Boris Johnson

Oh come on, not this old marron again
I know that Boris is a blunderer and an idiot at times, but the word "marron" has no meaning here? Unless it is spelt incorrectly!

Urmstongran

Boris enjoying a glass of wine. Plenty of similar photos. Ditto Starmer enjoying a beer and curry takeaway.
Work gatherings both.
Yes I get that.
But I thought this Committee has to decide whether or not he lied to Parliament.

Oh come on, not this old marron again! That was a work meeting, and food was required to keep going, and a beer with it too- and KS totally exonorated.

We are talking about PARTIES - BD or leavings dos. Planned as parties, with byob and food. No-one, but no-one 'had to' have leaving dos- and no other very hard working and deserving groups of employees had them. Because it WAS NOT ALLOWED per his rules. Please!

Not even other leaving dos of loved ones, funerals. Respect for what our late Queen had to go through, sitting on her own.

The highlight of Peston last night was Caroline Noakes being asked about those Tories who had voted against the Windsor agreement, despite it being a three line whip. When asked what the punishment for this should be, she said that is a decision for the Whips, and besides, nobody really worries about a spent force like the ERG anymore (words to that effect).

Give it up Urmstongran .

As he always does, Johnson taints everyone who makes the mistake of hitching their wagon to him; look at that idiot JRM, the self proclaimed constitutional 'expert' who was tweeting that the committee was a kangaroo court and subsequently made to look even more of a fool when Peston pointed out that nobody objected to the committee personnel when first announced and that the majority were Tories. The most decisive questioning was from Sir Bernard Jenkins who is not only a Tory, but also a leading Brexiteer, ERG member.

twitter.com/tonyhusband1/status/1638870170046468096?t=GJKKL1qyatVSxpoiIpMwCA&s=19

Two farewells.

Thanks Maizie. It’s worth reading I think.

Here's the link to the Institute for Government piece:

www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/comment/privileges-committee-inquiry-accountability

Whitewave He would only think it legitimate if it exonerates Johnson.
That is the crux really, it calls democracy into question The significance is explained very well in the article which I can’t link on iPad, but I am aware that some don’t bother with links anyway!

Casdon

Freya5

I really don't know the Priveledge committe is even bothering. Harman et al have already made their minds up.

For clarity, here is the membership of the Privileges Committee. Out of 7 members, there are 4 Tories and 2 Labour including Harriet Harman, 1 SNP.
committees.parliament.uk/committee/289/committee-of-privileges/membership/

Aka Tory majority.

And, having followed the proceedings yesterday I can assure Freya that the tory members of the committee were every bit as incisive and probing in their questioning as were any of the others.

That's why I didn't watch it Grannynannywanny, just listening to snippets on the news makes my blood boil.

Whitewavemark2

Freya5

I really don't know the Priveledge committe is even bothering. Harman et al have already made their minds up.

No that is so wrong. You are suggesting in effect that this is a kangaroo court as are the populists like Mogg, but this is as far from the truth as it can get.

The committees in parliament are one of the tools our democratic process uses to ensure correct procedure and management by those that rule. They hold them up to be answerable to parliament.

This is a sovereign parliament, if parliament deem Johnson to be not guilty they will not punish him in any way.

Oh and by the way, the committee asked Johnson whether he recognised the committee as a proper place to investigate the issue, or whether Johnson did indeed think it was a kangaroo court as he had been suggesting.

Guess Johnson’s answer

He would only consider it legitimate if it exonerates Johnson.
😄😄

Farzanah

I think we are largely missing the point whether Johnson is found guilty or not.

I have just read a really good piece on the Institute for Government website entitled The Privileges Committee inquiry’s significance goes far beyond Boris Johnson’s future.

Sorry can’t post links but it puts it so much better than I can, and I urge you to have a look. Too long to replicate here.

Thanks will have a look.

I think we are largely missing the point whether Johnson is found guilty or not.

I have just read a really good piece on the Institute for Government website entitled The Privileges Committee inquiry’s significance goes far beyond Boris Johnson’s future.

Sorry can’t post links but it puts it so much better than I can, and I urge you to have a look. Too long to replicate here.

Maybee - deliberately or recklessly lied. One of Johnson’s attempts at discrediting the process was to claim that ‘recklessly’ should be out of the Committee’s remit.

The smoking gun came from his own mouth yesterday when he said the drinks parties, and there were quite a few, were ESSENTIAL as thank yous and to keep up morale as everyone had been working so hard. And he was innocent of lying as he thought they were within the rules, as no one had told him otherwise!

I don't think many people would believe that, at a time when mourners couldn't even gather for a funeral tea.

Well, he is guilty of lying to parliament. There’s no argument about that. The to be answered was if he deliberately lied to parliament. He was also, at the very end, given an opportunity to set the record straight but he refused.

Urmstongran

Didn’t Harriet Hartman tweet one time that Boris was guilty.?

If that is suggesting that she therefore shouldn’t head the committee - don’t forget that the committee his entirely weighted in the Tories favour, so the verdict will be because the Tories think him innocent or guilty.

Freya5

I really don't know the Priveledge committe is even bothering. Harman et al have already made their minds up.

For clarity, here is the membership of the Privileges Committee. Out of 7 members, there are 4 Tories and 2 Labour including Harriet Harman, 1 SNP.
committees.parliament.uk/committee/289/committee-of-privileges/membership/

Aka Tory majority.

Urmstongran

Boris enjoying a glass of wine. Plenty of similar photos. Ditto Starmer enjoying a beer and curry takeaway.
Work gatherings both.
Yes I get that.
But I thought this Committee has to decide whether or not he lied to Parliament.

Yes that’s right, but evidence of whether parties took place and Johnson subsequently lying that they didn’t, together with all the written evidence has him bang to rights.

I can’t find anyone - well except Vine😄- who thinks that he isn’t guilty in any of the comment pages, articles etc. of course the BBC in the interests of balance and impartiality are as usual ending up their own proverbial, but as far as I can see no one thinks him innocent.

Grantanow

I fear the voters of Uxbridge will vote him in again so he may be with us for a long time to come. I just hope he is never given high office again. His so-called evidence to the Committee was largely bluster and denial and seemed to cut no ice with them. But he is carving out a role as a very expensive after dinner speaker for the rich fools who want to listen to him. In my opinion his friend Lord G defended him on Newsnight with a mixture of diversion, special pleading and bluster. I doubt most viewers were taken in.

Uxbridge really isn’t a safe seat now, especially with BJ as MP. The 2019 voting was 25,000 Conservatives to 18,000 Labour, at a time when we were between a rock and a hard place with no sensible choice of PM.

There was rumour early in the year that BJ had asked Sunak that he be moved to a safer constituency. www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/boris-johnson-will-stand-in-uxbridge-at-next-election-says-sunak_uk_63c15e4be4b0ae9de1c73f90

Almost 2 years is a long time to wait, though, for BJ to get kicked out.

Didn’t Harriet Hartman tweet one time that Boris was guilty.?

Boris enjoying a glass of wine. Plenty of similar photos. Ditto Starmer enjoying a beer and curry takeaway.
Work gatherings both.
Yes I get that.
But I thought this Committee has to decide whether or not he lied to Parliament.

Freya5

I really don't know the Priveledge committe is even bothering. Harman et al have already made their minds up.

No that is so wrong. You are suggesting in effect that this is a kangaroo court as are the populists like Mogg, but this is as far from the truth as it can get.

The committees in parliament are one of the tools our democratic process uses to ensure correct procedure and management by those that rule. They hold them up to be answerable to parliament.

This is a sovereign parliament, if parliament deem Johnson to be not guilty they will not punish him in any way.

That was replying to ugs post about smoking guns.

They certainly did, and plenty of them.

Johnson was ok as long as he kept to the script drafted by the lawyers, but as time went on and he ran out of script his obfuscation and lies were absolutely laid bare.

This was not about one man, this was about parliamentary democracy in the U.K. and the recognition of the need to preserve what the world has so long admired.