He won’t have to though. Another non-apology, or perhaps just referring to having already apologised and then back to business as usual.
He had already committed though to addressing the report and its findings in the Commons. Surely he will have to take questions (a lot of them !) , a simple statement isn’t going to cut it.
It will just be a repeat of the last time with the interim report.
A non-apology, a commitment to ‘changing the culture’ (no cameras allowed at parties anymore) ) and to getting back to the job of running the country.
I know his head should roll after this. It just won’t.
1 Like
… and blame the leader of the Labour party, somehow, even though he/she isn’t PM! 
Rubbish, the PM should always be under more scutiny than anyone else, you know the one that passed the regulations.
Anything else is whataboutism!
1 Like
Errr! yes they do!
STARMER is the villain here, he stood on a table with a beer in his hand ripping his trousers off shouting ‘fuck covid’ passed the glass around then took it back sniffed and licked it. Finishing off by drinking the dregs that left. LOCK HIM UP!
Oh! and keep Boris in N°10 he never does anything wrong! He also makes us laugh, unlike boring Starmer!
2 Likes
Christ, Laura looks like she’s had to swallow a pint of sick, there. 
Apparently, at one point in the evening he got his cock* out.
*actually his phone, but let’s not worry about the details.
Most shocking thing is the bbc has allowed comments on the article 
For me it’s fairly simple. The rules as I understand it for gathering were if it was “reasonably necessary for work.”
A leaving party, Christmas party, regular Friday drinks in no way can be considered reasonably necessary for work. It’s kind of black and white.
A takeaway while campaigning is debatable. It can legitimately be argued it was reasonable. I would say though it was poor judgment/planning.
3 Likes
Having a piss up at work every Friday at 4pm is questionable even if there isn’t a pandemic.
Ok go out for a drink, but Christ 5.30 - 6.00pm absolute earliest!
It’s the sheer number of events for me and then the lies. He knew, he attended them even if for 10 minutes and then did it again and again later. He set the rules, repeatedly ignored them and then he then lied about it.
Starmer may have broken rules once. Perhaps he should be fined too but this does not excuse what Johnson did. It’s the classic “look over there” while I pull your trousers down
Ultimately, Johnson is the cherry on top of a very broken society. Afghanistan is important but this is moreso. This was, is an opportunity for everyone to see the animal that Johnson is in plain sight. Too many are still prepared to look the other way. That will ultimately lead to other Afghanistan’s down the line. People need to see the Party gate animal to wake up to the reality elsewhere.
1 Like
This is no longer the problem. The problem now is the complete ‘whataboutism’ where 2 unrelated events get mentioned in the same breath in the press to the kitchen.
Oh! what about Starmer, ok what about Starmer?
This is the state of ‘our’ media and society it’s even here in your post.
Johnson could bugger a 5 year old and it would all become about Starmer saying a boy had beautiful eyes. It’s sick (yes I remember what they picked up on over Biden, it wasn’t enough that he was a senile old git they had to make out he was some kind of pervert and we let them even vote for them to do this ‘we are the problem!’).
2 Likes
9am too early then?
Ofgem confirmed today that the energy price cap will got to £2800 this October. Apparently that equates to a bill of £233 a month. And still they do nothing.
But but but Starmer had a party.
Will give this a read later.
First thing that struck me though:
On 19 April, Boris Johnson was asked in Parliament: “Did you deliberately mislead the House at the dispatch box?” His one-word reply: “No.”
After being fined by the Metropolitan Police for breaking his own Covid rules, he will be investigated by a Commons committee over whether he misled MPs when talking about parties in Downing Street.
It is important because the Ministerial Code, the rule book for government ministers, says: “Ministers who knowingly mislead Parliament will be expected to offer their resignation.”
“Knowingly” suggests deliberately misleading MPs, which can be difficult to prove.
These are the key times the prime minister has talked in Parliament about Downing Street parties and gatherings.
Date of quote: 8 December 2021
Context: Labour MP Catherine West asked: “Will the prime minister tell the House whether there was a party in Downing Street on 13 November [2020]?”
What Mr Johnson said: “No - but I am sure that whatever happened, the guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times.”
Analysis
Let’s break down his answer. The first part is the apparent denial that there was a party on 13 November 2020.
Anyone notice that this is not actually what he’s saying ‘No’ to?
The question being posed is, “Will the prime minister tell the House whether there was a party in Downing Street on 13 November [2020]?”
Answering “No” is actually…“No, I will not tell the House whether there was a party in Downing Street on 13 November”.
He’s not actually denying whether there was a party or not. Perhaps the question should have been phrased better, although it is certainly the typical way in which questions are posed in the chamber. However, “Prime Minister, was there a party or social gathering in Downing Street on 13 November?” would have afforded him much less wriggle room.
