|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Jul 3, 2023 22:53:46 GMT
...and just like that, conservatives care about rules again.
So long as it isn't Boris unlawfully proroguing parliament or having parties during lockdown.
|
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Jul 3, 2023 23:05:46 GMT
How come a terrible stench can be smelt here in Devon when you post on this forum wonky? And no it has nothing to do with Torbay on turd... How can the cabinet office 'investigation' find Sue Gray 'guilty' if she did not cooperate with them? . They took their lead from the Harriet Harperson book on finding people guilty without any due process. The irony obviously escapes you. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Jul 4, 2023 4:51:25 GMT
...and just like that, conservatives care about rules again. So long as it isn't Boris unlawfully proroguing parliament or having parties during lockdown. And just like that, lefties are blind to their own double-standards? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2023 6:05:35 GMT
Her reputation precedes her. Crack on then stand up for a piece of crap, it says more than you will ever know. So that's a no then all you have is what you are told by the Tories. The cabinet office investigation was not an official investigation. Gray cooperated with the official investigation. ACOBA said she is clear to work with Starmer. The Tories need something, anything to besmirch Labour and while they have fools believing them they will keep trying. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2023 6:07:24 GMT
How can the cabinet office 'investigation' find Sue Gray 'guilty' if she did not cooperate with them? Happens every day in courts up and down the land.. It was not a court proceeding. In court the 'accused' is allowed to speak. Gray cooperated with the official investigation. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2023 6:08:02 GMT
How can the cabinet office 'investigation' find Sue Gray 'guilty'... Probably because she didn't cooperate with them, Wonky. She did not have to it was not official. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2023 6:09:58 GMT
How can the cabinet office 'investigation' find Sue Gray 'guilty' if she did not cooperate with them? . They took their lead from the Harriet Harperson book on finding people guilty without any due process. The irony obviously escapes you. Harmon was cleared by Parliament to carry on the inquiry, there is no irony. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jul 4, 2023 6:46:21 GMT
Happens every day in courts up and down the land.. It was not a court proceeding. In court the 'accused' is allowed to speak. Gray cooperated with the official investigation. She was allowed to speak - she chose not to. Happens every day in courts up and down the land. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2023 6:58:38 GMT
It was not a court proceeding. In court the 'accused' is allowed to speak. Gray cooperated with the official investigation. She was allowed to speak - she chose not to. Happens every day in courts up and down the land. She did speak to the proper authority. Why did we need to bodies to investigate the situation? Do the cabinet office always carry out their own investigation when a civil servant leaves? Why did ACOBA clear her to work for Starmer? Why did the cabinet office emphasise 'prima facie' in their findings? Given the Cabinet Office is a department of the UK Government responsible for supporting the prime minister and Cabinet, is that not a biased faction? Gray followed official procedures, if she had not she would not have been cleared to take up her new position. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Jul 4, 2023 7:05:39 GMT
They took their lead from the Harriet Harperson book on finding people guilty without any due process. The irony obviously escapes you. Harmon was cleared by Parliament to carry on the inquiry, there is no irony. You’d have made an excellent character in Orwell’s 1984 |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jul 4, 2023 7:12:34 GMT
She was allowed to speak - she chose not to. Happens every day in courts up and down the land. She did speak to the proper authority. Why did we need to bodies to investigate the situation? Do the cabinet office always carry out their own investigation when a civil servant leaves? Why did ACOBA clear her to work for Starmer? Why did the cabinet office emphasise 'prima facie' in their findings? Given the Cabinet Office is a department of the UK Government responsible for supporting the prime minister and Cabinet, is that not a biased faction? Gray followed official procedures, if she had not she would not have been cleared to take up her new position. She broke the Civil Service code by failing to disclose her contacts with the Labour Party - the only difference of opinion with ACOBA was the length of time she has to wait before joining the Labour Party. The government wanted 12 months - ACOBA decided on 6. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Jul 4, 2023 7:24:26 GMT
Gray cooperated with the official investigation. ...She did not have to it was not official. Bloody hell, Wonky - make your mind up.🤣 |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2023 7:27:23 GMT
Gray cooperated with the official investigation. ...She did not have to it was not official. Bloody hell, Wonky - make your mind up.🤣 Bloody hell *** *** There were 2 investigations. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2023 7:28:39 GMT
She did speak to the proper authority. Why did we need to bodies to investigate the situation? Do the cabinet office always carry out their own investigation when a civil servant leaves? Why did ACOBA clear her to work for Starmer? Why did the cabinet office emphasise 'prima facie' in their findings? Given the Cabinet Office is a department of the UK Government responsible for supporting the prime minister and Cabinet, is that not a biased faction? Gray followed official procedures, if she had not she would not have been cleared to take up her new position. She broke the Civil Service code by failing to disclose her contacts with the Labour Party - the only difference of opinion with ACOBA was the length of time she has to wait before joining the Labour Party. The government wanted 12 months - ACOBA decided on 6. She disclosed them to the relevant authorities, not the irrelevant ones. Did you answer any of the questions? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2023 7:29:11 GMT
She broke the Civil Service code by failing to disclose her contacts with the Labour Party - the only difference of opinion with ACOBA was the length of time she has to wait before joining the Labour Party. The government wanted 12 months - ACOBA decided on 6. She disclosed them to the relevant authorities, not the irrelevant ones. 6 months is normal. Did you answer any of the questions? |
|
