2020 No. 10 Christmas Party!

[hakwright]

Yesterday, in response to Labour's urgent question, Paul Scully kept calling it a "gathering", not a party.

He was challenged about this today on LBC, and apparently it wasn't a party because a party must have balloons and there were no balloons:

Look, ‘party’ suggests, and you see some of the graphics that go around with some of the coverage here, with balloons and poppers and these kind of things. It suggests that there’s big invitations going out and lots of people coming in from elsewhere and those kind of things, so I think it’s right to be proportionate until we know the detail.

Does he not realise that a "gathering" is exactly what the regulations made illegal?

This is one of the things that really p*sses me off. So many soundbites and news headlines about whether it was a "party" or not. That's irrelevant, and I wish there were some journalists who would just cut to chase on this. At the time tier 3 restrictions were in place, social gatherings of people indoors (outside of support bubbles) were not permitted. You couldn't even meet more than 6 people outdoors FFS. So stop agonising over what word to call it - was it a social gathering of people beyond support bubbles? (Hint: yes).

Are they really going to try and argue it was just "people at work" who happened to stay beyond midnight, drinking alcohol, giving secret Santa presents, eating nibbles and playing games? This shouldn't be hard to figure out, but journalists and commentators should focus on the very simple fundamentals - were the tier 3 restrictions broken or not?

And as for the police "not investigating potential covid breaches retrospectively". WTAF? Assuming they don't have a time machine to allow them to investigate future covid breaches, are they really saying they don't investigate covid breaches at all? People have already been investigated and prosecuted for private parties etc. So this is presumably just a word-salad smokescreen to try and put people off the scent. But it should be journalists who ask the very simple and direct questions on this stuff. It's not hard.

And lastly, the "we don't have any evidence" to investigate. Aside from CCTV cameras, I presume that people coming in and out of No 10 are recorded or logged in one form or another. It really can't be hard to figure out who was in the building at the time. Are the police saying they don't *want* to investigate and they don't *want* to collect evidence?

[tom p]

Yesterday, in response to Labour's urgent question, Paul Scully kept calling it a "gathering", not a party.

He was challenged about this today on LBC, and apparently it wasn't a party because a party must have balloons and there were no balloons:

Look, ‘party’ suggests, and you see some of the graphics that go around with some of the coverage here, with balloons and poppers and these kind of things. It suggests that there’s big invitations going out and lots of people coming in from elsewhere and those kind of things, so I think it’s right to be proportionate until we know the detail.

Poppers? What kind of parties is he going to?

[wilsontown]

Self-justification and cynicism. Two things we're really good at, unfortunately...

If Johnson was the worst PM in our history then they'd have been stupid to have voted for him. They know they're not stupid, so Johnson can't be all that bad.

Anyway, Starmer or Corbyn probably would have been just as bad and Labour probably had a load of Xmas parties too. Politicians are all the same, aren't they.

To quote someone else on here (can't remember who it was) "something something something Diane Abbott". That was pretty much literally the response I got from one of the regulars in my local.

[FlammableFlower]

We could be getting to a tortured Oscar Wilde quote time: "To lose one ethics advisor may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose two looks like you're a corrupt idiot."

[jimbob]

Last christmas, my wife's dad was in the final stages of a relapse of his colon cancer. It had metastasised throughout his body and he was going to die, painfully and slowly over the course of the next couple of months or so. That prognosis came to pass and he died in February. We didn’t come back to the UK to visit him because we were following the COVID rules & my wife didn’t get to say goodbye to her dad, nor did my daughters get to say goodbye to their grandad.

My mum had been diagnosed with Alzheimer’s around the start of last year. Last Christmas would have been about my last chance to speak to her, and not the half-dead husk she is now, who only occasionally flickers with the dimmest smidgeon of recognition. She couldn’t really cope with the telephone or skype back then, even with people helping, but she could manage small face-to-face chats. But I didn’t go home and talk to her, because I was obeying the rules. When I finally got to see her, she had no speech, and clawed at my watch and wedding ring like some character out of a bad play. She briefly recognised me (I hope, but I may be deluding myself) and as I sat there with her she patted me on the head. That’s it, though, that’s my interaction with my mum. I gave up the chance to say goodbye because I was sticking to the rules. Again, my daughters didn’t get a chance to say goodbye to a grandmother who could understand them and respond.

And these c.nts. These utter, f.cking, shameless, hateful c.nts, were getting pissed (almost certainly on free booze provided by the public) and plotting their vicious schemes and lies.
I can’t say how much hatred and contempt I have for them.

a..eholes

[shpalman]

No. 10 Christmas party cancelled (not satire).

[dyqik]

No. 10 Christmas party cancelled (not satire).

I'm pretty sure satire underwent a hostile takeover by reality some time ago.

[plodder]

If we assume they were key workers (which surely they were) and they spent all day every day mingling indoors with each other and their peers then I’m not sure that this party is problematic tbh.

[El Pollo Diablo]

Well, it depends whether your definition of "problematic" includes a horrified press reaction, a horrified public reaction, your personal ratings being the worst they've been since you became prime minister, your political party dropping to around six points behind in the polls, increased press focus on the other parties and the other things you've done, people talking openly about replacing you as leader of the Conservative party and prime minister, and, last but not least, the 100% definite illegality of the parties (plural) and possibility of police investigation, charges and massive fines.

[plodder]

Well, it depends whether your definition of "problematic" includes a horrified press reaction, a horrified public reaction, your personal ratings being the worst they've been since you became prime minister, your political party dropping to around six points behind in the polls, increased press focus on the other parties and the other things you've done, people talking openly about replacing you as leader of the Conservative party and prime minister, and, last but not least, the 100% definite illegality of the parties (plural) and possibility of police investigation, charges and massive fines.

I'm not sure about the last bit. If they are all allowed to work in the same office then where's the illegality?

[TimW]

I'm not sure about the last bit. If they are all allowed to work in the same office then where's the illegality?

Do you think Exception 3(a) applied?

Exception 3: gatherings necessary for certain purposes

(4) Exception 3 is that the gathering is reasonably necessary—
(a) for work purposes or for the provision of voluntary or charitable services;

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/202 ... ule/1/made

[plodder]

Right. Plenty of people were entitled to be in the office during lockdown, and anyone who wants to argue that No 10 staff aren’t important enough will have a job on their hands. I just can’t see this ‘definitely 100% illegal’ thing.

[shpalman]

Right. Plenty of people were entitled to be in the office during lockdown, and anyone who wants to argue that No 10 staff aren’t important enough will have a job on their hands. I just can’t see this ‘definitely 100% illegal’ thing.

Maybe they were entitled to be there to do their jobs, but the party we're talking about doesn't count as work.

[discovolante]

Blog about the legal side of things here:

https://barristerblogger.com/2021/12/06 ... #more-3408

[Woodchopper]

Blog about the legal side of things here:

https://barristerblogger.com/2021/12/06 ... #more-3408

Thanks Disco. Looks like the party probably didn't break the law, but could have done. But it was completely against the spirit of the guidelines at the time.

[discovolante]

Blog about the legal side of things here:

https://barristerblogger.com/2021/12/06 ... #more-3408

Thanks Disco. Looks like the party probably didn't break the law, but could have done. But it was completely against the spirit of the guidelines at the time.

Oh yeah definitely. Just seems like a very lucky potential loophole at best.

[El Pollo Diablo]

Well, it depends whether your definition of "problematic" includes a horrified press reaction, a horrified public reaction, your personal ratings being the worst they've been since you became prime minister, your political party dropping to around six points behind in the polls, increased press focus on the other parties and the other things you've done, people talking openly about replacing you as leader of the Conservative party and prime minister, and, last but not least, the 100% definite illegality of the parties (plural) and possibility of police investigation, charges and massive fines.

I'm not sure about the last bit. If they are all allowed to work in the same office then where's the illegality?

Oh right yeah, if it wasn't illegal then it's definitely not problematic for Johnson. No problemo if there's merely a horrified press reaction, a horrified public reaction, his personal ratings being the worst they've been since he became prime minister, his political party dropping to around six points behind in the polls, increased press focus on the other parties and the other things he's done, and people talking openly about replacing him as leader of the Conservative party and prime minister.

Oh, and Ant and f.ckin Dec ripping the sh.t out of him on primetime TV

[TimW]

Thanks Disco. Looks like the party probably didn't break the law, but could have done. But it was completely against the spirit of the guidelines at the time.

That article is a bit specific though,it's looking at "Did Boris Johnson break the law", without being at the gathering. Not the more general issue of whether the people directly involved did.

[Woodchopper]

Thanks Disco. Looks like the party probably didn't break the law, but could have done. But it was completely against the spirit of the guidelines at the time.

That article is a bit specific though,it's looking at "Did Boris Johnson break the law", without being at the gathering. Not the more general issue of whether the people directly involved did.

It also seems like there is a general loophole for gatherings taking place in official premises.

[shpalman]

Well, it depends whether your definition of "problematic" includes a horrified press reaction, a horrified public reaction, your personal ratings being the worst they've been since you became prime minister, your political party dropping to around six points behind in the polls, increased press focus on the other parties and the other things you've done, people talking openly about replacing you as leader of the Conservative party and prime minister, and, last but not least, the 100% definite illegality of the parties (plural) and possibility of police investigation, charges and massive fines.

I'm not sure about the last bit. If they are all allowed to work in the same office then where's the illegality?

Oh right yeah, if it wasn't illegal then it's definitely not problematic for Johnson. No problemo if there's merely a horrified press reaction, a horrified public reaction, his personal ratings being the worst they've been since he became prime minister, his political party dropping to around six points behind in the polls, increased press focus on the other parties and the other things he's done, and people talking openly about replacing him as leader of the Conservative party and prime minister.

Oh, and Ant and f.ckin Dec ripping the sh.t out of him on primetime TV

And it's not like there'd be any legal consequences for Johnson even if it were found to have been illegal.

[TimW]

It also seems like there is a general loophole for gatherings taking place in official premises.

Maybe, for the organiser, but the guy says:

Secondly, even attending a “permitted organised gathering” was not necessarily lawful. To be exempt from the rules those participating had to satisfy further conditions of mind-boggling complexity.

[shpalman]

It also seems like there is a general loophole for gatherings taking place in official premises.

Maybe, for the organiser, but the guy says:

Secondly, even attending a “permitted organised gathering” was not necessarily lawful. To be exempt from the rules those participating had to satisfy further conditions of mind-boggling complexity.

I'm also sure that they didn't carefully navigate this "mind-boggling complexity" to find a way to ensure their gathering was legal but rather just did what they want because they don't care.

[plodder]

Yeahbut if they didn’t break the rules then the outrage will subside. It’s not checkmate. Allegra Stratton’s apologised for the optics, there’s not much more to do.

[El Pollo Diablo]

No one is testing whether the rules were broken because the Met isn't investigating. The public thinks the rules were broken. That's the end of it.

[discovolante]

Yeahbut if they didn’t break the rules then the outrage will subside. It’s not checkmate. Allegra Stratton’s apologised for the optics, there’s not much more to do.

If they didn't break the rules it's pretty much entirely down to chance and the (relatively) unique status of number 10 as some sort of public place that nobody is really allowed to go to apart from if you're a member of the elite and get invited to a party. It's not really anything to do with whether it's generally allowed to have a party or not or whether that means it was fair that you didn't get to see your relatives one more time before they died.