Sue Gray to be Starmer’s Chief of Staff

DaisyAnne

Glorianny

DaisyAnne

Glorianny

Funny isn't it Starmer probably upset the very voters he is currently pursuing- the doubtful Tory. They are now probably thinking Johnson was stitched up and they should stay faithful.

So people think the person Johnson employed to carry out the Party Gate report, lauding her character as he did so, stitched him up? What would that make Johnson if it were true? What would it make him if it wasn't?

What does that make the police, who carried out a separate investigation? Are you suggesting the fines - over 100 of them - were Sue Gray's fault, Starmer's fault, or could they have been the fault of those who were fined?

What does that make the Commons Privileges Committee, who have decided there is enough evidence for them to continue the investigation on the question as to whether Johnson deliberately lied to Parliament? Are they all (with a majority of Conservatives) colluding to punish an innocent man or trying to find justice?

It seems that to you, everyone's out of step except your Boris. I think that put's you on a par with the deluded mother of "Jimmy" from the WW1 song.

Your problem DaisyAnne is you imagine voters thoroughly research things before drawing conclusions, many of them don't. Many will simply read what is said by people like JRM and draw their conclusions from that.
He isn't my Boris by the way I have always loathed the man, however I acknowledge he has a certain ability to charm and I listen to what is being said about him .
There is also a body of opinion that says civil servants are sneaky lying individuals and this provides ammunition for that.

I don't feel I have a "problem", Glorianny, thank you. My conversation was about your view, not the view taken by others but let's address that.

Boris said, "When the herd moves, it moves". It seems that you feel those people thinking about voting for Starmer stop when there is propaganda bombing by the press. They stop, according to you, thinking for themselves.

Surely those who have been thinking will continue thinking? Of course, there are sheeple just as there are some Conservative MPs (probably some of all MPs) with the herd mentality Johnson spoke of but it was never was all of them.

Sheeple can be defined as docile and compliant or easily influenced, but not as thinkers. They will sway with what is being said, whether by Rees Mog, strange social media sites or the comics of the right-wing press. They are catch-us-if-you-can voters. We cannot guess what their thinking will be at the time of the next election. However, Johnson might have been sacked as an MP, possibly going in deep personal humiliation and disgrace. If so I would guess that some of the easily influenced will think he was badly treated, and some that he was the spawn of the devil.

I believe however, that those who are thinking at the moment will still be thinking. I wonder why you don't?

Perhaps because so many people who voted for Brexit now bravely admit they were convinced by lies and misinformation. In other words people do think but their thoughts are often based on inaccuracies and by the time the truth is revealed the damage is done.
It is interesting that you feel reading positive press releases about Starmer is valid, but reading negative ones and acting on them is mindless.

Glorianny

DaisyAnne

Glorianny

Funny isn't it Starmer probably upset the very voters he is currently pursuing- the doubtful Tory. They are now probably thinking Johnson was stitched up and they should stay faithful.

So people think the person Johnson employed to carry out the Party Gate report, lauding her character as he did so, stitched him up? What would that make Johnson if it were true? What would it make him if it wasn't?

What does that make the police, who carried out a separate investigation? Are you suggesting the fines - over 100 of them - were Sue Gray's fault, Starmer's fault, or could they have been the fault of those who were fined?

What does that make the Commons Privileges Committee, who have decided there is enough evidence for them to continue the investigation on the question as to whether Johnson deliberately lied to Parliament? Are they all (with a majority of Conservatives) colluding to punish an innocent man or trying to find justice?

It seems that to you, everyone's out of step except your Boris. I think that put's you on a par with the deluded mother of "Jimmy" from the WW1 song.

Your problem DaisyAnne is you imagine voters thoroughly research things before drawing conclusions, many of them don't. Many will simply read what is said by people like JRM and draw their conclusions from that.
He isn't my Boris by the way I have always loathed the man, however I acknowledge he has a certain ability to charm and I listen to what is being said about him .
There is also a body of opinion that says civil servants are sneaky lying individuals and this provides ammunition for that.

I don't feel I have a "problem", Glorianny, thank you. My conversation was about your view, not the view taken by others but let's address that.

Boris said, "When the herd moves, it moves". It seems that you feel those people thinking about voting for Starmer stop when there is propaganda bombing by the press. They stop, according to you, thinking for themselves.

Surely those who have been thinking will continue thinking? Of course, there are sheeple just as there are some Conservative MPs (probably some of all MPs) with the herd mentality Johnson spoke of but it was never was all of them.

Sheeple can be defined as docile and compliant or easily influenced, but not as thinkers. They will sway with what is being said, whether by Rees Mog, strange social media sites or the comics of the right-wing press. They are catch-us-if-you-can voters. We cannot guess what their thinking will be at the time of the next election. However, Johnson might have been sacked as an MP, possibly going in deep personal humiliation and disgrace. If so I would guess that some of the easily influenced will think he was badly treated, and some that he was the spawn of the devil.

I believe however, that those who are thinking at the moment will still be thinking. I wonder why you don't?

Life imitating art?????

I have come to the conclusion that the ministers of the last eight years of government are, almost all of them, highly incompetent.

Some are also corrupt.

That conclusion has absolutely nothing to do with "Yes Minister"

Whitewavemark2

Blimey

😂😂😂

Blimey

Whitewavemark2

Who on earth says that civil servants are sneaky lying individuals😄😄😄. You must move in strange circles.

That comment is on par with one by a poster that suggested that officers read The Telegraph and foot soldiers ( clerks I assume) read The Daily Mail.

Honestly this site gives me a huge amount of merriment at times.

Some might term them devious Whitemark2 but the perception is much the same the language is slightly more basic. It's a perception cultivated by various works of fiction like "Yes minister" where Sir Humphrey often explains how a subject is avoided or circumvented (sneaky) and language is used which covers up actualities (lying).
The perception that ministers are largely incompetent resulted from that programme as well.

Who on earth says that civil servants are sneaky lying individuals😄😄😄. You must move in strange circles.

That comment is on par with one by a poster that suggested that officers read The Telegraph and foot soldiers ( clerks I assume) read The Daily Mail.

Honestly this site gives me a huge amount of merriment at times.

DaisyAnne

Glorianny

Funny isn't it Starmer probably upset the very voters he is currently pursuing- the doubtful Tory. They are now probably thinking Johnson was stitched up and they should stay faithful.

So people think the person Johnson employed to carry out the Party Gate report, lauding her character as he did so, stitched him up? What would that make Johnson if it were true? What would it make him if it wasn't?

What does that make the police, who carried out a separate investigation? Are you suggesting the fines - over 100 of them - were Sue Gray's fault, Starmer's fault, or could they have been the fault of those who were fined?

What does that make the Commons Privileges Committee, who have decided there is enough evidence for them to continue the investigation on the question as to whether Johnson deliberately lied to Parliament? Are they all (with a majority of Conservatives) colluding to punish an innocent man or trying to find justice?

It seems that to you, everyone's out of step except your Boris. I think that put's you on a par with the deluded mother of "Jimmy" from the WW1 song.

Your problem DaisyAnne is you imagine voters thoroughly research things before drawing conclusions, many of them don't. Many will simply read what is said by people like JRM and draw their conclusions from that.
He isn't my Boris by the way I have always loathed the man, however I acknowledge he has a certain ability to charm and I listen to what is being said about him .
There is also a body of opinion that says civil servants are sneaky lying individuals and this provides ammunition for that.

Sueki44

I do not like Boris - but I’m afraid Yammy is right. A foolish choice that may give Boris an escape clause.

How could it possibly give Johnson an escape clause? Escape from what?

Glorianny

Funny isn't it Starmer probably upset the very voters he is currently pursuing- the doubtful Tory. They are now probably thinking Johnson was stitched up and they should stay faithful.

So people think the person Johnson employed to carry out the Party Gate report, lauding her character as he did so, stitched him up? What would that make Johnson if it were true? What would it make him if it wasn't?

What does that make the police, who carried out a separate investigation? Are you suggesting the fines - over 100 of them - were Sue Gray's fault, Starmer's fault, or could they have been the fault of those who were fined?

What does that make the Commons Privileges Committee, who have decided there is enough evidence for them to continue the investigation on the question as to whether Johnson deliberately lied to Parliament? Are they all (with a majority of Conservatives) colluding to punish an innocent man or trying to find justice?

It seems that to you, everyone's out of step except your Boris. I think that put's you on a par with the deluded mother of "Jimmy" from the WW1 song.

Casdon

Sueki44

I do not like Boris - but I’m afraid Yammy is right. A foolish choice that may give Boris an escape clause.

It won’t. The Privileges Committee have gathered their own evidence, their decision making process is in no way reliant on Sue Gray's Inquiry. Johnson is the fish on the hook now, and he isn’t going to break free,

Yes

Sueki44

I do not like Boris - but I’m afraid Yammy is right. A foolish choice that may give Boris an escape clause.

It won’t. The Privileges Committee have gathered their own evidence, their decision making process is in no way reliant on Sue Gray's Inquiry. Johnson is the fish on the hook now, and he isn’t going to break free,

I do not like Boris - but I’m afraid Yammy is right. A foolish choice that may give Boris an escape clause.

Whitewavemark2

Glorianny

Funny isn't it Starmer probably upset the very voters he is currently pursuing- the doubtful Tory. They are now probably thinking Johnson was stitched up and they should stay faithful.

Just how many Tories do you think support Johnson?

Do you want me to quote polls.

His support is absolutely at rock bottom from Tories.

I think that's the funny thing. If asked would you vote for him people say "No". But talk to people and they have a sort of grudging respect for him. So I don't think they will return to voting. for him, they may well return to voting for the Tory party.

Glorianny

Funny isn't it Starmer probably upset the very voters he is currently pursuing- the doubtful Tory. They are now probably thinking Johnson was stitched up and they should stay faithful.

Just how many Tories do you think support Johnson?

Do you want me to quote polls.

His support is absolutely at rock bottom from Tories.

Funny isn't it Starmer probably upset the very voters he is currently pursuing- the doubtful Tory. They are now probably thinking Johnson was stitched up and they should stay faithful.

What a vindictive lot the Tories are.

I guess they are s..t scared that Gray knows too many skeletons of which there are undoubtedly thousands - judging by what has been in the news this week.

Behaved like a proper government and none of this would matter.

Come on now MaizieD. Starmer should not have appointed her because by doing so he has stolen a march on the Tories. That isn’t allowed under any circumstances.

She should have been impartial politically when she chaired the committee.

If by 'she' you mean Sue Gray, she didn't chair any committee.

You are also slandering her if you are calling her impartiality into question. She is a top ranking civil servant who has served governments and ministers of all political affiliations. She wouldn't have reached the position she achieved had she shown any hint of partiality.

Her son's party affiliation has no relevance. No-one with any sense controls their offspring's political choices.

There is absolutely no reason at all why Starmer should not have appointed her; there are plenty of precedents.

She should have been impartial politically when she chaired the committee. It now turns out her son is a member of the Irish Labour party, not that we all have the same political views as our children.
It still points to the fact she should not have been asked by Starmer and neither should she have agreed until everything was out in the open.
She could have damaged either party what ever your political affiliations.

The interim report “totally vindicates him” don’t you know.

Johnson said that it was “concerning “ that the enquiry into whether he lied to MPs relied on evidence from Ms Gray’s findings because she will now be working for Labour.

If you read the interim report of the committee you will find that they make it clear that they have not relied on Sue Gray's report. There are copious footnotes which detail the evidence they have taken.

Who is going to believe liar Johnson, anyway?

Nightsky2

Yammy

Who knows what her political views were when in the post as we should not.
A bad move for either party I would think. It questions her impartiality however you look at it.
It gives Johnston leverage so could harm the Labour-run for government .
It might also question Starmers choice , choosing someone who appeared to be impartial but has now shown her party affiliation. Was there no one else he could have chosen?

Not a clever move on his part. Surely he must have known that choosing SG would be very controversial. He has also said that he knew her socially, does that mean they’re friends.

Johnson said that it was “concerning “ that the enquiry into whether he lied to MPs relied on evidence from Ms Gray’s findings because she will now be working for Labour.

I think you may find people - perhaps not those you read though - saying this is a genius move. Starmer is preparing for government, ensuring that his team know how it works so they can get things done from Day 1.

I really doubt that, should Labour win, he will even mention Johnson or his antics ever again.

This is simply not a runner. Try as the likes of Mogg, Johnson and the Daily Mail do, they will not convince the vast majority (75%) of the population of Johnson’s innocence.

The objection to Gray’s appointment is all about trying to get Johnson off.