Boris Would Have Been Suspended...

[choux]

for 90 days had he not resigned. tbh, I am not surprised but it is a mucky game in politics and there will be more dirt-throwing, no doubt. The world still spins ;)

[naomi24]

ClareTG0ld, 16.48. That isn’t something I’ve said. You must be confusing me with someone else.

[Atheist]

Naomi; Am I allowed to say "Wind your neck in"? I noticed you sometimes use that and I thought it sounded cool - sort of rude without being definably contraty to regulations.

[Untitled]

oh sorry i misunderstood

i take it then that you refuse to read the report... and if so then you actually don't know how they conducted their investigation or how they substantiated their conclusions... i would suggest that you become better informed on this subject

[ClareTG0ld]

Well, have you read the report? Do you have any comment on its substance?

[naomi24]

Atheist, you’ve said it.

ClareTG0ld. I’ve commented.

[Ellipsis]

Yes, it should have been JRM, Michael Fabricant, Nadine Dorries and Brendan Clarke-Smith on the committee, that would have been much fairer. We got the wrong Tories, Gromit, the wrong Tories!

Or we could take Chris Bryant's comment @14:53:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-65876914
Referring to attacks on the suitability of chair Harriet Harman and Sir Bernard Jenkin to sit on the committee, Sir Chris pointed out the committee’s verdict was “unanimous…even if you were to take those two members out of the committee you would still have all of the other five coming to the same conclusions”.

He also pointed out that Johnson was prime minister when it was agreed for the committee to be set up with Harman as chair.

[Gromit]

John personally lied to Harman and the rest of the MPs in the Commons. He told them no Lockdown rules had been broken. Then he was fined by the police for breaking lockdown rules.
Her (and anyone else) forming an opinion about that and saying it, does not indicate bias.

[Peter Pedant]

The report is here
https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/40412/documents/197199/default/

earlier on: it was a court they sat in judgement of him

no no no - absolute twaddle - yikes - read Ladybook guide to Courts Act 1981.

[Peter Pedant]

The difficulty for thos that havent read the Ladybird guide book is
article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1689

`That the freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament.

select committee of privileges is one of them

you did all know this didnt you? Jesus

[Peter Pedant]

Harman was objected to.....
no no no - the committee and inquiry was decided WITHOUT a vote
so no, there WASN'T an objection

and I agree with the opinion, that no con wd take up the poisoned chalice ( chairmanship).

Hahahaha Jacob R-M, soon to be SIR jacob, objected to one member. Talk about unbiassed objections by one Jacob R-M,
Carry on er lying ABers !

[Hymie]

It’s worth pointing out that the Committee-chair (Harperson) did not get to vote on the Committee’s findings – she would have only done so, had there been a tie between the other Committee members.

[Peter Pedant]

ClareTG0ld, 16.48. That isn’t something I’ve said. You must be confusing me with someone else.

yes I think I confused you with a mad old bag lady who says one thing one day and the opposite the next. My apologies.

difference between sue gray and this report ( no reader there are NOT fifty shades of Grey = ter daah !)

have we sought to repeat the inquiry commissioned by Mr
Johnson from the then Second Permanent Secretary at the Cabinet Office (Sue Gray) into the conduct of individual Ministers and officials in No. 10. What the House mandated us to do was to investigate whether Mr Johnson told the truth to Parliament, to the best of his knowledge, about No. 10’s compliance with those Rules and Guidance

yes I agree with Clare Gold, that few posters here have read the report ( before blaarting - a bit like Boris really)

[Peter Pedant]

Boris screamed 'unfair' no less than four times during this charade

there are FOUR opinions ( legal, stuff, big fees etc) refs given p11 of the report. Few hundred pages of guff there alone

[Peter Pedant]

FPN ( fixed penalties) were issued
he has no idea why
and yes they were at parties which were within the rules

"I don’t know why the FPNs were issued, but it may be that they were issued to people who had not a good enough reason to come in from home to that gathering, or people who had come from elsewhere to that gathering. "

not surprisingy the committee found such statements from Boris.... incredz
(also disingenuous - pretending to know less than you do: synonyms deceitful, duplicitous, falso)

[Gromit]

Looks like Monday’s vote on the report in the Commons could tear the Conservative Party apart. They seem intent on imploding.
Sunak nears to show leadership of his party now. Otherwise Monday could be a watershed moment for him, and his party.
Don’t hold your breath.

[10ClarionSt]

Never trust a Tory! :o)

[Gromit]

* Sunak needs to show leadership…

[Peter Pedant]

separation of powers - and art IX of the bill of rights ( parliamentary procedure shall not be impugned in the courts)
is discussed in R v Chaytor

3 Nardy MPs filled out fraudulent expenses and then said ' oh we cannot be prosecuted in the courts as we are separate a/c art IX 1689 Act

https://lawprof.co/public-law/separation-of-powers-cases/r-v-chaytor-and-others-2010-uksc-52/

held - they cd be indicted as it didnt interfer with parliamentary free speech.

I was gonna do a bit on fairness and its review by impt bods in parliamentary ctees, but I must say I have lost the will to live. (Law Lords consulted gave an opinion that parliamentary procedure was fair ( enough))

[Old_Geezer]

I don't much care which conservative members were on the committee, untitled. They're all politicians, they all can't be trusted to do more than look after their own interests, especially political career interests. One only has to look at their antics, both outside & inside the HoC, assuming one can be bothered any more. I know I can't, it's all just so depressing. But I saw months and months of BJ, and others who fought for our sovereignty, being abused and obstructed to know there's zero chance of an unbiased result from any such committee. Not even from, or maybe especially not from those who claimed to be Brexiteers but clearly don't act as such.

[Gromit]

Brexit was a failure.
There is a chance that when Conservative MPs realise that, then the ensuing civil war within the party will flush out the nut-jobs and the party can reunite again.
But in the short term the bloodshed from Tories attacking other Tories will just hasten their demise.