So. On the 1 hand we have an "independent" Cabinet Office inquiry. Carried out by someone ultimately employed by Boris Johnson. Relating to the actions of Boris Johnson and his friends. And, presumably, Civil Servants employed by the Cabinet Office.
So independent that 2 sets of people get to view the evidence before the report is allowed to be published. Boris Johnson and the Met Police. Who also get to decide what this "independent" report is allowed to comment on. Before deciding how much of it to allow to be seen by others.
Then there is the Met Police. Carrying out its "own investigation". Anyone think that that "investigation" should include why several Met Police Officers, primarily employed to stop people breaking the Law around 10 Downing St, stood by and allowed dozens of people in to Downing Street. Carrying booze. And then watch them all have illegal gatherings both in 10 Downing St and in the gardens. And did feck all.
You might imagine that an independent inquiry would involve (in the creation of the report) people neither employed by alleged wrongdoers. Or someone who has employed people who have aided and abetted them.
Just a quick aside on the role of the Met Police in all of this. Because here is what I think is likely to have happened:-
1. At least 1 Met Officer is concerned about 1 or more of these parties he has witnessed 2. He does not want to risk his career by steaming in, but is also concerned about the risk to him of doing nothing 3. He emails his boss, setting out in brief what has happened, and asks if there is more he should be doing 4. His boss, recognising the inherent risk to him, does nothing other than forward it to his boss. and so on 5. I think it likely that Cressida D1ck had personally been made aware of some of this months ago. And chose to do nothing then.
She should be answering questions. Not in charge of asking them. That should be a different Police force.
Cressida D1ck went the Balliol College, the same as Boris. Her father was a senior tutor there.
2 year unknown gap in her career.
"It was announced in December 2014 that she would retire from the police in 2015 to join the Foreign Office, in an unspecified director-general level posting.[29][14][30] The Foreign Office refused Freedom of Information requests for information on her job title, role and responsibilities, or her wage.[31][32] In the Daily Telegraph, Martin Evans wrote that she had "an unspecified and rather shadowy security role" at the Foreign Office".[10]
Just a quick aside on the role of the Met Police in all of this. Because here is what I think is likely to have happened:-
1. At least 1 Met Officer is concerned about 1 or more of these parties he has witnessed 2. He does not want to risk his career by steaming in, but is also concerned about the risk to him of doing nothing 3. He emails his boss, setting out in brief what has happened, and asks if there is more he should be doing 4. His boss, recognising the inherent risk to him, does nothing other than forward it to his boss. and so on 5. I think it likely that Cressida D1ck had personally been made aware of some of this months ago. And chose to do nothing then.
She should be answering questions. Not in charge of asking them. That should be a different Police force.
As more and more information was being leaked The Met continuously said there was nothing to investigate. This was despite having a constant police presence at number 10. You might have thought that they would have made a few enquiries before deciding that there was nothing to investigate. This may have resulted in less eggs on fewer faces.
This has made a nonsense of the Sue Gray report. It now has to be watered down, or delayed until whenever. Very lucky for Boris.
So. On the 1 hand we have an "independent" Cabinet Office inquiry. Carried out by someone ultimately employed by Boris Johnson. Relating to the actions of Boris Johnson and his friends. And, presumably, Civil Servants employed by the Cabinet Office.
So independent that 2 sets of people get to view the evidence before the report is allowed to be published. Boris Johnson and the Met Police. Who also get to decide what this "independent" report is allowed to comment on. Before deciding how much of it to allow to be seen by others.
Then there is the Met Police. Carrying out its "own investigation". Anyone think that that "investigation" should include why several Met Police Officers, primarily employed to stop people breaking the Law around 10 Downing St, stood by and allowed dozens of people in to Downing Street. Carrying booze. And then watch them all have illegal gatherings both in 10 Downing St and in the gardens. And did feck all.
You might imagine that an independent inquiry would involve (in the creation of the report) people neither employed by alleged wrongdoers. Or someone who has employed people who have aided and abetted them.
Pathetic.
We just dont seem to very good at the organisation of anything very much.
The man who could replace Boris? Tory MPs look to ex-soldier, critic of the Government and China hawk Tom Tugendhat to be next PM - but Johnson's allies have cruelly nicknamed him 'Tom Tugentw*t' and others fear he could be too POSH
Centrist Tory MPs are turning to former soldier Tom Tugendhat as their choice to take over from Boris Johnson, as the Conservative Party braces for a potential leadership contest. Mr Johnson continues to fight for his political life over the Partygate scandal amid fears in Downing Street that the eventual publication of an official report into Whitehall gatherings will prompt a vote of no confidence in his leadership. If Mr Johnson lost that vote the race to succeed him would be officially triggered and Tory MPs are now actively considering who would be best placed to be the next prime minister. Mr Tugendhat, a vocal critic of the Government and a China hawk, is viewed as an outsider in the potential contest, trailing the frontrunners Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss. But some Conservative MPs believe the current chairman of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee would be well suited to the role and represents the 'best chance for a fresh start'. However, some are concerned the 48-year-old, who has never served as a minister, lacks experience and could be viewed by voters as too posh for the premiership. He is the son of a high court judge and the nephew of a Tory peer.
Cressida D1ck has, in the past, received unfair criticism. Sometimes it is not the fault of leadership if a few out of thousands of employees are rubbish. But sometimes the problem is one of leadership. And bowing and scraping to their paymaster, rather than the public which they are supposed to serve.
Here is an extract from her Wiki page. The facts are all well documented.
"In March 2021, D1ck was criticised for Metropolitan Police's handling of a vigil for Sarah Everard, where officers arrested four attendees, alleging violations of COVID-19 restrictions on public gatherings. Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey led calls for her resignation. D1ck defended the MPS's conduct; said that policing was "fiendishly difficult"; and criticized what she called "armchair" critics. Opposition Leader Keir Starmer, London mayor Sadiq Khan, campaigners and backbench MPs all criticised the Metropolitan Police. **** retained the confidence of Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Home Secretary Priti Patel. Patel directed HMICFRS to look into the police response to the incident. HMICFRS findings, reported on 31 March 2021, were that the police "reacted appropriately and were not heavy handed" and were "justified" in their stance with respect to the Covid regulations saying that the risks of transmission were "too great to ignore". In response to the prosecution of an off duty officer for the murder of Sarah Everard, D1ck suggested that if women felt unsafe when approached by officers they should resist arrest, run away, then flag down a bus or call 999."
So-people could fairly be arrested by the police for a vigil about a woman murdered by a Policeman. But a Party (or indeed many parties) is just fine-police can stand around and watch. Read the above again. Focus on the words "risks of transmission were too great to ignore".
Anyone with a shred of dignity would resign. Boris is not the only one that history will judge as being 2-faced.
Cressida D1ck has, in the past, received unfair criticism. Sometimes it is not the fault of leadership if a few out of thousands of employees are rubbish. But sometimes the problem is one of leadership. And bowing and scraping to their paymaster, rather than the public which they are supposed to serve.
Here is an extract from her Wiki page. The facts are all well documented.
"In March 2021, D1ck was criticised for Metropolitan Police's handling of a vigil for Sarah Everard, where officers arrested four attendees, alleging violations of COVID-19 restrictions on public gatherings. Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey led calls for her resignation. D1ck defended the MPS's conduct; said that policing was "fiendishly difficult"; and criticized what she called "armchair" critics. Opposition Leader Keir Starmer, London mayor Sadiq Khan, campaigners and backbench MPs all criticised the Metropolitan Police. **** retained the confidence of Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Home Secretary Priti Patel. Patel directed HMICFRS to look into the police response to the incident. HMICFRS findings, reported on 31 March 2021, were that the police "reacted appropriately and were not heavy handed" and were "justified" in their stance with respect to the Covid regulations saying that the risks of transmission were "too great to ignore". In response to the prosecution of an off duty officer for the murder of Sarah Everard, D1ck suggested that if women felt unsafe when approached by officers they should resist arrest, run away, then flag down a bus or call 999."
So-people could fairly be arrested by the police for a vigil about a woman murdered by a Policeman. But a Party (or indeed many parties) is just fine-police can stand around and watch. Read the above again. Focus on the words "risks of transmission were too great to ignore".
Anyone with a shred of dignity would resign. Boris is not the only one that history will judge as being 2-faced.
We all know the policeman have all the evidence they need for any event at no 10, the logs of visitors give them the information.
They probably don’t want to release lists/names because they no events will have breached the no more than 30 rule = £10k fine!
Who will pay that? Us in the long run!
That’s why they keep chundering less than 30….it’s another scandal on top of the scandals all aprund them…
Just a quick aside on the role of the Met Police in all of this. Because here is what I think is likely to have happened:-
1. At least 1 Met Officer is concerned about 1 or more of these parties he has witnessed 2. He does not want to risk his career by steaming in, but is also concerned about the risk to him of doing nothing 3. He emails his boss, setting out in brief what has happened, and asks if there is more he should be doing 4. His boss, recognising the inherent risk to him, does nothing other than forward it to his boss. and so on 5. I think it likely that Cressida D1ck had personally been made aware of some of this months ago. And chose to do nothing then.
She should be answering questions. Not in charge of asking them. That should be a different Police force.
Outrage on NewsNight. They made the point that The Met refused to investigate time and time again. They even made the point that they dont investigate retrospectively. This confused people as crimes are usually investigated after they have been committed. At the beginning of the week they were ok with the report being published in full. That was until this morning, when they decided that the events they intend to investigate should be redacted in the report. The only reason for this according to the experts would be to avoid influencing a jury in any prosecutions that may follow. Yet The Met have made clear that they will only impose fixed penalties, which are dealt with in a Magistrates Court, and without a jury. Lord Sumption made the point that factual reports are often followed by criminal investigations. Only one person benefits from this.
Furious bereaved families, ex-cops and MPs accuse 'incompetent' Met chief of a Partygate 'stitch up' as police order Sue Gray to water down report - with a redacted version set to be released next week but the full verdict could take MONTHS
Furious bereaved families, ex-cops and MPs accuse 'incompetent' Met chief of a Partygate Tories, lawyers and ex-officers have joined a furious backlash after police confirmed they have told the Cabinet Office the long-awaited document should feature 'minimal reference' to lockdown breaches that might be criminal. The announcement has thrown the situation into complete chaos, with Ms Gray now considering pausing the process rather than releasing a version that would inevitably be condemned as a whitewash. Police waited until the report was all-but complete to launch their own investigation into some of the allegations on Tuesday, but initially briefed they were still happy for the civil servant's findings to be published in full. Opposition MPs vented fury at the latest move, which will be a massive relief to Boris Johnson as the Yard probe is not likely to be complete for weeks or even months. Some complained that the events 'reek of a stitch-up' while others suggested it was down to 'incompetence'.
Forget Partygate, the bigger scandal is the £4.3billion lost to Covid fraud that no one seems to care about... apart from one minister who dared tell the truth in a House of Lords speech - then quit on the spot
Theodore Agnew said 'schoolboy errors' had been made by the Covid loans scheme, such as bounce-back loans being given to more than 1,000 companies that were not trading when Covid struck.
Comments
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/jacob-rees-mogg-labour-only-care-cakes-animals-partygate-130709080.html
Partygate: Threat of general election within weeks branded nonsense
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/partygate-general-election-within-weeks-total-nonsense-084955829.html
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60166997
So. On the 1 hand we have an "independent" Cabinet Office inquiry. Carried out by someone ultimately employed by Boris Johnson. Relating to the actions of Boris Johnson and his friends. And, presumably, Civil Servants employed by the Cabinet Office.
So independent that 2 sets of people get to view the evidence before the report is allowed to be published. Boris Johnson and the Met Police. Who also get to decide what this "independent" report is allowed to comment on. Before deciding how much of it to allow to be seen by others.
Then there is the Met Police. Carrying out its "own investigation". Anyone think that that "investigation" should include why several Met Police Officers, primarily employed to stop people breaking the Law around 10 Downing St, stood by and allowed dozens of people in to Downing Street. Carrying booze. And then watch them all have illegal gatherings both in 10 Downing St and in the gardens. And did feck all.
You might imagine that an independent inquiry would involve (in the creation of the report) people neither employed by alleged wrongdoers. Or someone who has employed people who have aided and abetted them.
Pathetic.
1. At least 1 Met Officer is concerned about 1 or more of these parties he has witnessed
2. He does not want to risk his career by steaming in, but is also concerned about the risk to him of doing nothing
3. He emails his boss, setting out in brief what has happened, and asks if there is more he should be doing
4. His boss, recognising the inherent risk to him, does nothing other than forward it to his boss. and so on
5. I think it likely that Cressida D1ck had personally been made aware of some of this months ago. And chose to do nothing then.
She should be answering questions. Not in charge of asking them. That should be a different Police force.
Old school tie brigade.
Cressida D1ck went the Balliol College, the same as Boris.
Her father was a senior tutor there.
2 year unknown gap in her career.
"It was announced in December 2014 that she would retire from the police in 2015 to join the Foreign Office, in an unspecified director-general level posting.[29][14][30] The Foreign Office refused Freedom of Information requests for information on her job title, role and responsibilities, or her wage.[31][32] In the Daily Telegraph, Martin Evans wrote that she had "an unspecified and rather shadowy security role" at the Foreign Office".[10]
This was despite having a constant police presence at number 10.
You might have thought that they would have made a few enquiries before deciding that there was nothing to investigate.
This may have resulted in less eggs on fewer faces.
This has made a nonsense of the Sue Gray report.
It now has to be watered down, or delayed until whenever.
Very lucky for Boris.
Centrist Tory MPs are turning to former soldier Tom Tugendhat as their choice to take over from Boris Johnson, as the Conservative Party braces for a potential leadership contest. Mr Johnson continues to fight for his political life over the Partygate scandal amid fears in Downing Street that the eventual publication of an official report into Whitehall gatherings will prompt a vote of no confidence in his leadership. If Mr Johnson lost that vote the race to succeed him would be officially triggered and Tory MPs are now actively considering who would be best placed to be the next prime minister. Mr Tugendhat, a vocal critic of the Government and a China hawk, is viewed as an outsider in the potential contest, trailing the frontrunners Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss. But some Conservative MPs believe the current chairman of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee would be well suited to the role and represents the 'best chance for a fresh start'. However, some are concerned the 48-year-old, who has never served as a minister, lacks experience and could be viewed by voters as too posh for the premiership. He is the son of a high court judge and the nephew of a Tory peer.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10451665/Centrist-Tory-MPs-Tom-Tugendhat-potential-PM.html
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/sue-gray-report-theresa-may-says-no-one-is-above-the-law-and-she-expects-full-accountability/ar-AATeA4W?ocid=msedgntp
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/newslondon/top-foreign-office-civil-servant-apologises-for-misleading-mps-over-nowzad-emails/ar-AATeFcY?ocid=msedgntp
Here is an extract from her Wiki page. The facts are all well documented.
"In March 2021, D1ck was criticised for Metropolitan Police's handling of a vigil for Sarah Everard, where officers arrested four attendees, alleging violations of COVID-19 restrictions on public gatherings. Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey led calls for her resignation. D1ck defended the MPS's conduct; said that policing was "fiendishly difficult"; and criticized what she called "armchair" critics. Opposition Leader Keir Starmer, London mayor Sadiq Khan, campaigners and backbench MPs all criticised the Metropolitan Police. **** retained the confidence of Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Home Secretary Priti Patel. Patel directed HMICFRS to look into the police response to the incident. HMICFRS findings, reported on 31 March 2021, were that the police "reacted appropriately and were not heavy handed" and were "justified" in their stance with respect to the Covid regulations saying that the risks of transmission were "too great to ignore". In response to the prosecution of an off duty officer for the murder of Sarah Everard, D1ck suggested that if women felt unsafe when approached by officers they should resist arrest, run away, then flag down a bus or call 999."
So-people could fairly be arrested by the police for a vigil about a woman murdered by a Policeman. But a Party (or indeed many parties) is just fine-police can stand around and watch. Read the above again. Focus on the words "risks of transmission were too great to ignore".
Anyone with a shred of dignity would resign. Boris is not the only one that history will judge as being 2-faced.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/nadine-dorries-takes-to-twitter-to-poke-the-pork-pie-plotters-but-she-may-have-undermined-boris-johnson/ar-AATfcPI?ocid=msedgntp
They probably don’t want to release lists/names because they no events will have breached the no more than 30 rule = £10k fine!
Who will pay that? Us in the long run!
That’s why they keep chundering less than 30….it’s another scandal on top of the scandals all aprund them…
They made the point that The Met refused to investigate time and time again.
They even made the point that they dont investigate retrospectively.
This confused people as crimes are usually investigated after they have been committed.
At the beginning of the week they were ok with the report being published in full.
That was until this morning, when they decided that the events they intend to investigate should be redacted in the report.
The only reason for this according to the experts would be to avoid influencing a jury in any prosecutions that may follow.
Yet The Met have made clear that they will only impose fixed penalties, which are dealt with in a Magistrates Court, and without a jury.
Lord Sumption made the point that factual reports are often followed by criminal investigations.
Only one person benefits from this.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/british-police-say-have-received-information-on-downing-street-gatherings/ar-AATfyPk?ocid=msedgntp
Sue Gray report: redacted version is imminent, say government sources
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/sue-gray-report-redacted-version-is-imminent-say-government-sources/ar-AATfyxj?ocid=msedgntp
Furious bereaved families, ex-cops and MPs accuse 'incompetent' Met chief of a Partygate
Tories, lawyers and ex-officers have joined a furious backlash after police confirmed they have told the Cabinet Office the long-awaited document should feature 'minimal reference' to lockdown breaches that might be criminal. The announcement has thrown the situation into complete chaos, with Ms Gray now considering pausing the process rather than releasing a version that would inevitably be condemned as a whitewash. Police waited until the report was all-but complete to launch their own investigation into some of the allegations on Tuesday, but initially briefed they were still happy for the civil servant's findings to be published in full. Opposition MPs vented fury at the latest move, which will be a massive relief to Boris Johnson as the Yard probe is not likely to be complete for weeks or even months. Some complained that the events 'reek of a stitch-up' while others suggested it was down to 'incompetence'.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10451357/Partygate-report-minimal-reference-potential-crimes.html
Theodore Agnew said 'schoolboy errors' had been made by the Covid loans scheme, such as bounce-back loans being given to more than 1,000 companies that were not trading when Covid struck.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10454029/Forget-Partygate-bigger-scandal-4-3billion-lost-Covid-fraud.html