The Johnson Government 2019-2022

KUMB's 24-hour rolling news channel. The Forum in which to discuss non sport-related news and current affairs, including politics.

Moderators: Gnome, last.caress, Wilko1304, Rio, bristolhammerfc, the pink palermo, chalks

Post Reply
User avatar
SammyLeeWasOffside
Posts: 21689
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:31 am
Has liked: 290 likes
Total likes: 1020 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by SammyLeeWasOffside »

Clacton-ammer wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 1:18 pm Why didn't you say that then....... :wink: :lol: :lol:
Lol. It was getting a bit repetitive tbh
User avatar
Johnny Byrne's Boots
Posts: 32128
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 5:19 pm
Location: Care home dodger
Has liked: 1785 likes
Total likes: 2071 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by Johnny Byrne's Boots »

Burnham dealt with at magistrates court

For the sake of accuracy, Burnham didn't receive a fixed penalty notice, he was summoned to court.

The Manchester Evening News reported that Burnham’s case was dealt with at Manchester and Salford magistrates court on 14 March. The court fined him £1,353 and ordered him to pay a victim surcharge of £541. He was also told to pay £90 court costs, bringing the total penalty to £1,984.
User avatar
Hampshire Hammer
Posts: 10154
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2003 3:18 pm
Location: Somewhere south of sanity
Has liked: 2429 likes
Total likes: 77 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by Hampshire Hammer »

IMO the Burnham case and the Johnson case are totally different.

Burnham committed an offence that was unrelated to his role, was caught, prosecuted and fined.

Johnson committed offences which were directly related to his role, both within 10 Downing Street and the House of Commons. He allowed offences to occur which were directly in contravention to rules that he introduced and presented repeatedly on television to the nation, and is now dancing on the head of a pin with semantics to try and pretend that he didn't. He then repeatedly lied about those offences taking place and/or avoided admitting this through careful language when speaking in the HoC.

The two are not remotely similar.
User avatar
delbert
Posts: 27172
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 11:27 pm
Location: Barking, home of the slowly meandering Prius
Has liked: 698 likes
Total likes: 697 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by delbert »

Johnny Byrne's Boots wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 2:11 pm Burnham dealt with at magistrates court

For the sake of accuracy, Burnham didn't receive a fixed penalty notice, he was summoned to court.

The Manchester Evening News reported that Burnham’s case was dealt with at Manchester and Salford magistrates court on 14 March. The court fined him £1,353 and ordered him to pay a victim surcharge of £541. He was also told to pay £90 court costs, bringing the total penalty to £1,984.
That's a strange figure to fine him, you'd think they'd round it up or down. Reminds me of seeing a sign in Cyprus warning of a fine of €134.56* if caught speeding, got me thinking me that perhaps the local mayor needed that exact amount to finish his swimming pool or something.......

* Or there abouts, it was a while ago.
User avatar
mumbles87
Posts: 17676
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2012 10:35 am
Has liked: 55 likes
Total likes: 935 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by mumbles87 »

delbert wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 6:42 pm That's a strange figure to fine him, you'd think they'd round it up or down. Reminds me of seeing a sign in Cyprus warning of a fine of €134.56* if caught speeding, got me thinking me that perhaps the local mayor needed that exact amount to finish his swimming pool or something.......

* Or there abouts, it was a while ago.
"The amount you’re fined depends on what the speed limit was and how much over it you were driving. It’s usually a percentage of your weekly income, up to a maximum of £1,000 (£2,500 if you were driving on a motorway)."

I know a colleague who got fined massively because it was a month with a lot of overtime

So Burnham have to look up the % for that speed

So he was 40mph limit so anything above 66 is a band c

"Six points or
7-56 days disqualified
125-175% of weekly income"
User avatar
Hummer_I_mean_Hammer
Posts: 11573
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:45 pm
Has liked: 939 likes
Total likes: 479 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by Hummer_I_mean_Hammer »

Be a touch if you hadn't earned anything that week. :grin:
User avatar
Junco Partner
Posts: 12387
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 11:03 pm
Location: Paquetta, he's played it through...and Bowen's in...ITS UP FOR GRABS NOW!"
Has liked: 552 likes
Total likes: 891 likes
Contact:

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by Junco Partner »

Its been recommended that Rutherglen MP Margaret Ferrier gets a 30 day suspension for speaking in the Commons while awaiting the results of a Covid test and taking a train back to Glasgow when positive.

30 days for a train ride sets a precedent, running a boozy party scene in Downing Street over a prolonged period of time resulting in 126 fixed penalty notices and flat-out lying about them to the House seems to be by an order of magnitude much worse than what this lassie done.

The people of of Uxbridge may get their say after all :newthumb:
User avatar
Johnny Byrne's Boots
Posts: 32128
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 5:19 pm
Location: Care home dodger
Has liked: 1785 likes
Total likes: 2071 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by Johnny Byrne's Boots »

I read (on the BBC) that three MPs who voted for a nine day ban, and hence no by-election, are on the committee judging Boris.

edit: almost the beeb, it was a tweet from a beeb political wonk

User avatar
Big George
Posts: 13291
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2003 2:59 pm
Location: ENFP-T
Has liked: 133 likes
Total likes: 274 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by Big George »

Johnny Byrne's Boots wrote: Thu Mar 30, 2023 1:14 pm I read (on the BBC) that three MPs who voted for a nine day ban, and hence no by-election, are on the committee judging Boris.

If it goes the same way for Johnson, the commons vote will be an abolsute clusterf***

IF the Tories on the priviliges vote against a majority recommendation for a ten day plus ban for Johnson, would Sunak whip his party to vote against a ban? Would we see members of the cabinet standing up to speak on Johnson's behalf? I can't see a way that will end well for the Tories considering where the country is with their current views on Johnson. Major headache for Sunak. Johnson allowed to present himself as persecuted by a partizan committee. what a mess
User avatar
SammyLeeWasOffside
Posts: 21689
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:31 am
Has liked: 290 likes
Total likes: 1020 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by SammyLeeWasOffside »

Sunak confirmed before the hearings started that it would be a free vote for Tory mps
User avatar
SammyLeeWasOffside
Posts: 21689
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:31 am
Has liked: 290 likes
Total likes: 1020 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by SammyLeeWasOffside »

Junco Partner wrote: Thu Mar 30, 2023 1:11 pm Its been recommended that Rutherglen MP Margaret Ferrier gets a 30 day suspension for speaking in the Commons while awaiting the results of a Covid test and taking a train back to Glasgow when positive.

30 days for a train ride sets a precedent, running a boozy party scene in Downing Street over a prolonged period of time resulting in 126 fixed penalty notices and flat-out lying about them to the House seems to be by an order of magnitude much worse than what this lassie done.

The people of of Uxbridge may get their say after all :newthumb:
And of course the whole thing is about standards after all
On the prospect of a by-election, a Labour source said: "This is a seat that we can win. There will likely be panic stations in SNP HQ."
User avatar
Big George
Posts: 13291
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2003 2:59 pm
Location: ENFP-T
Has liked: 133 likes
Total likes: 274 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by Big George »

SammyLeeWasOffside wrote: Thu Mar 30, 2023 1:57 pm Sunak confirmed before the hearings started that it would be a free vote for Tory mps
I get that, but these things can change "in the light of new information"

I can't think for any reason for the Tories to vote against a long ban for Margaret Ferrier unless they are setting a marker for Johnson.

The likely outocme would be a similar split next time and an opportunity for Johnson allies to paint it as party political.
User avatar
SammyLeeWasOffside
Posts: 21689
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:31 am
Has liked: 290 likes
Total likes: 1020 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by SammyLeeWasOffside »

Big George wrote: Thu Mar 30, 2023 2:35 pm I get that, but these things can change "in the light of new information"

I can't think for any reason for the Tories to vote against a long ban for Margaret Ferrier unless they are setting a marker for Johnson.

The likely outocme would be a similar split next time and an opportunity for Johnson allies to paint it as party political.
Some of his allies (does he have that many left) will spin whatever happens as party political or in party politics.

The only thing they won't want I guess is the by election so that part I could maybe see.

Quotes like the one I posted just make it easier I guess. Both sides tarred as doing it for politics.

It does seem odd to me that there are MPs with suspended custodial sentences allowed to stay with no by election but more than 10 days ban and we are off to the races.
User avatar
Big George
Posts: 13291
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2003 2:59 pm
Location: ENFP-T
Has liked: 133 likes
Total likes: 274 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by Big George »

Plot twist
JOHNSON HANDS WHATSAPPS AND NOTEBOOKS TO CABINET OFFICE AMID COVID INQUIRY ROW
By Dominic McGrath, PA Political Staff
Boris Johnson has handed his unredacted WhatsApp messages and notebooks to the Cabinet Office, as the former prime minister called on the Government to "urgently disclose" the material to the Covid-19 inquiry.
The Cabinet Office had claimed it did not have access to Mr Johnson's WhatsApp messages and private notebooks, which were demanded by inquiry chairwoman Baroness Hallett.
Ministers have so far objected to the release of "unambiguously irrelevant" material.
The inquiry has set a deadline of 4pm on Thursday to hand over Mr Johnson's messages, notebooks and official diaries, having granted a 48-hour extension on Tuesday.
A spokesman for Mr Johnson said all the material requested by the Covid inquiry had been handed to the Cabinet Office and should be disclosed to Baroness Hallett.
"All Boris Johnson's material - including WhatsApps and notebooks - requested by the Covid inquiry has been handed to the Cabinet Office in full and in unredacted form," the spokesman said on Wednesday.
"Mr Johnson urges the Cabinet Office to urgently disclose it to the inquiry.
"The Cabinet Office has had access to this material for several months. Mr Johnson would immediately disclose it directly to the inquiry if asked.
"While Mr Johnson understands the Government's position, and does not seek to contradict it, he is perfectly happy for the inquiry to have access to this material in whatever form it requires.
"Mr Johnson co-operated with the inquiry in full from the beginning of this process and continues to do so.
"Indeed, he established the inquiry. He looks forward to continuing to assist the inquiry with its important work."
User avatar
last.caress
Star Raid-er
Posts: 16725
Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2006 11:38 pm
Location: Eyes that shine, burnin' red. Dreams of you all through my head.
Has liked: 1222 likes
Total likes: 1639 likes
Contact:

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by last.caress »

In the first (diary entry), Vallance says Boris Johnson is “obsessed with older people accepting their fate and letting the young get on with life and the economy going”.

Another entry says: “He says his party ‘thinks the whole thing is pathetic and Covid is just nature’s way of dealing with old people – and I am not entirely sure I disagree with them’.”

A third entry, from December 2020, reads: "Chief whip says 'I think we should let the old people get it and protect others’. PM says ‘a lot of my backbenchers think that and I must say I agree with them’."


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/health- ... type=share
User avatar
Johnny Byrne's Boots
Posts: 32128
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 5:19 pm
Location: Care home dodger
Has liked: 1785 likes
Total likes: 2071 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by Johnny Byrne's Boots »

^^^^That view was also expressed by some on this very forum during the pandemic.
User avatar
bubbles1966
Posts: 66966
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 10:01 pm
Location: I'm holding onto nothing, and trying to forget the rest
Has liked: 2436 likes
Total likes: 4292 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by bubbles1966 »

Younger people should never have been deprived of their liberty to the extent that they were.

It was excessive, draconian and unnecessary.
User avatar
DaveWHU1964
Posts: 14872
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 10:14 am
Has liked: 1302 likes
Total likes: 676 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by DaveWHU1964 »

Johnny Byrne's Boots wrote: Tue Oct 31, 2023 1:12 pm ^^^^That view was also expressed by some on this very forum during the pandemic.
Yep, saw some on here in a different light after reading their views on the Covid thread.

Anyway, I wonder how the elderly, who are the only demographic still behind the Tory party, will react to see how expendable they were considered by those they voted for.
User avatar
bubbles1966
Posts: 66966
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 10:01 pm
Location: I'm holding onto nothing, and trying to forget the rest
Has liked: 2436 likes
Total likes: 4292 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by bubbles1966 »

DaveWHU1964 wrote: Tue Oct 31, 2023 1:23 pm Yep, saw some on here in a different light after reading their views on the Covid thread.

Anyway, I wonder how the elderly, who are the only demographic still behind the Tory party, will react to see how expendable they were considered by those they voted for.
How many other NHS treatments were delayed leading to excessive deaths from other causes?

How much mental illness has it left behind?

How much has it damaged the education of the young?

How did those who rejected lockdown orthodoxy (sweden) do in comparison?
User avatar
Oldun
Posts: 8135
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 9:59 am
Location: living in the past and loving it.
Has liked: 165 likes
Total likes: 566 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by Oldun »

It was good of Boris to consider himself god and want to be the person who decided who should live and who should die.
It’s a wonder he found time with all the parties he was having .
Post Reply