That Sue Gray Report/Johnson meeting

It was a secret meeting until the details got leaked.

Then it wasn't a meeting, there was no meeting, then it was a meeting, that Sue Grey wanted, and it did take place, now it's a meeting that Number 10 requested, but didn't formalise.

Jeez lol ?

Dinahmo

Urmstongran

Such negativity. It worked for us. We needed a better weekly income and went out to earn it.

Sorry to derail the thread. It was just a reply to WWmk2. I won’t mention my circumstances again. We are all different.

Back in the 50s I was one of 4. My mum worked nights (not every night) and my dad connected insurance premiums for a Friendly Society one evening a week in addition to his full time job. I'm sure others will have a similar story. That was then. Things are different now.

Not everyone is part of a couple so whose going to look after the children?

Not everyone has a car and public transport is very poor in rural areas so ow are people expected to get to one of these part time evening jobs in a town?

Most people experiencing fuel and food poverty ARE IN WORK!

We have full employment as near to dam it.

Johnson statement is both ridiculous and unhelpful.

A bit like the daft statement that perhaps people ought to get on their bikes.

sorry - collected not connected

Urmstongran

Such negativity. It worked for us. We needed a better weekly income and went out to earn it.

Sorry to derail the thread. It was just a reply to WWmk2. I won’t mention my circumstances again. We are all different.

Back in the 50s I was one of 4. My mum worked nights (not every night) and my dad connected insurance premiums for a Friendly Society one evening a week in addition to his full time job. I'm sure others will have a similar story. That was then. Things are different now.

Not everyone is part of a couple so whose going to look after the children?

Not everyone has a car and public transport is very poor in rural areas so ow are people expected to get to one of these part time evening jobs in a town?

Tories are now saying neither Met Police investigation nor report are decisive for Johnson’s future. Now we apparently have to wait for the Privileges Committee report.

Frankly I think it is for the voting public to decide not the craven Tories.

Urmstongran

It wasn’t a ‘secret’ meeting. It was a ‘private meeting’.
Which is why we all know about it.

Why would Ms Gray agree to hold a meeting which could or would undermine the integrity of her report?

If she attended it must be because she felt that there was no such risk, or even that it would help her to iron out technicalities. She is either a paragon of virtue, in which case her report will have a lot of weight; or she is nothing but a puppet, in which case it doesn’t matter what she says. The media need to make up their minds.

They have already decided that the report will be ‘explosive ‘, and unless it leaves the PM fatally wounded they will not accept the legitimacy of the report.

Sue Gray would not be able to refuse to attend a meeting with the Prime Minister if he summoned her. He is her boss.

I don’t care what the media are saying or not saying. I just want the truth. Is that something impossible to achieve with this current government.

So first there was no meeting. Then there was a meeting but it was Sue Gray who asked for it. Then Dacre/Lap? Media wound up to do her in. Now it turns out there was a meeting and No 10 asked for it. And it was because Johnson wanted to discuss ‘timings’. Yeah right! PM has a diary Secretary and a planning team. Absolutely no need whatever for the PM (a busy man/woman in a functional government) to be involved in issues of timing like that. So we can assume that yet again a new set of lies has been constructed to cover up the original lies

Now stand by for ministers in studios debasing themselves by saying the opposite of what they said a day ago while insisting they have been ‘clear all along.’ One final point. There is no such thing as an ‘independent’ civil servant. They are impartial. That is not same thing

Alastair Campbell

It wasn’t a ‘secret’ meeting. It was a ‘private meeting’.
Which is why we all know about it.

Why would Ms Gray agree to hold a meeting which could or would undermine the integrity of her report?

If she attended it must be because she felt that there was no such risk, or even that it would help her to iron out technicalities. She is either a paragon of virtue, in which case her report will have a lot of weight; or she is nothing but a puppet, in which case it doesn’t matter what she says. The media need to make up their minds.

They have already decided that the report will be ‘explosive ‘, and unless it leaves the PM fatally wounded they will not accept the legitimacy of the report.

This enquiry involves the PM, cabinet ministers, other MPs, and civil servants.

Are we seriously saying that a civil servant would arrange a "secret meeting", with the head of this enquiry, without telling the PM, who is a major subject of it??

I don't think so...?

Urmstongran

He's PM, not head of HR. You think he organises the lunch rota as well?

Have you ever met any boss ever who doesn’t decide who he wants to see and when, and who he doesn’t - and makes sure his reports don’t book people in without his say so? That is how the world works.

Well at least he's now picked a better cabinet in the number 10 shake-up

He's PM, not head of HR. You think he organises the lunch rota as well?

The thing is Urmstongran that Prime Ministers don't arrange meetings for their diary. They have somebody with a job title something like "diary secretary" in their Private Office. So they will probably be civil servants doing the Prime Minister's bidding.
Does this help you understand?

Boris picks the cabinet. Who then go about doing the job. Rishi Sunak for example runs the Exchequer. He reports in to the PM, but Rishi makes the decisions.

Same in other depts. PM is there to set overall strategy and direction.

DiamondLily

Number 10 has just admitted they did ask for a secret meeting with Sue Grey.?

There are now disputes as to who sent a formal invite, or if a formal invite was ever sent...

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10844513/Boris-braces-Partygate-report-DAYS-including-photos-No10-bashes.html

How strange. Didn’t the Daily Mail have a front page news item saying it was Sue Grey that instigated it?? Surely the Mail wouldn’t lie?

Dear God in heaven.

Our PM today, in his element.

Point of accuracy.
Downing Street usually refers to either the PPS or similar. It is not the same as Boris Johnson.

Boris may have initiated the meeting, but that is different to Downing Street initiating the meeting.

Either way i agree it's a bad look, but it depends whether Boris made the order, or whether a PPS did it, then told him.

Not defending him, just saying

And Johnson wasn't told? Sounds like a so called leader who has no control then.

Or, more likely, he did know, but it was better to accuse Sue Grey of lying.

No. 10 officials asked.
I think the civil servants wanted to talk to Sue Grey as their involvement is a bit embarrassing.

Number 10 has just admitted they did ask for a secret meeting with Sue Grey.?

There are now disputes as to who sent a formal invite, or if a formal invite was ever sent...

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10844513/Boris-braces-Partygate-report-DAYS-including-photos-No10-bashes.html

www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHPOzQzk9Qo

Such negativity. It worked for us. We needed a better weekly income and went out to earn it.

Sorry to derail the thread. It was just a reply to WWmk2. I won’t mention my circumstances again. We are all different.

Lucca

Urmstongran

I think the real scandal about Gray’s report is that the lawyer advising her, Daniel Stilitz, has been exposed as a vocal Labour activist and committed Remainer.

Stilitz has repeatedly attacked Boris Johnson on Twitter, describing him as a "reckless dangerous PM", referring to “Johnson’s fake news machine” and telling MPs “if you trust Johnson, you’re a mug.”

Not impartial then?

A committed remainer? Like Boris was before he decided it was better for his “career” to become a brexiteer ?

Yes, that always makes me laugh. Johnson spent 8 years, as Mayor, telling everyone that only a fool would want to leave the EU.

The night before he had to make a decision what way to jump, he did statements about both, but still swaying with the "Remain is best" idea.

Then, he realised that becoming a "Brexiteer" could get him into Number 10, and he became that.

He will be anything that gives him power or money, and I am amazed that so many people cannot seem to see through his phoniness.

He has no principles, no commitment to anything or anyone but himself, and just lies his way through life.

Not a good look for any leader that wants to be respected.?

gong? going!!