2020 No. 10 Christmas Party!

[Woodchopper]

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.

Fair enough, and we’re into mind boggling complexity if it was lawful sir someone to organize a party but not lawful to attend it.

[Woodchopper]

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.

Yes, indeed. ‘The rules’ are wider than criminal law and the party definitely broke what ministers were telling the public to do.

[plodder]

Sure, but poor optics can be dealt with. No 10 workers are key workers and as such it’s unlikely the rules were actually broken. The tragedy of lockdown is unfortunately and ultimately a separate matter.

[Woodchopper]

Sure, but poor optics can be dealt with. No 10 workers are key workers and as such it’s unlikely the rules were actually broken. The tragedy of lockdown is unfortunately and ultimately a separate matter.

I think Johnson will get away with it for now. He’s not going to resign and it’s not going to have a significant effect upon support for the Tories. This despicable episode won’t tell the voters anything they didn’t already know about Johnson and his government. The Tories might dip a few points in the polls but they won’t care about that with a fat majority and the next general election not until May 2024.

[Little waster]

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

Not to mention the almost nailed-on certainty that at some point in the next few days or weeks Johnson is going to have to stand at a lectern and announce to the public some sort of new lockdown or increased restrictions or plea for greater vaccinations or whatever from a position of absolutely zero moral authority.

The compliance (or lack thereof) of the public to these new rules will then determine how many more tens of thousands of people will die un-necessarily before the pandemic wanes.

The continued impunity of Johnson and his corrupt cronies actions will help pile the bodies high all the way from Downing Street to Barnard Castle.

[plodder]

Sure, but poor optics can be dealt with. No 10 workers are key workers and as such it’s unlikely the rules were actually broken. The tragedy of lockdown is unfortunately and ultimately a separate matter.

I think Johnson will get away with it for now. He’s not going to resign and it’s not going to have a significant effect upon support for the Tories. This despicable episode won’t tell the voters anything they didn’t already know about Johnson and his government. The Tories might dip a few points in the polls but they won’t care about that with a fat majority and the next general election not until May 2024.

Yup. Furthermore he won't resign because no-one has actually broken the rules, so he's not even lying about this. Unfortunately (because I hate the c.nt) I don't thing he's done anything wrong here (unless more evidence comes to light).

[Woodchopper]

Sure, but poor optics can be dealt with. No 10 workers are key workers and as such it’s unlikely the rules were actually broken. The tragedy of lockdown is unfortunately and ultimately a separate matter.

I think Johnson will get away with it for now. He’s not going to resign and it’s not going to have a significant effect upon support for the Tories. This despicable episode won’t tell the voters anything they didn’t already know about Johnson and his government. The Tories might dip a few points in the polls but they won’t care about that with a fat majority and the next general election not until May 2024.

Yup. Furthermore he won't resign because no-one has actually broken the rules, so he's not even lying about this. Unfortunately (because I hate the c.nt) I don't thing he's done anything wrong here (unless more evidence comes to light).

He may or may not have broken criminal law. But his actions were morally wrong. Allowing his employees to have a party while telling everyone else not to meet each other was a profound failure of leadership.

[Trinucleus]

I think Johnson will get away with it for now. He’s not going to resign and it’s not going to have a significant effect upon support for the Tories. This despicable episode won’t tell the voters anything they didn’t already know about Johnson and his government. The Tories might dip a few points in the polls but they won’t care about that with a fat majority and the next general election not until May 2024.

Yup. Furthermore he won't resign because no-one has actually broken the rules, so he's not even lying about this. Unfortunately (because I hate the c.nt) I don't thing he's done anything wrong here (unless more evidence comes to light).

He may or may not have broken criminal law. But his actions were morally wrong. Allowing his employees to have a party while telling everyone else not to meet each other was a profound failure of leadership.

Absolutely. You would expect a message going to everyone in Government, civil servants and politicians, saying that any gathering would be an insult to the population as well, as being forbidden under the rules

[Fishnut]

I think this piece does a pretty good job of summing up the anger people feel,

...tens of thousands of her fellow citizens died alone. They died alone, with nobody to hug them goodbye or make them laugh so they wouldn’t be scared, because their own f.cking government was too busy scheming over the cheese plate to do its f.cking job.

And because that happened, this Christmas, there are hundreds of thousands of empty places at the dinner table. Meals that won’t be made, washing up that won’t be argued over, tasteless gifts that won’t be given, awful in-jokes that will never be told again, and the Tories had a party and laughed about it, and no amount of excuses can make that right.

Personally, I don't care if the party was technically legal. Even if it was, the government knows it was morally wrong because otherwise they wouldn't be so strenuously denying it took place. Whether or not it takes Johnson down (and i doubt it*) it is clear to everyone, even those only vaguely paying attention, that this government doesn't give a flying f.ck about anyone who's not in their circle of friends and influencers. It's not news to those of us here because we're fairly politically aware, but for those for whom politics is background noise to their lives this is cutting through. I don't know if it'll translate into anything meaningful come election time, but I highly suspect that this will be the final straw that makes people say "f.ck it, I'm spending this Christmas with my family, regardless of government rules. If they can break them then so can I". So at the very least it'll lead to a load more deaths.

* I don't think there's a clear replacement, and Johnson is a convenient scapegoat. I suspect he'll be kept in place until things look like they're going to improve and then he'll be kicked to the curb so his successor can claim responsibility for those improvements.

[discovolante]

I just want to clarify, because a couple of posts have made me wonder whether it isn't clear (although I'm not sure about that either), the reason I posted that link twice in this thread was because both times the discussion was circulating around the legality or otherwise of the party. So I thought I'd post some analysis of someone who had looked into it. It's probably fairly obvious from my subsequent posts that I'm not really too bothered whether it was technically legal or not. But 1) this is a forum where people look for information and evidence, and I don't see how the law is or should be any different in that regard, and 2) there seemed to be a feeling of injustice that the Met weren't investigating, which I totally sympathize with tbh, but I thought it may be helpful to give some expectation of what might have actually been achieved if they did.

Anyway yeah I agree that it undermines any message that people should be careful over Christmas, it is terrible leadership and I really struggle to believe that the PM didn't know anything about it even if he wasn't there.

[Fishnut]

Thanks for the clarification. I read the blog when it was first posted and was disappointed but not entirely surprised to see it was possible they were just within the bounds of the law (though I'm sure by accident rather than design).

Anyway, I've just seen this. Apparently Johnson helped to host a quiz for a party on the 15th Dec last year. The Mirror reports,

The Prime Minister was pictured on screen, sitting underneath a portrait of Margaret Thatcher as he read out questions.

A source said many staff huddled by computers, conferring on questions and knocking back fizz, wine and beer from a local Tesco Metro.

In one office, the insider said, there were four teams, each made up of six people.

It was December 15 – three days before a gathering now being probed – and the PM was flanked by two members of his top team, although they were not drinking.

One was wearing a Santa hat and the other draped in tinsel.

They go on,

On Dec 15 last year, 459 people died from coronavirus, while another 33,828 were infected.

London was then under Tier 2 regulations banning any social mixing between households – which Mr Johnson appeared to have breached by mixing with the aides.

Official guidance also stated: “You must not have a work Christmas lunch or party, where that is a primarily social activity and is not otherwise permitted by the rules in your tier.”
...
A source said of staff’s decision to do the quiz in Downing St: “Everybody decided it would be more fun. It would be difficult to take part in such a large virtual quiz from home.
...

Halfway through the quiz, the PM surprised staff by turning up on screen as quizmaster for one round lasting between 10 and 15 minutes.

[Grumble]

We had a works Xmas do on Teams, remotely.

[Bird on a Fire]

We had a works Xmas do on Teams, remotely.

Would've been more fun in 10 Downing Street though, surely?

[lpm]

Ignore.

[Grumble]

We had a works Xmas do on Teams, remotely.

Would've been more fun in 10 Downing Street though, surely?

Absolutely, and that’s why I didn’t bother. I’ll only accept parties where afterwards no-one’s sure if they happened or not. They’re the best.

[shpalman]

Absolutely, and that’s why I didn’t bother. I’ll only accept parties where afterwards no-one’s sure if they happened or not. They’re the best.

"If you're sure if it happened or not, you weren't there."

[FlammableFlower]

So... ITV, Sky and the Mirror all break stories about the parties/gatherings...

Mail on Sunday headlines with Boris's anger at BBC over the same issue.

[tom p]

Sure, but poor optics can be dealt with. No 10 workers are key workers and as such it’s unlikely the rules were actually broken. The tragedy of lockdown is unfortunately and ultimately a separate matter.

I think Johnson will get away with it for now. He’s not going to resign and it’s not going to have a significant effect upon support for the Tories. This despicable episode won’t tell the voters anything they didn’t already know about Johnson and his government. The Tories might dip a few points in the polls but they won’t care about that with a fat majority and the next general election not until May 2024.

Yup. Furthermore he won't resign because no-one has actually broken the rules, so he's not even lying about this. Unfortunately (because I hate the c.nt) I don't thing he's done anything wrong here (unless more evidence comes to light).

Says you, being a tedious contrarian dickwad, as usual.
It is possible the rules were not broken, but you don't actually know that and absent an investigation by an independent body (not the cabinet secretary), we will never know. And when people are being asked to make sacrifices by someone obviously not making any, they tend to take a rage against the machine view of things.

To take an earlier (tediously contrarian dickwadish) point you made, having drinks and socialising together after work is a different risk level to sitting far apart and quietly getting on with one's work. If you don't understand that, then either your parties are sh.t, or your office is ace.

[noggins]

If the party was just naughty minions partying behind the bosses’ back you’d just sacrifice a few publicly, fulsome apology, concerned face, blah blah.

[plodder]

Well, Starmer’s now saying he might have broken the rules, since the quiz stuff came out, but I’m sure Tom knows more than the former director of the DPP and the person with the second-most political skin in the game.

[Stranger Mouse]

Adam Wagner thinks they broke the law https://twitter.com/mirrorpolitics/stat ... 98595?s=21

[bjn]

Caesar's Wife innit. Putting it mildly.

Legality is almost beside the point. Politically it was absolutely f.cking stupid. Morally it was indefensible, as people were making hard decisions not to see loved ones, sometimes in dire circumstances such as Tom's, or mine. I had to abandon MrsBJN at the doors of A&E when she suffered near fatal side effects of chemo and then did not hear from or about her for hours.

It shows that the don't give a flying f.ck and are barely competent.

[El Pollo Diablo]

It doesn't really matter if they broke the law. It's unlikely they'll be prosecuted even if they did. The problematic nature of the parties (plural) is not based on the legality of the parties. It's based in the fact that Liz mcfucking Truss is being spoken of as the potential next prime minister, with an air of seriousness.

[plodder]

It doesn't really matter if they broke the law. It's unlikely they'll be prosecuted even if they did. The problematic nature of the parties (plural) is not based on the legality of the parties. It's based in the fact that Liz mcfucking Truss is being spoken of as the potential next prime minister, with an air of seriousness.

It depends on whether you want to unpick things or just run around waving your hands in the air. As I get older the latter does increasingly feel like the more rational response but I'm aware there are young 'uns on the forum and we need to put up a good show in times like these.

[Trinucleus]

Anyone else expecting to see a conga line go behind Boris in his broadcast this evening?