PM breaking the law creates a constitutional crisis

GillT57

DiamondLily, your sad story illustrates just why most sensible people get so angry when these events are dismissed as "trivial fluff" and "just a piece of cake". This administration must be held to account for this, the sneering disregard of what people such as you were going through is unforgivable and I cannot understand the mindset of some on here who still think this is about "boris bashing" by crazy lefties.

Well, it suits the Tories and their acolytes to say this.?

However, I think the majority of people are appalled at ending up with a law breaking PM, who just breezes on regardless, thinking he's The Special One who doesn't have to abide by his own laws and rules.

I expect the majority of the HofC will support him tomorrow in the debate, but the public can have their say in May.

DiamondLily, your sad story illustrates just why most sensible people get so angry when these events are dismissed as "trivial fluff" and "just a piece of cake". This administration must be held to account for this, the sneering disregard of what people such as you were going through is unforgivable and I cannot understand the mindset of some on here who still think this is about "boris bashing" by crazy lefties.

I can't get my head around the fact that when these parties were held, despite very strict rules being in place regarding distancing and contact, the people attending the parties were not worried about the transfer of covid. If whilst I was out and someone came a little too close to me, I quickly moved away and worried about it for the rest of the day. Even my son, in his 30s and with quite a cavalier in attitude to life, stood at the bottom of our drive after delivering some shopping, and insisted I put gloves on to unpack it all. The people who attended these parties (which in no way were social distancing) obviously didn't think or were worried about the consequences of spreading the virus. Were they thick or just plain naive?

I don’t think the parties were trivial either. The population was required by law to minimise contact with others. To work from home whereever possible. Only to shop in person for essential items. Only to exercise for an hour a day. Businesses and services deemed non-essential were forced to close. Socialising was prohibited. And so on. We all know what the rules were. And yet here were staff in Downing Street throwing regular parties on the slightest pretext. All of the twelve parties under investigation took place before the vaccine roll out had reached the majority of the population.

The Prime Minister described his behaviour on the day for which he has been fined. He said he attending several meetings and then called in at the party. Plenty of scope there to transmit the virus. Considering he had been hospitalised only weeks before this season of parties began, he cannot have failed to understand how serious Covid was. By 20 May 2020, the date of the first party under investigation, over 43,000 people had died from the virus. The people who attended these parties were not existing in a bubble where they did not come into contact with others. Presumably they all went home from these parties using public transport, potentially spreading the virus far and wide.

We already knew that certain staff were cavalier about the rules. We know, for example, that in March, soon after Johnson had posted a video that he had Covid, Dominic Cummings dashed home to see his sick wife but returned to Downing Street without isolating. We know that he then drove to Durham and the next day had Covid symptoms.

Johnson is Prime Minister. He sets the standard for behaviour in Downing Street and what a low bar we now know that be. I have no doubt that when the House returns his week he will seek to trivialise the matter. Sources suggest he will talk about getting things in perspective. He will no doubt mention the war on Ukraine and suggest that going to a few parties is nothing compared to what is happening there. Covid is every bit as deadly as war. Morever, it killed may people who had no means of escape. Johnson and his staff have behaved with gross negligence. Not trivial at all.

On May 20th 2020, the rules, laid down by Johnson and co. were:

'13 May 2020: leaving or being outside one’s home without a reasonable excuse continues to be prohibited Some restrictions are relaxed to allow meetings outdoors for exercise or recreation with one person from another household. Guidance encourages those who cannot work from home to go back to work.

At work, social distancing advice applies with workplaces required “to avoid crowding and minimise opportunities for the virus to spread by maintaining a distance of at least 2 metres (3 steps) between individuals wherever possible. No socialising is permitted."

We were threatened with legal action if we in any way broke these rules,

On that date, I received a phone call from the nursing home my elderly dad was in, and they told me thought he only had about an hour or so to live.

I hadn't been able to visit him for 10 weeks (the laws and rules), and I pleaded with them to just let me go up and have a minute with him. I offered to purchase any PPE they needed me to wear.

They were very upset, but told me it was against the law for them to allow that. The matron and a carer sat with him, while the GP watched him die over FaceTime.

I then had to notify the family, and sort out a funeral. It was 10 people maximum, no funeral cars (inadequate screening), and sitting socially distanced in a chapel. Everything had to be organised by phone or email. I couldn't visit him at The chapel of rest, and my son couldn't come over from America.

No gathering afterwards, indoors or out, straight home.

The professionals involved were lovely, but the whole thing was awful. However, I accepted all this because it was thought it was the right thing to do.

What was Johnson and his wife, plus others at Downing Street, doing that very same day?

They were holding a garden drinks party, sitting in groups, complete with cases of wine, a running buffet and even a photographer. It did happen, the photos have been produced, so there's no arguing with it.

It is one of those party/events where a fine is likely to be issued to Johnson and wife.

So, do I think all this is trivia and not worth getting stressed about? It's just good 'ol Boris?

No, I don't.?

Good post luckygirl.

An excellent thread with such a comprehensive OP Ramblingrose. Thanks for the thoughtful posts from others too.

In some ways, the Downing Street Parties do seem trivial. They were trivial. The breaking of the laws by the policy makers who made them was not.

Accountability is the main point here. Who, if not the leader of those who made the law, can be more accountable. No one should be above the law. The Prime Minister is our equal and a servant of the country and the Queen. The Prime Minister should not expect to be treated as above the law. It is the law that stops such people from becoming dictators.

Nixon said of Watergate "It's going to be forgotten.". Just as then it will be the unravelling of the cover-up that does the damage. People don't expect their elected leaders to be saints but they do expect them not to treat them and the law as fools.

He's got away with so many lies that I expect he thought a few more wouldn't matter. People have just shrugged their shoulders because they didn't care that much about the effects of the lies. For example, if it "got Brexit done" or put "woke" people in their place, people didn't care about the means. Cummings got away with his trip(s), which Johnson supported. People have just said "oh that's Boris for you - bad lad - but he gets things done and he's quite amusing". I think he's badly miscalculated. It's quite stark when parties are put next to stories of people not going to funerals or seeing their family, etc during lockdown. Combine that with the stories about Sunak's wife when people are struggling to pay bills. The Rwanda story is the latest in a long line to rally the pro-Brexit troops in a culture war, hoping that people will forget about the rest.

paddyann54

Ms Sturgeon had been outside with the campaigners and momentarily forgot her mask ,you can see online that she put it on within a minute or so.Thats a lot different to parties at Downing st.Oh and the person who reported her is a well know Tory Activist from the North east of SCOTLAND so hardly someone wthout an ae to grind.The woman is a regular on BBC's Question time always moaning about SNP and Nicola Sturgeon .Reporting a matter of a minute without a mask to Police Scotland SHE should be fined for wasting police time

I'm not a fan of Sturgeon, but a spokesperson for the SNP at least admitted it and gave an explanation, rather than denying it and repeatedly lying.

Absolutely right Luckygirl13.

maddyone

Just done a bit of quick research and it appears that the FPN, so long as it is paid, does not result in a criminal conviction. It only becomes criminal if the FPN is not paid. Interesting isn’t it. I didn’t know that.

It still comes under criminal law, even if it's not recorded on a person's record.

Ms Sturgeon had been outside with the campaigners and momentarily forgot her mask ,you can see online that she put it on within a minute or so.Thats a lot different to parties at Downing st.Oh and the person who reported her is a well know Tory Activist from the North east of SCOTLAND so hardly someone wthout an ae to grind.The woman is a regular on BBC's Question time always moaning about SNP and Nicola Sturgeon .Reporting a matter of a minute without a mask to Police Scotland SHE should be fined for wasting police time

Thanks for explaining so clearly OakDryad.

I do not care one jot about the political colour of the PM - a PM of any party who has behaved as he has should resign.

A Labour PM who sought to undermine democracy should resign.
A Lib Dem PM who sought to undermine democracy should resign.

We are talking basic principles of democracy here, not party politics.

maddyone

Just done a bit of quick research and it appears that the FPN, so long as it is paid, does not result in a criminal conviction. It only becomes criminal if the FPN is not paid. Interesting isn’t it. I didn’t know that.

That's why he paid up and didn't contest it. His case wouldn't have stood up to legal scrutiny.

Allsorts

Concentrate on the bigger picture, he didn’t plan it, they all worked together, it about time people got a grip. This has been blown up out of all proportion as a means of getting rid of him. That’s the reality.

If it were his only lie, you may have a modicum of a point.

However, our PM, is an inveterate liar. This is not a one off. He lied to the Queen about why parliament was being prorogued FGS.

Casdon

The judge can send you to prison if you don't pay the fine for a civil offence. The judge will decide how long you stay in prison depending on how much of the fine is unpaid.

Yes, that’s right.

Just done a bit of quick research and it appears that the FPN, so long as it is paid, does not result in a criminal conviction. It only becomes criminal if the FPN is not paid. Interesting isn’t it. I didn’t know that.

A fixed penalty notice is for a summary offence - a criminal offence which is normally tried in a magistrates' court. If Johnson were to refuse to pay his fine within 28 days, he could can be charged with breaching coronavirus regulations by the Crown Prosecution Service and summoned to court. There, he could mount a defence during criminal prosecution. With his compulsion for lying he would be on very thin ice which is why he will pay his fine (or fines as many are predicting).

Note that the police have discretion not to offer a fixed penalty notice where there has been repeated offending and to recommend prosecution in court so he is on thin ice anyway.

The judge can send you to prison if you don't pay the fine for a civil offence. The judge will decide how long you stay in prison depending on how much of the fine is unpaid.

I’m not saying that paying the fine isn’t an admission of guilt, as it is. I think it unlikely that anyone in number 10 would dispute the fine. I was drawing the distinction between civil and criminal law. They are different. Growstuff thinks it maybe criminal law but I thought I’d seen on a news programme that the fines are civil law. I don’t think anyone can actually go to prison for a civil offence. I put my hands up though because I’m not sure.

GillT57

Sometimes Urm, I think you are just winding some of us up for entertainment,nobody can have such a tin ear. Have you read what grannyactivist has posted, twice?

I have suspected that for a long time, Gill57.There is a name for people who do that on forums...

growstuff

maddyone

It’s civil law, not criminal law. That’s an important distinction.

I think a FPN is actually criminal law, but at the very bottom of the scale.

Paying the fine is an admission of guilt and thus an admission that one has broken the criminal law.

Breaking it once, unknowingly, is just about forgivable. Breaking it more than once, as Johnson did, is demonstrating a blatant disregard of the law. It is particularly serious when the person who wrote the law actually breaks it continually. It demonstrates an utter disregard for the law and insults everyone who obeyed the law to protect the whole of society. It breaches both the Nolan Principles and the Ministerial Code and renders that person unfit for high office.

No-one in the entire land, neither the Queen, nor the PM is above the law. That is what the Rule of Law is about. It's part of what holds society together.

maddyone

It’s civil law, not criminal law. That’s an important distinction.

I think a FPN is actually criminal law, but at the very bottom of the scale.

It’s civil law, not criminal law. That’s an important distinction.