Forum Topic

Twenty fines to be issued over No 10 lockdown parties

Twenty fines will be issued as part of the police inquiry into Downing Street parties that broke Covid rules.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60911798Have they been issued?  "The Met police will not be saying who is fined or which events the fixed penalty notices relate to."Why the secrecy? Oh, forgot!!! Law breaker's anonymity is protected by law....  Great!!

Ivonne Holliday ● 1686d31 Comments

Oh, but it'll all be OK because that nice Mr Johnson has assured us multiple times that no law-breaking occurred there.

Richard Carter ● 1685d

I do not think the word disgraceful is strong enough!

Ivonne Holliday ● 1685d

At the time this all came out I was , like everyone else, extremely angry having missed the birth of my grand daughter and spent xmas morning of that year in a motorway services car park at Pease Pottage exchanging presents with my son and getting a first cuddle of the grandchild. My son was angry that having had a still born child a few years earlier he had to beg the hospital to allow him to be present at the birth of the latest child.All that said was this enquiry really worth the £ millions spent for 20 £100 fixed penalty notices and isnt it time to move on and deal with the bigger issues of the war in Ukraine, ongoing covid  the cost of living crisis etc etc.  Not sure continually harping on about something now long gone is worth the effort.For my part the granddaughter is a joy and all has ended up ok with the betrayal of others (including some of the newscasters who constantly go on about it) something to remember at the next election ( if it is a major issue in context with other natters)

Andy Pike ● 1685d

Hello Andy,Breaking the law is breaking the law. More so, if it is broken by legislators! Yes, there are big issues at the moment, that does not mean we should (conveniently) brush things under the carpet.That the enquiry has probably cost £ millions, it was a way of prolonging the issue hoping we would all forget.Do you happen to remember or know what happened to the famous Russian report?

Ivonne Holliday ● 1685d

Andy. It is heartening to hear that you have been able to put that extremely distressing incident behind you and move on and not let it spoil the joy that Paige has brought to you and your family.  Unfortunately the anti Boris bores on this forum obviously get their joy from constantly harking on about the same issue and they will never move on.🥱

Sue Hammond ● 1685d

Surely the far more serious offence is Boris lying to parliament? That has traditionally been a resignation matter

Matt Palmer ● 1685d

I agree, Matt.But BJ seems to be getting away with blue murder....

Ivonne Holliday ● 1685d

No Sue, you are wrong about not moving on, but in my case, definitely that the law must be respected.It is interesting to read your post regarding Baby P's mother.  Can you not move on?  She has, for all intents and purposes, paid her debt to society.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1685d

Has Boris been formally investigated and found guilty of lying?  We all know that Blair lied to Parliament but he's been awarded with a Knighthood ...

Sue Hammond ● 1685d

As the saying goes, Sue, two wrongs do not make one right.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1685d

Cheers Sue, yes Paige is a diamond and we are so happy.With regard the folk on here they seem to have an agenda over getting Brexit done . But it remains done so lets get on with itA few weeks back one of those folk posted a scream and scream  comment about another issue. Exactly what he is doing

Andy Pike ● 1685d

If Boris is prosecuted of course the law must be respected and I am sure BJ will step down if that's the outcome. As for Baby P's mother; paying her debt to society doesn't mean anything to me because in my book there is absolutely no redemption for torturing and killing a child. Sadly Connelly isn't the only one as these type of crimes are becoming more and more prevalent and there is no deterrent in place to try and prevent them from happening.

Sue Hammond ● 1685d

If Boris gets a £100 fine I'm sure he'll pay it. Job done move on .It's not a jailing offence , take the punishment, pay the fine and on we go.Alternatively, get a parking fine and be banned from driving. No now that would be daft.

Andy Pike ● 1685d

"get a parking fine and be banned from driving. No now that would be daft."Yes it would, and it's also extremely unlikely:"You’ll only get penalty points on your licence for certain types of parking FPN, for example for leaving a vehicle in a dangerous position."https://www.gov.uk/parking-tickets

Richard Carter ● 1685d

Exactly so why should anyone loss their job over a £100 fpn of any sort?

Andy Pike ● 1685d

I am sorry Andy, but you are wrong.Nothing to do with Brexit whatsoever.It has got to do with integrity and honesty.How can BJ say he did not know they were breaking the law?  The one that he implemented!!!!

Ivonne Holliday ● 1685d

Andy,Not for the fpn at all.  For breaking the laws he himself implemented and also for misleading Parliament. He did say in Parliament that nobody had broken the rules in No. 10.  ??

Ivonne Holliday ● 1685d

"Nothing to do with Brexit whatsoever."Like Brexit it is a form of tribalism.Unfortunately as already highlighted there is nothing new in the law being broken by PM's. In this case at least it is not a matter for the Hague.If we want high standards in public office then we need to apply consistent standards across all parties.I haven't caught up with the news - is Starmer calling for Johnson's resignation or is he still supporting a unity government?

Ed Robinson ● 1685d

Morning Ed. I believe Smarmer will be tossing a coin later ...

Sue Hammond ● 1685d

😁😁😁you beat me to it Sue.He's now also come unstuck on the Russian peerage issue ( I believe it's the owner of the evening standard) . Called for an investigation having forgot he sent him a congratulations well deserved tweet !!

Andy Pike ● 1684d

Good morning Ed,If you call right and wrong a form of tribalism, that is your problem.I am most certainly in the side of doing the right thing, of honesty, integrity and correctness.  It is moral, not political.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1684d

"Forum MessageTopic: Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Twenty fines to be issued over No 10 lockdown parties Posted by: Andy PikeDate/Time: 31/03/22 09:30:00😁😁😁you beat me to it Sue.He's now also come unstuck on the Russian peerage issue ( I believe it's the owner of the evening standard) . Called for an investigation having forgot he sent him a congratulations well deserved tweet !!Ooops!😹He's such a plonker.🙄

Sue Hammond ● 1684d

perhaps at the time he congratulated him it wasnt known that Mi5 specifically advised against putting Lebedev in the house of lords?I can't remember the timeline but I doubt that little nugget came out on the same day.

Matt Palmer ● 1684d

I agree Matt.Lebedev became a peer in October 2020 and his full title was published in November 2020. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/lord-lebedev-title-russia-london-b1760597.htmlNo-one raised security concerns over Lord Lebedev with me, says Michael Gove (13 March 2022)https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60727297The comments and emails revealed by Lebedev do not contain the date of the original messages but 29 March 2022.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1684d

"No-one raised security concerns over Lord Lebedev"This is non-sense as mentioned before on numerous threads.The guy has not suddenly been adopted his father has been the same farther when he bought the independent and the evening standard. Where the money has come from also hasn't changed.Nothing has changed apart from the war.So either he was a security risk before and the powers to be decided to ignore it or it is just political now. It can't be both.The idea that Starmer, Mandelson or Bryant or anyone else that were happy to socialize did not know his family history is nonsense!So where does it leave us.Either they all have been socializing with a security risk for years or someone is just trying to score cheap political points.

Ed Robinson ● 1684d

Hello Ed,"So either he was a security risk before and the powers to be decided to ignore it or it is just political now. It can't be both."I would suggest it is the former.Yes, many socialized with many people from different nationalities.  It is part of politics. The question that is being asked is why did Johnson intervene when told Lebedev posed a threat to national security.These are the first paragraphs of an article in The Times entitled: "Boris Johnson’s Russian crony Evgeny Lebedev got peerage after spies dropped warning" of 5 March 2022https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnsons-russian-crony-evgeny-lebedev-got-peerage-after-spies-dropped-warning-3dp6sw29x"The security services withdrew an assessment that granting a peerage to a Russian businessman posed a national security risk after Boris Johnson intervened.The prime minister pushed ahead with the nomination of his friend Evgeny Lebedev, the Moscow-born son of an ex-KGB agent and media mogul, even after intelligence officials raised concerns."

Ivonne Holliday ● 1684d

I think your missing the point Ivonne.what gives him more influence and power: being a member of the HoL or owning a national newspaper and the London evening standard?Johnson is quite right here - to say someone is a security risk NOW after owning the papers for all these years is complete nonsense.Johnson's relationship was know for years before he was Foreign Secretary under May. Just to add that thee fact that Johnson was an US citizen at the time doesn't seem to bothered May or the security services either.When is it exactly that he became a security risk is the question that journalists should be asking. You could make a comedy out of this:007: M - do you know that Russian oligarchy that bought those newspapers thirteen years ago and has been hanging out with misters and senior officials from both parties?Well it turns out his Dad who supplied the money is ex-KGB agent. Do you think they bought it to influence the UK?"M: Don't be silly 007! People only buy UK newspapers as an act of charity. He's a splendid chap I have met him myself on his yacth. Where did you read that his dad was ex-KGB?007: In the Independent!

Ed Robinson ● 1684d

"Yes, many socialized with many people from different nationalities.  It is part of politics."Is as if the scandals over the decades have never happened.Https://www.france24.com/en/20081029-yachtgate-papers-united-kingdom

Ed Robinson ● 1684d

I just looked at the article, dated 2008, quickly as I have to go out.What is wrong, is wrong.  Politicians, and diplomats, need to socialized with many people from different nationalities.  That is their work.What is very wrong are cases like Lebedev (I disagreed with his purchase of the Independent) where the PM actively intervened to push Lebedev's honour.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1683d

yawn

Penelope Becker ● 1680d

I agree Penelope. Double yawn ... 🥱🥱

Sue Hammond ● 1680d