Boris Johnson referred to the police for suspected further breaches of lockdown regulations.

Maizie D have just read SB’s letter available on Guido Fawkes website… the problem of the ‘snitching civil servants’ is yet to be resolved. Exactly how did this complete fiasco blow out of all proportion and how can it be prevented from re-occurring ?

Not interested, don’t care. He’s gone.

Considering how many civil servants, staff at No. 10 and Chequers and the police on duty at both establishments must have known about the Covid Regulations breaking parties in both places and the breach of the Civil Service Guidance obligation to report suspected illegality, this rather blows the 'snitching civil servants' theory out of the water.

In fact, it indicates a deeply worrying extent of corruption in the whole of the government machinery.

People might not be able to read this, so I've linked to the tweet where it was posted

From the Directory of Civil Service Guidance: 'Information on suspected crimes'

Civil servants who believe they have information (including documents) which may be relevant to planning or committing a criminal offence, or to the investigation or prosecution of a criminal offence, or to the defence have a general professional duty to draw this fact to the attention of the appropriate authorities

twitter.com/SirJJKC/status/1661071660357754884

Well Casdon let’s hope the mudslide doesn’t immobilise the country….

I can’t help thinking that if ministers didn’t behave like idiots with no regard for their positions, nobody would be able to apply mud that sticks. There are plenty of inaccurate accusations around, but the mud only sticks when the accusations have foundation.

Racingsparrow don’t know about unnamed Civil Servants in the Cabinet Office- one is married to Rachael Reeves and the other to a Guardian journalist. No evidence at all that they were in any way involved with any of it.

Just one thought. There seems to be a conspiracy by civil servants against cabinet members at the moment. Accusations about bullying by ministers have led to the resignation of several of them. Suella Braverman is now in their sights over a perfectly reasonable question asking about private safe driving courses. These are perfectly legal and open to anybody. What are these always unnamed civil servants trying to do.

What a very strange way to conduct an investigation by any stretch of the imagination. And still it goes on and on…. Quite bizarre.

No we don’t know, but I suspect that she would have done if she requested access.

What we do know is that she stopped looking into areas of interest by the police. That is where all this has come from. That is what has remained hidden until recently and that is what the privileges committee must investigate and make a decision on.

I suppose I feel that this is past history. Boris most likely did it but I'm cross at so much time and energy at great expense being wasted on it. He lost his job and any credibility he had. In what way does it help the country to tie up so many in this investigation? It's just pumping money to lawyers while the country needs every penny it can get.

Whitewavemark2

ronib

MaizieD yes but Sue Grey had produced a Partygate report which resulted in 120 fines, including one for Rishi Sunak. So how is it possible that Sue Grey didn’t have access to BJ’s diaries? Or did she?

Don’t tell me to hire a private detective - it’s just a discussion point.

I have of course noted two very interesting people working in the Cabinet Office but I shall spare my blushes ….

I’m sure Gray had access to Johnson’s diary.

I’m not sure if your point.

Did Sue Grey have access to the diaries, though? Do we know this for certain?

Anyway, once again our Civil Service conspiracy theorist has got it wrong. Sue Grey's report did not lead to all those fines. The fines were the result of the (very flawed) police investigation.

It is bring reported that Johnson's dwindling band of supporters are threatening to withdraw support from the Sunak administration unless this matter is dropped. My opinion would get me banned ftom GN for excessive use of foul language, but meanwhile are any of his supporters on here happy with this? Happy that your current government is being told to turn a blind eye/pressurise the Police to stop their investigations or lose backbench support?

Whitewavemark2

Why isn’t Sunak standing against the tax payer forking out for Johnson? Surely Johnson can get some idiot to pay his bill. He usually seems to manage it.

It was Sunak who approved it as I understand.

I think we should consider it money well spent if it rids us of Johnson for ever....

No mistresses of desperation 😄😄

Primrose53

Oreo

The lockdowns were OTT
Awful times for those who lost family and friends. For those who didn’t tho, times move on and I can’t think of anyone I know who didn’t break lockdown rules even if just slightly, who’ll be bothered about events at Chequers.Some will, of course.

They were but remember, Labour wanted them to continue for much longer!!

Are you mistresses of obfuscation?

Primrose53

Oreo

The lockdowns were OTT
Awful times for those who lost family and friends. For those who didn’t tho, times move on and I can’t think of anyone I know who didn’t break lockdown rules even if just slightly, who’ll be bothered about events at Chequers.Some will, of course.

They were but remember, Labour wanted them to continue for much longer!!

I can't see how Labour's view of lockdowns is remotely relevant.
I would have thought that anyone with a passing acquaintance with right and wrong would understand that the Prime Minister presenting the rules to the nation ought not to be in breach of them.

Why isn’t Sunak standing against the tax payer forking out for Johnson? Surely Johnson can get some idiot to pay his bill. He usually seems to manage it.

Do you think he'll opt for the (private) truth awareness course rather than a fine?

Oreo

The lockdowns were OTT
Awful times for those who lost family and friends. For those who didn’t tho, times move on and I can’t think of anyone I know who didn’t break lockdown rules even if just slightly, who’ll be bothered about events at Chequers.Some will, of course.

They were but remember, Labour wanted them to continue for much longer!!

Ww2 didn’t see your post as was typing

Bear with me- what is the controversy around the diaries if Sue Grey had access to them? Surely she used the diaries as evidence to prove breaches in compliance? I thought all this had been settled by the Sue Grey report and that she would have referred up the chain to the Met Police etc if she thought fit?

Yes - Gray stopped her investigation over certain things asa the police got involved.

It is Johnson’s lawyers who advised of the illegality of his actions to the privileges committee .

ronib - my understanding is that the diaries only came out because we are paying Johnson's solicitors.

ronib

MaizieD yes but Sue Grey had produced a Partygate report which resulted in 120 fines, including one for Rishi Sunak. So how is it possible that Sue Grey didn’t have access to BJ’s diaries? Or did she?

Don’t tell me to hire a private detective - it’s just a discussion point.

I have of course noted two very interesting people working in the Cabinet Office but I shall spare my blushes ….

I’m sure Gray had access to Johnson’s diary.

I’m not sure if your point.