 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
So it has been said that Johnson didn't breach the code but Hancock did. I guess now he is ripe for sacking?
https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/boris-johnson-did-not-breach-ministerial-code-over-funding-for-downing-street-flat-refurb-official-probe-finds?utm_source=upday&utm_medium=referral |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
"So it has been said that Johnson didn't breach the code but Hancock did. I guess now he is ripe for sacking?
https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/boris-johnson-did-not-breach-ministerial-code-over-funding-for-downing-street-flat-refurb-official-probe-finds?utm_source=upday&utm_medium=referral"
What kind of world do you have to live in to order a £100,000 flat renovation and not even be either expecting to pay for it, or caring who would be paying?
Still, just as well that it was a Johnson appointee who came up with the verdict.
Nothing to see here now.
Move along
Lol |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
It does not look that Matt Hancock has too much to worry about . The general public are extremely appreciative of his efforts in leading us through the crisis . He has worked non stop and done a great job .
Matt Hancock committed a "minor breach" of the ministerial code when a coronavirus contract was awarded to his sister's company in which he had share holdings, an independent report has found.
Lord Geidt, the independent adviser on ministers' interests, found that the health secretary had made a "technical" breach of the ministerial code of conduct by failing to declare that a firm run by a family member, which he has a 20% stake in, had won an NHS contract.
However, he added that Mr Hancock had "a lack of knowledge" of the contract and that the conflict of interest was "in no way deliberate".
Live COVID updates from the UK and around the world
Image:The report found Matt Hancock made a 'technical' breach of the code but acted with 'integrity'
Lord Geidt, former permanent secretary to the Queen, also deemed that the health secretary acted with "integrity throughout", adding: "This event should in no way impugn his good character or ministerial record."
Advertisement
Boris Johnson has said that the health secretary would face no further action after the technical breach, defying Labour deputy leader Angela Rayner's call for the PM to "explain why the public should trust him to lead such a major government department".
Lord Geidt was investigating Mr Hancock's shares in Topwood Ltd, a firm run by his sister and brother-in-law, which was approved as a potential supplier for NHS trusts in England
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So it has been said that Johnson didn't breach the code but Hancock did. I guess now he is ripe for sacking?
https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/boris-johnson-did-not-breach-ministerial-code-over-funding-for-downing-street-flat-refurb-official-probe-finds?utm_source=upday&utm_medium=referral"
. I cannot see any rational individual being too bothered over who paid to decorate the apartment of Boris . He can hardly rip off the wallpaper and take it with him when leaves . It is simply accommodation provided by his employer . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
So Mr Johnson contracted a company to perform £100,000 of work on his place of residence, without having the means of paying and apparently not even caring that he had no means of paying. I'm no lawyer so not certain what the technical name for this offence would be, but possibly "intent to defraud"? I'm pretty sure that if I did this I would end up being charged with some kind of criminal offence.
That the bill was then paid firstly by the public purse (presumably to avoid the contracter passing the matter to the police) and later re-paid to the public purse by the conservative party does not excuse the original crime. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So Mr Johnson contracted a company to perform £100,000 of work on his place of residence, without having the means of paying and apparently not even caring that he had no means of paying. I'm no lawyer so not certain what the technical name for this offence would be, but possibly "intent to defraud"? I'm pretty sure that if I did this I would end up being charged with some kind of criminal offence.
That the bill was then paid firstly by the public purse (presumably to avoid the contracter passing the matter to the police) and later re-paid to the public purse by the conservative party does not excuse the original crime."
Tbf its almost comical.
Its like some banana republic |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So Mr Johnson contracted a company to perform £100,000 of work on his place of residence, without having the means of paying and apparently not even caring that he had no means of paying. I'm no lawyer so not certain what the technical name for this offence would be, but possibly "intent to defraud"? I'm pretty sure that if I did this I would end up being charged with some kind of criminal offence.
That the bill was then paid firstly by the public purse (presumably to avoid the contracter passing the matter to the police) and later re-paid to the public purse by the conservative party does not excuse the original crime."
. Any contractor not paid would simply issue a county court summons . The police would have no interest in whether or not a contractor was paid , their role is to fight crime , not act as debt collectors . It is up to a contractor to assess the credit worthiness of their client . Any contractor undertaken work for Boris Johnson is guaranteed to be paid - he is constantly in the spotlight |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
When there are lots of city jobs that pay many multiples of an MPs wage and without the public scrutiny.. is it any we end up run by a parliament filled with MPs from the dregs of the pile! Borris took a huge cut in earning when he became leader. Something is backwards in society when one can earn much more penning a few articles for a newspaper, playing football or making Tik toc videos than being responsible for leading a country! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So Mr Johnson contracted a company to perform £100,000 of work on his place of residence, without having the means of paying and apparently not even caring that he had no means of paying. I'm no lawyer so not certain what the technical name for this offence would be, but possibly "intent to defraud"? I'm pretty sure that if I did this I would end up being charged with some kind of criminal offence.
That the bill was then paid firstly by the public purse (presumably to avoid the contracter passing the matter to the police) and later re-paid to the public purse by the conservative party does not excuse the original crime.. Any contractor not paid would simply issue a county court summons . The police would have no interest in whether or not a contractor was paid , their role is to fight crime , not act as debt collectors . It is up to a contractor to assess the credit worthiness of their client . Any contractor undertaken work for Boris Johnson is guaranteed to be paid - he is constantly in the spotlight "
This is where we're at. Tax payers arguing in favour of the PM ripping off tax payers. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Can I just ask why does anyone here give a fuck about the ministerial code?
Surely if ministers don't (and we know that at least Priti Patel and Boris Johnson don't) it is irrelevant?
And now the "independent" in charge is a Boris appointee to replace the one who resigned because it was all being treated as a joke.
Save the wear and tear on your keybaord... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"So it has been said that Johnson didn't breach the code but Hancock did. I guess now he is ripe for sacking?
https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/boris-johnson-did-not-breach-ministerial-code-over-funding-for-downing-street-flat-refurb-official-probe-finds?utm_source=upday&utm_medium=referral. I cannot see any rational individual being too bothered over who paid to decorate the apartment of Boris . He can hardly rip off the wallpaper and take it with him when leaves . It is simply accommodation provided by his employer . "
Do you not think he may owe the donor a favour? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"So Mr Johnson contracted a company to perform £100,000 of work on his place of residence, without having the means of paying and apparently not even caring that he had no means of paying. I'm no lawyer so not certain what the technical name for this offence would be, but possibly "intent to defraud"? I'm pretty sure that if I did this I would end up being charged with some kind of criminal offence.
That the bill was then paid firstly by the public purse (presumably to avoid the contracter passing the matter to the police) and later re-paid to the public purse by the conservative party does not excuse the original crime.. Any contractor not paid would simply issue a county court summons . The police would have no interest in whether or not a contractor was paid , their role is to fight crime , not act as debt collectors . It is up to a contractor to assess the credit worthiness of their client . Any contractor undertaken work for Boris Johnson is guaranteed to be paid - he is constantly in the spotlight "
I think the poster has a point. If Boris knew for definite he couldn’t pay and had no actual plan to pay that is fraud. Contractor was safe as court would be the last place Boris wanted to go.
Why does a government bail out an individual in such circumstances?
I know someone would end up paying but how disgusting is it that Boris knew it would come out of someone else’s pocket so he didn’t have to bother!
Entitled individual indeed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So Mr Johnson contracted a company to perform £100,000 of work on his place of residence, without having the means of paying and apparently not even caring that he had no means of paying. I'm no lawyer so not certain what the technical name for this offence would be, but possibly "intent to defraud"? I'm pretty sure that if I did this I would end up being charged with some kind of criminal offence.
That the bill was then paid firstly by the public purse (presumably to avoid the contracter passing the matter to the police) and later re-paid to the public purse by the conservative party does not excuse the original crime.. Any contractor not paid would simply issue a county court summons . The police would have no interest in whether or not a contractor was paid , their role is to fight crime , not act as debt collectors . It is up to a contractor to assess the credit worthiness of their client . Any contractor undertaken work for Boris Johnson is guaranteed to be paid - he is constantly in the spotlight
I think the poster has a point. If Boris knew for definite he couldn’t pay and had no actual plan to pay that is fraud. Contractor was safe as court would be the last place Boris wanted to go.
Why does a government bail out an individual in such circumstances?
I know someone would end up paying but how disgusting is it that Boris knew it would come out of someone else’s pocket so he didn’t have to bother!
Entitled individual indeed. "
it’s the same with the royals isn’t it ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"So Mr Johnson contracted a company to perform £100,000 of work on his place of residence, without having the means of paying and apparently not even caring that he had no means of paying. I'm no lawyer so not certain what the technical name for this offence would be, but possibly "intent to defraud"? I'm pretty sure that if I did this I would end up being charged with some kind of criminal offence.
That the bill was then paid firstly by the public purse (presumably to avoid the contracter passing the matter to the police) and later re-paid to the public purse by the conservative party does not excuse the original crime.. Any contractor not paid would simply issue a county court summons . The police would have no interest in whether or not a contractor was paid , their role is to fight crime , not act as debt collectors . It is up to a contractor to assess the credit worthiness of their client . Any contractor undertaken work for Boris Johnson is guaranteed to be paid - he is constantly in the spotlight
I think the poster has a point. If Boris knew for definite he couldn’t pay and had no actual plan to pay that is fraud. Contractor was safe as court would be the last place Boris wanted to go.
Why does a government bail out an individual in such circumstances?
I know someone would end up paying but how disgusting is it that Boris knew it would come out of someone else’s pocket so he didn’t have to bother!
Entitled individual indeed. it’s the same with the royals isn’t it ?"
It is
The class system has held back many skilled intelligent people in this country.
Boris had a velvet roped path to power along with dozens of others.
The top echelons of the civil service are mostly populated by the elite schools not on ability always but on the old boy public school network.
As long as you all know your place that’s just fine.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ebbie69Couple
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"So Mr Johnson contracted a company to perform £100,000 of work on his place of residence, without having the means of paying and apparently not even caring that he had no means of paying. I'm no lawyer so not certain what the technical name for this offence would be, but possibly "intent to defraud"? I'm pretty sure that if I did this I would end up being charged with some kind of criminal offence.
That the bill was then paid firstly by the public purse (presumably to avoid the contracter passing the matter to the police) and later re-paid to the public purse by the conservative party does not excuse the original crime.. Any contractor not paid would simply issue a county court summons . The police would have no interest in whether or not a contractor was paid , their role is to fight crime , not act as debt collectors . It is up to a contractor to assess the credit worthiness of their client . Any contractor undertaken work for Boris Johnson is guaranteed to be paid - he is constantly in the spotlight
I think the poster has a point. If Boris knew for definite he couldn’t pay and had no actual plan to pay that is fraud. Contractor was safe as court would be the last place Boris wanted to go.
Why does a government bail out an individual in such circumstances?
I know someone would end up paying but how disgusting is it that Boris knew it would come out of someone else’s pocket so he didn’t have to bother!
Entitled individual indeed. it’s the same with the royals isn’t it ?
It is
The class system has held back many skilled intelligent people in this country.
Boris had a velvet roped path to power along with dozens of others.
The top echelons of the civil service are mostly populated by the elite schools not on ability always but on the old boy public school network.
As long as you all know your place that’s just fine.
"
I seem to recall (before covid) Cummings complaining about the same thing and trying to address the problem. Guess that's unlikely to change now |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
