branch of the Civil Service, not the workers.

 

It's ironic that the higher up the greasy pole you get, the bigger and better the perks, along with a substantial salary, pension fund and maybe a knighthood for just doing your rather cushy, well renumerated job.  

 

 

1 hour ago, Mister M said:

I'm not sure about their terms and conditions.

However, I think it's a strength of the system that we have a civil service that's, as far as I'm aware, politically neutral. It also ensures continuity when administrations change.

Most civil servants don't work in No 10, but in benefit offices, home offices up and down the country, and do not have any input into policy at all. It's only the very top division that work with Ministers on policy

True, but I'll bet the top division are Oxbridge, and Tory to a man.

So, far from being 'politically neutral,' they see life from their guilded cage, and implement things from their own perspective: the very definition of the 'Establishment.'

Which is another reason why our 'democracy' is flawed. Surely people can see by now just how skewed our Parliamentary system is.

Having 'The oldest Parliament in the world' is not a compliment, it means it is hidebound in old ideas and traditions which keep it tied to the past , along with the gentlemen's clubs, old boys network and days of Empire. It is grindingly slow to change and to act. 

It must be a disfunctional laughing stock when compared to modern places of work, inhabited by lesser mortals who are actually able to get things done.

Edited May 24, 2022 by Anna B

[Mister M 1,605]

Sam Coates doing a sterling job here:

 

[L00b 441]

4 hours ago, West 77 said:

The Met Police who have access to more evidence than ITN  didn't judge it necessary to give Boris a fixed penalty notice regarding that particular work gathering which should be the end of the matter.  I will just add unlike most of those receiving fines in the Downing Street work area Boris has allowed his name to be made public. If memory serves me right Boris has only received one fixed penalty notice regarding when he was given some cake in his place of work on his birthday. 

Ah. It was a ‘work gathering’, then?

 

So can you explain why did any attendees of that ‘work gathering’ in November 2020 receive fines, but not others?

Edited May 24, 2022 by L00b