Will the Nation accept an apology? Will you?

It was discussed on a thread the other day.

There are issues in all parties with individual members. This would make your hair curl too.
inews.co.uk/news/tory-sleaze-allegations-claims-since-owen-paterson-lobbying-scandal-1300929
However, there’s a huge difference between individual member behaviour and the PM of the UK lying to the electorate and the House of Commons. That is inexcusable no matter what party you support.

DiscoDancer1975

Farzanah

I’m not sure that over 150,00 deaths is “handling it well” Allsorts

There’s 70 million of us! It could have been much worse.

I think given the content of some of the posts on this thread the comment that "It could have been much worse" is particularly ill-considered.

Kuenssberg said that she was told that Johnson complained after PMQs that he’d been forced to take the blame for others. That’s how genuine his so called apology was.

I also don’t see how a civil servant can independently hold an inquiry into her boss’ activities and present it to him to be signed off. Look what happened re Patel.

Chestnut

Just a thought. If the same people were all working together indoors then what difference does it make if they go outside for a break? Even if it did involve food and drink. This is not people from different households meeting up, but work colleagues who are together all the time anyway going outside the building. At least they were at work which is quite something.

I am quoting myself because my point has been ignored. I agree MissAdventure to invite 100 people seems a lot. I have no idea how many people work at No 10 but those that do would probably mix indoors during the course of their work, and it would make no difference if they mix outside. The question is who these 100 people are, because if they came from elsewhere then that is not acceptable, and the person issuing the invitation is responsible.
I see no problem with those that work inside going outside.

and it would make no difference if they mix outside.

It doesn't matter.

The rules were, no socialising, no meeting people outside. Hanging out in the garden with a glass of wine is socialising, not matter how you twist it. They weren't working, they were socialising. It doesn't matter who else was there, it doesn't matter how many of them there were (apparently 70 of the invitees had the sense to know that what was being proposed was unwise.)

The people who set the rules, broke the rules. The man at the top of the heap didn't think that was a problem. In fact he may have been complicit.

Chestnut

Chestnut

Just a thought. If the same people were all working together indoors then what difference does it make if they go outside for a break? Even if it did involve food and drink. This is not people from different households meeting up, but work colleagues who are together all the time anyway going outside the building. At least they were at work which is quite something.

I am quoting myself because my point has been ignored. I agree MissAdventure to invite 100 people seems a lot. I have no idea how many people work at No 10 but those that do would probably mix indoors during the course of their work, and it would make no difference if they mix outside. The question is who these 100 people are, because if they came from elsewhere then that is not acceptable, and the person issuing the invitation is responsible.
I see no problem with those that work inside going outside.

Exactly what I said. Totally agree. You’re not ignored...you’re just not saying what the majority on here want to hear. There’s only one highway here, and that’s’ my way!’

Chestnut would you still think it acceptable if it had been (for example) teachers having a drink in the playground after school? Or off duty doctors in a hospital car park?

Alegrias1, exactly - a rose (or party) by any other name, is still..

If he'd been honest from the start of all this, then maybe I would have accepted an apology but it's gone on far too long and he just kept on lying until finally he has been caught out and been forced into this position.
I think he has damaged the Conservative Party too much now and needs to go.

Mamie

Chestnut would you still think it acceptable if it had been (for example) teachers having a drink in the playground after school? Or off duty doctors in a hospital car park?

There is no reason why people who mix all day inside at work cannot go outside and stand in the open air! If those teachers and doctors want to stand outside after work then why not. Although I suspect they would prefer to go home.

There was such a thing as a work bubble I believe.

Chestnut

Mamie

Chestnut would you still think it acceptable if it had been (for example) teachers having a drink in the playground after school? Or off duty doctors in a hospital car park?

There is no reason why people who mix all day inside at work cannot go outside and stand in the open air! If those teachers and doctors want to stand outside after work then why not. Although I suspect they would prefer to go home.

When I read posts like yours, Chestnut I fully understand why Johnson thinks he can take the country for a ride.

Since when did 'going outside to stand in the open air' require an emailed invitation to do so and to bring a bottle and 'oh, what a surprise, there are tables laden with crisps and snacks and sausage rolls!'?

I just thank heaven that most of the electorate aren't so easily hoodwinked...

In May 2020 I retired after 40 years. I went into the office, where the HR lady stood outside while I put all my work stuff in a pile on my desk. One of the technical staff came in later and sorted out my stuff once I had left. Then phoned me to say he was sorry we hadn't been able to have a hug after 15 years of working together.

Don't make excuses about work bubbles and how it wouldn't have mattered.

There is a reason why people couldn't mix. The rules told us not to. Why is this even being discussed?

I think I might forgive him if I thought he meant it, but he doesn't, does he. So, I don't forgive him. He will lie again and again.
We were allowed to meet one person outside at that time, if I remember rightly. My friend turned up one day with a two meter long rope, and loops at each end. We went for a "socially distanced " walk, holding on to each end of the rope pulled tight. We spent most of the walk laughing, and our neighbours did too.

I am not hoodwinked. I agree the e-mail invitation and refreshments were wrong, and too many people were invited etc. It would have been totally wrong to invite anyone who didn't work within the same offices. If it had been colleagues who work together inside simply standing outside with a drink then no problem. I guess that's what we need to know, who is responsible for making this much more of a social event than it should have been.

Chestnut - ‘making it more of a social event than it should have been’
What do you mean?
What should ‘it’ have been?
What was ‘it’ supposed to be, before ‘it’ became ‘too social’?

Yes. Problem.

Illegal.

Just like having a cup of coffee with your pal while walking in the countryside. Maybe they thought is was OK too, but the law said "No". So them's the rules, whether the PPS thought otherwise or not.

I agree with you Chestnut. I expect more detail will come out.

FannyCornforth

Chestnut - ‘making it more of a social event than it should have been’
What do you mean?
What should ‘it’ have been?
What was ‘it’ supposed to be, before ‘it’ became ‘too social’?

As I said, what it should have been was colleagues who work together inside simply standing outside with a drink. The drink is neither here nor there. They could have had that drink inside in their office, or outside in the fresh air. The problem was the invitation, the food etc. thus making it a true social event. That is what needs to be investigated.

Okay Chesnut thank you.
So it shouldn’t have been a party, but was one

If 100 were invited to a “work event” why didn’t they all attend?

Do you accept every invitation that comes your way?

Not for social events no. Perhaps different if work related.

Perhaps some had a conscience?