Gransnet forums

News & politics

Will Johnson come out of hiding to make a statement

(18 Posts)
suziewoozie Tue 25-Feb-20 12:06:50

Given that he believes investigating historic child sexual abuse is ‘ spaffing money against a wall’.

suziewoozie Tue 25-Feb-20 12:14:50

You can access the full report from this link as well.

suziewoozie Tue 25-Feb-20 12:40:05

Listening to James O’Brien on LBC. Heartbreaking phone calls from men who as boys were not believed.

suziewoozie Tue 25-Feb-20 13:07:09


HootyMcOwlface Tue 25-Feb-20 13:09:41

He will when Dom tells him to.

suziewoozie Tue 25-Feb-20 13:47:12

LBC coverage of this today is excellent - in depth, measured, informed and treating the callers with respect and care. Theo Usherwood, their political editor, is first class. Compare this with the headlines in the DM.

Opal Tue 25-Feb-20 14:05:25

I find it pretty disgusting that the OP has used such a serious issue to fire yet another criticism at Johnson, when the link provided actually refers to the claim that Westminster has failed on this issue for decades - Johnson has only been PM for a matter of months! Shame the OP's opening post isn't in depth, measured and informed - but no surprises there, eh?

suziewoozie Tue 25-Feb-20 14:19:49

BJ who is the PM ( yes I know it’s easy to forget) made a disgusting comment that I referred to only last year. This report is about Westminster - as PM he should have responded by now with a statement containing words of regret and a promise to take recommendations seriously. Of course he needs criticising for what he said then and what he’s not said today. But maybe you agree with his comments about ‘spaffing’? After all he is perfect

MaizieD Tue 25-Feb-20 14:21:21

As PM, Opal, it is his duty to welcome the publication of the report, deeply regret the failings of the establishment over several decades, show sympathy with the victims and promise that measures will be put in place to ensure that this never happens again.

It really doesn't matter how long he's been in post. His duty is to speak for Westminster and acknowledge failings.

I'll be amazed if he does, though.

MaizieD Tue 25-Feb-20 14:22:38

Snap! Suzie!

suziewoozie Tue 25-Feb-20 14:26:49

Yours was better Maizie. LBC were playing the BJ spaffing clip frequently this morning - it’s beyond disgusting and I defy any BB to come up with a defence for it.

suziewoozie Tue 25-Feb-20 15:25:52

Oh dear David Steel is sounding a bit sulky as he resigns, Not a good look.

paddyanne Tue 25-Feb-20 16:33:49

Meantime the lib dems are swithering and falling out with each other over suspending...not sacking "Lord Steele " for his inaction over Cyril Smith when he apparently knew the whole time that vile man was abusing boys .
The list that was "lost" contained many names of serving politicians ,when will Westminster deal with them?

paddyanne Tue 25-Feb-20 17:31:19

update David Steel has resigned and said he will leave the H of L .."as soon as possible".He should just walk out today and not go back after admitting he knew about Cyril Smith all along

suziewoozie Tue 25-Feb-20 17:33:45

I said he’d resigned paddyann about 2 hours ago and that he was being sulky about it.

varian Tue 25-Feb-20 18:19:36

As far as I understand it, Smith told David Steele that he had been investigated by the police, but he did not admit to having done anything. The police investigation did not result in prosecution so David Steele could have been forgiven for thinking Smith was innocent.

suziewoozie Tue 25-Feb-20 19:39:34

This isn’t quite the evidence DS gave I believe

suziewoozie Tue 25-Feb-20 19:46:27

varian this from the Executive Summary in the report - DS accepts CS did it but it was beforehand so didn’t matter

The Private Eye article was read by David Steel (now Lord Steel), the then leader of the Liberal Party, who decided to speak to Cyril Smith about the content.

During that discussion Cyril Smith told him that the ‘story’ was correct but that no further action had been taken. Lord Steel told the Inquiry that the allegations had arisen before Cyril Smith had become a member of the Liberal Party and he saw “no reason, or no locus to go back to something that had happened during his time as councillor … ”.[11] In effect, that it was nothing to do with him. This failure to recognise the risk that Cyril Smith potentially posed to children was an abdication of responsibility by a political leader and an example of a highly placed politician turning a blind eye to something that was potentially troublesome to his party, with no apparent regard for criminal acts which might have occurred or for any victims, past or future.