Johnson summoning Savile in HOC

Laughing said:
I understand what you are saying and would normally agree to an extent. However, Johnsons popularity added to how badly wrong he has got.... Well everything. I don't think anyone can dismisses the horror felt by 150k families and their friends. Plenty of people are talking about the tories, engaged or not.
Click to expand...
He got in on personality (I know I don't get it either), but that personality gets boring quickly, and when tainted with acting superior to the normal person it's a damaging population
 
BoroMart said:
He got in on personality (I know I don't get it either), but that personality gets boring quickly, and when tainted with acting superior to the normal person it's a damaging population
Click to expand...
It's not just that Mart. His popularity is damaging now too. People who wouldn't have been interested in Cameron loving up a pigs head will follow the news about Johnson and his staff getting ***ed up whilst the people he was supposed to represent were dying.

That same popularity shines a spotlight on his behaviour.
 
ā€˜I believe it was wrong for you to imply this week that Keir Starmer was personally responsible for allowing Jimmy Savile to escape justice. There was no fair or reasonable basis for that assertion. This was not the usual cut and thrust of politics; it was an inappropriate and partisan reference to a horrendous case of child sex abuse. You tried to clarify your position today but, despite my urging, you did not apologise for the misleading impression you gave.ā€™

The words of Boris Johnsonā€™s policy chief who has clearly had enough.

www.spectator.co.uk

Exclusive: No. 10 policy chief quits over Boris's Jimmy Savile slur

Munira Mirza, the Downing Street head of policy, has resigned over Boris Johnsonā€™s Jimmy Savile attack on Keir Starmer. Mirza, who has worked with Johnson for 14 years and who he named as one of the five women who have most inspired him, quit this afternoon. In a letter to the Prime Minister...
www.spectator.co.uk www.spectator.co.uk
 
FabioPorkpie said:
ā€˜I believe it was wrong for you to imply this week that Keir Starmer was personally responsible for allowing Jimmy Savile to escape justice. There was no fair or reasonable basis for that assertion. This was not the usual cut and thrust of politics; it was an inappropriate and partisan reference to a horrendous case of child sex abuse. You tried to clarify your position today but, despite my urging, you did not apologise for the misleading impression you gave.ā€™

The words of Boris Johnsonā€™s policy chief who has clearly had enough.

www.spectator.co.uk

Exclusive: No. 10 policy chief quits over Boris's Jimmy Savile slur

Munira Mirza, the Downing Street head of policy, has resigned over Boris Johnsonā€™s Jimmy Savile attack on Keir Starmer. Mirza, who has worked with Johnson for 14 years and who he named as one of the five women who have most inspired him, quit this afternoon. In a letter to the Prime Minister...
www.spectator.co.uk www.spectator.co.uk
Click to expand...
I know we can all click on a link but here's her resignation letter. Dynamite.

Dear Prime Minister,

It is with great regret that I am writing to resign as your Head of Policy.

You are aware of the reason for my decision: I believe it was wrong for you to imply this week that Keir Starmer was personally responsible for allowing Jimmy Savile to escape justice. There was no fair or reasonable basis for that assertion. This was not the normal cut-and-thrust of politics; it was an inappropriate and partisan reference to a horrendous case of child sex abuse. You tried to clarify your position today but, despite my urging, you did not apologise for the misleading impression you gave.

I have served you for fourteen years and it has been a privilege to do so. You have achieved many important things both as Prime Minister and, before that, as Mayor of London. You are a man of extraordinary abilities with a unique talent for connecting with people.

You are a better man than many of your detractors will ever understand which is why it is desperately sad that you let yourself down by making a scurrilous accusation against the Leader of the Opposition.

Even now, I hope you find it in yourself to apologise for a grave error of judgement made under huge pressure. I appreciate that our political culture is not forgiving when people say sorry, but regardless, it is the right thing to do. It is not too late for you but, Iā€™m sorry to say, it is too late for me.

Yours sincerely,

Munira
 
She worked for him for fourteen years.ā€¦ā€¦ Jesus, doesnā€™t say much about her character that this was the straw that broke the camelā€™s back. The blind eyes she must have turned in all that time.
 
Last edited:
Interesting to see Simon Clarke is still defending what Johnson said about Keir Starmer and Jimmy Savile, wonder if he can get his tongue any further up Johnsons large backside?

What Johnson said was, to anyone with even the remotest amount of decency, completely unacceptable and a disgusting comment to make.

Once Johnson is gone (which hopefully won't be too long) those who prostitutes themselves to him and defended his every move will have some very awkward questions to answer.
 
WeeGord said:
Interesting to see Simon Clarke is still defending what Johnson said about Keir Starmer and Jimmy Savile, wonder if he can get his tongue any further up Johnsons large backside?

What Johnson said was, to anyone with even the remotest amount of decency, completely unacceptable and a disgusting comment to make.

Once Johnson is gone (which hopefully won't be too long) those who prostitutes themselves to him and defended his every move will have some very awkward questions to answer.
Click to expand...
The people who defend him are even worse than him. How the hell did that lickspittle Clarke get elected?
 
I see Johnson has backtracked on the slur now. I'm pretty dumbfounded I have to say at one or two people on the thread who took actual time out of their day to argue for at least 20 posts that they saw the Starmer lie as true "at its core".

The problem with the Board sometimes is that people have little to do all day, get bored, start "playing" and end up just having a negative impact on the conversation. Very tiresome.
 
Abel Tasman said:
I see Johnson has backtracked on the slur now. I'm pretty dumbfounded I have to say at one or two people on the thread who took actual time out of their day to argue for at least 20 posts that they saw the Starmer lie as true "at its core".

The problem with the Board sometimes is that people have little to do all day, get bored, start "playing" and end up just having a negative impact on the conversation. Very tiresome.
Click to expand...
Of course you only want a one sided conversation. Again someone who didn't bother to read nor understand what I posted.
 
Cardiffdaffs said:
So many people misunderstanding you fella. You must think sometimes you are too clever for this Board.
Click to expand...
I have no idea I don't know most on this board, perhaps I am, or is it more that some people want an echo chamber and are essentially not interested in a balanced conversation. Or, maybe some people just don't understand the rules in the house of commons.

In any event abel is peddling bull**** and doing it in a way to suggest I was defending Johnson. I wasn't I was defending Hoyle. See its bad that Johnson smears starmer, but its open season on Hoyle when he could have done nothing about it.

I do wonder at people making snide comments though. That's interesting. Argue and debate the point, don't behave like little children.

Adi was right about one thing its tiresome on here sometimes.
 
Laughing said:
I have no idea I don't know most on this board, perhaps I am, or is it more that some people want an echo chamber and are essentially not interested in a balanced conversation. Or, maybe some people just don't understand the rules in the house of commons.

In any event abel is peddling bull**** and doing it in a way to suggest I was defending Johnson. I wasn't I was defending Hoyle. See its bad that Johnson smears starmer, but its open season on Hoyle when he could have done nothing about it.

I do wonder at people making snide comments though. That's interesting. Argue and debate the point, don't behave like little children.

Adi was right about one thing its tiresome on here sometimes.
Click to expand...
A little self awareness on your part may not be amiss sometimes. I appreciate that you think you are right all the time but maybe understand why a good number of people on this thread took exception to a comment you seem to want to continue to brazen out as ā€œyou misunderstood meā€
 
Abel Tasman said:
A little self awareness on your part may not be amiss sometimes. I appreciate that you think you are right all the time but maybe understand why a good number of people on this thread took exception to a comment you seem to want to continue to brazen out as ā€œyou misunderstood meā€
Click to expand...
I am not brazenning anything out. I was stating, in response to a post by Chris, I think, that Hoyle was a disgrace. I simply said that he couldn't do anything about Johnson's comment Johnson hadn't broken the rules for MP's in parliament. Lots of people jumped on me for that. From that point on, it went off track with, of course he was lying. Of course he was dishonest. He didn't break any rules that were actionable by the speaker. Bare in mind the speaker can no more call Johnson a liar than Blackford can.

I don't really care that people took exception, I do care when I am misrepresented, which you did, suggesting I was supporting Johnson. Now I don't know whether you did misunderstand what I was saying, or whether you deliberately ignored the point to have a go. Open and honest debate is necessary. Repeating the same nonsense that Hoyle was a disgrace isn't helpful to anyone, regardless of what you may think about Johnson.

Don't get me wrong, I understand why people are angry, so am I. Lashing out at the speaker is directing our anger at the wrong person, as is trying to taint me because you don't agree.
 
What this whole fiasco, and a lot of others that have occurred in recent times is there is no way, seemingly, of holding the executive and its individuals to account.
The system itself is not fit for purpose in a modern democracy. Basically itā€™s a fkn joke.
 
Ziggy said:
What this whole fiasco, and a lot of others that have occurred in recent times is there is no way, seemingly, of holding the executive and its individuals to account.
The system itself is not fit for purpose in a modern democracy. Basically itā€™s a fkn joke.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, all the electorate have is by-elections and general elections to do anything about it.

The issue with Johnson is he isn't really a tory in the conventional sense. He doesn't, necessarily, believe in the tory ideology. He is in it for himself. Any other sitting PM would have realised he had gone to far and resigned to save the party, Johnson won't do that because he doesn't care about the party. I wonder if many of the backbenchers believe he can pull this around and get a majority at the next election. I think if that is how they are thinking they are sadly mistaken.

Parliamentary reform is difficult, whilst we may think the inability to call someone a liar is stupid, can you imagine what Johnson would be like if that rule were removed? They behave like children at the best of times. The wording of what is allowed in statements could be re-worded, I suppose to remove political spin, but that would just result in points of order over and over again.

Proportional representation would work to avoid large majorities and limit the damage done by any single party. Would it also hinder genuine reform? I don't know.
 
Laughing said:
Proportional representation would work to avoid large majorities and limit the damage done by any single party. Would it also hinder genuine reform? I don't know.
Click to expand...

Hoyle, made a statement the other day before PMā€™s or the big debate, canā€™t remember which. Basically he was pleading for them all to return to being ā€œGood Chapsā€ā€¦.during that he quoted Erskine May 3 times.
Written in 1844 itā€™s basically a book of convention and procedure which now expanded to contain about a thousand pieces of ā€˜guidanceā€™ on these ā€¦non rules!
The Speaker is purposely left toothless to a large extent. But that is to the advantage ultimately of opposition parties
This non Tory Brit Nat government have prised open doors leaving convention and procedures in the ditch.
Itā€™s there now if, Labour form the next government, for them to take advantage of this new landscape.
For me PR, is not the whole answer to constitutional change, but it would be a start.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top