0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
What Johnson thinks about Hancock is beside the point, and utterly immaterial.So too is whether you think Cummings is trustworthy.The issue is whether Johnson and Hancock have breached ministerial rules, and sought to mislead the HoC and the public with deliberate misinformation.Cummings is showing that at key stages in the decision making process, Johnson and Hancock misled their own colleagues, and in doing so promoted policy choices which cost lives.They placed management of their image above the public interest.This is unforgivable, and potentially could lead to criminal action at a later date.Anyone who cannot see the importance of this from senior elected government personnel should give some consideration to the implications of allowing it to go unchecked.
Belton. If you don't see the answer, I'm not sure what more I can do short of being condescending.And my apologies if "yet another unnecessarily long winded post" was meant as a compliment and I misread you. I know you really don't like it when people pollute the atmosphere by chucking out insults so perhaps I was wrong.
Hound.It's irrelevant what the PM thinks about his Health Secretary as a person. It's absolutely relevant what he thinks about his competence as a Health Secretary.
A hopeless man talking about a hopeless man who accused another hopeless man of being hopeless. Desperate politics.
Whatever next? My dads bigger than your dad?
Quote from: albie on June 17, 2021, 06:16:07 pmShort summary here of some of the points raised by Cummings;https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/all-the-key-claims-and-evidence-from-dominic-cummings-bombshell-blogIt might help some, who are posting here without having read the Cummings blog.Not that reading Cummings is easy, but posting a reply to something you have not read is a sign of potential issues for the poster. at the minute he has not backed much of what he has said up, a couple of texts calling Hancock names, he really needs to provide proper evidence that he has been asked for to be taken seriously
Short summary here of some of the points raised by Cummings;https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/all-the-key-claims-and-evidence-from-dominic-cummings-bombshell-blogIt might help some, who are posting here without having read the Cummings blog.Not that reading Cummings is easy, but posting a reply to something you have not read is a sign of potential issues for the poster.
Hound.We are discussing decisions that have led to tens of thousands of avoidable deaths.What political issues would you think really ARE worthy of discussion if this isn't?
No Hound. It meant I know which one is important and which one is superfluous fluff.I would have explained that, but yer man Belton would have said that was being unnecessarily long winded, when a curt answer will do.
At the end of the day we have a Prime Minister who lies about anything on a regular basis and a minister not fit for purpose.However many to and fro spats, that is the bottom line.Trading insults and scoring points doesn't alter that.