UK Prime Minister can't tell the difference between a party and a work meeting | Hacker News Reader

UK Prime Minister can't tell the difference between a party and a work meeting

theguardian.com

33 pointsfeurio46 comments

Astonishing. At that time I travelled into central London on Saturday to do a bit of food shopping (mainly to enjoy the strange emptiness of the never-empty city). When done, I'd sit on a bench in Soho square to drink a can of pop. There was always a group of police rotating the park asking (ever so politely) people to move on, as sitting on benches was not permitted. If you chose your bench wisely, it would take them about 20 minutes to get around to you.

Clearly I would have been better off with 8 cans of Special Brew in the No 10 garden.

A friend of mine lives in a block of apartments and, during first lockdown, there was a disturbance in one of the flats below. It turned out the single resident had her family staying over at the weekend (2 adults and 3 kids) and they had travelled 250 miles to be there.

When we complained about the noise we were threatened with violence and told in no uncertain terms where to go. This was reported to the police and they did nothing.

Let's not pretend that we were living in a Police state at the the time. Yes, I would expect better from the PM and his ministers but the rules were barely enforced anywhere, save your can of pop example and few other isolated cases.

Well don't be a narc then.

But as one of the poster said one has to compare like with like. Covered the whole uk is hard. But it seems they are good in policing the park. But not the garden of pm. Anyway he is way down in popularity. It is not because of a party (unless it is criminal office which has to wait for … no multi-dept cross enquiry I hope) … more at play in politics.

I lived next to Hyde Park at the time. On numerous occasions whilst doing my daily run, I witnessed excessive policing. For instance, a group of 4 police officers moving on a student who was on her own sat on the grass studying, 15m away from anyone else in every direction. Two police officers moving along two grannies who'd just sat down at opposite ends of a bench, and clearly needing a rest. Mounted police and police in cars were everywhere in Hyde Park harassing anyone who dared sit down, so I can only assume they were all so busy in the park that they didn't have time left over to pop round to Downing Street to check on things there.

And yet it's really interesting that at the time the rules the government were saying we had to follow, weren't actually law. The official TV daily briefings said repeatedly that we could only have an hour outside for exercise, and only once per day, something that was simply a lie. The law stated only that one of the reasons for being outside was for exercise, and gave no time or frequency restrictions (except for in Wales, but the government advice in the briefings made out this was for the whole of the UK). They made the laws, they could have had any restrictions they wanted in them, but to pass one set of laws and then to misrepresent them to the public by imposing additional restrictions is pretty egregious, especially as it transpires that they weren't even following the rules or law themselves.

I don't think the police knew how to enforce the rules... so there was a lot of inconsistency.

> a group of police

This is the same Met police who dismissed the December Downing Street party investigation with a statement of “not enough evidence” despite many eyewitnesses including the met police officers who would have been on duty on-site at the time checking and recording who was going in & out.

But remember: we're all in it together, eh?

I think what is more fascinating is that high-ranking politicians have always sought ways to circumvent the rules, in order to get ahead, securing themselves exorbitant personal fortunes, even in times of financial crisis, and often at the immediate or delayed expense of the taxpayer (if not simply evading taxes).

And this phenomenon is not new. It has most probably been going on as long as the concept of money has been around, or even the concept of trade and personal-private wealth, be it tribal chieftains/shamans, monarchs and satellite nobles, land-owners/feudal leaders, warlords/military commanders, right the way up to contemporary politicians.

and yet, what the people get up in arms about is the garden party? How many of the UK's politicians have bizarre private companies and "offshore" bank accounts? How many of them paved the way for absurd legislation and policy decisions that serve only the top 1%?

How many of them let their actions be determined by lobbying and veiled bribery rather than any personal convictions or, heaven forfend, the views of the electorate?

People are getting upset about this, even though a non-trivial portion of the same people broke the law at the same time to see family and party? The people should pay attention to what else is going on.

Of course, the people mostly pay attention to whatever is put on the stage and given the spotlight. And that is determined not by an obligation to pursue and broadcast the truth, but rather by whatever can sell newspapers and online news subscriptions, and whatever can capture people's gaze on the television screen and online ad real estate -- but, critically, without shaking the foundations of the status quo.

It's all just a theatrical presentation. Politics and its coverage in the media is little more than a reality TV show.

None of it deserves your time of day.

> People are getting upset about this, even though a non-trivial portion of the same people broke the law at the same time to see family and party?

That's a may be, but they aren't Prime Minister and they haven't lied to the Commons and the entire British people about it.

Fair point.

Can you show me a Prime Minister who hasn't lied to the Commons and the British populace about something?

Sorry, that's unfair.

Can you show me a [governing body/individual] who hasn't lied to the [country]'s populace about something?

My point is only that people should be pretty pissed off about a host of other lies and fuck ups by this government and every government prior, but they're not.

Why aren't they? Well, because when governments screw up, the world keeps ticking over. Somebody embezzles a few million here, does some insider trading there, covers for some sex offenders elsewhere, etc.

But none of this messes with a person's daily routine. Their world keeps going, the company they work for still exists and if not, they'll just work somewhere else.

And it's obviously a lot more effort to dethrone the bloated corpses of our entrenched governments, and even more effort to replace it with something that is better.

Especially when, to the best of our knowledge, there isn't a better alternative to liberal democracy, but it comes with the small print that corruption is pretty much a part of it.

No one wants to rock the boat. The boat's got some leaks, we have to empty the water out every now and then, sometimes she runs aground due to some fairly terrible decision making by the captains, but it's the only boat where people can live in relative peace that's proven seaworthy so far.

> I think what is more fascinating is that high-ranking politicians ...

Expand that to anyone in a leading position, including tennis players.

You don't get to be at the top without bending the rules.

It’s a trope in British politics that the real division is not between left and right but between roundhead and cavalier. It’s a useful way to think about things. The British tend to prefer a bit of the cavalier in their Prime Ministers. The cavaliers do well until they forget that the British also expect at least a roundheadish front when the times call for it.

Like Charles I though, Johnson believes in the divine right of toffs and seems likely to end up with his Government decapitated.

The British political circus's priorities doesnt reflect the priorities of British people.

In most cases the fought over symbols (like this party) are reflective of the less well publicized power struggles and under the surface lobbying.

It might be good to ask at an interview. "Will I be able to tell a work meeting from a party". If the answer is no, life could be interesting.

For the none Brits on here, we are nearing the end of Boris Johnsons farcical term as PM. It could be just a matter of days until he is gone, and god know what then happens as there is no one obvious to take over - even on an interim basis. Most people I have spoken too would like there to be an early general election, even if they want another Conservative government, because we need to clear house and start afresh.

Honestly having The Guardian posted is the same as The Daily Mail, just the leftist version.

A better comparison might be between the Guardian and the Telegraph. The Daily Mail has a certain reputation...

In any case, pretty much all the papers have lambasted Johnson on this. When the Tory press turn on a Tory PM, it's a good sign that their days are numbered...

Title should be "Boris Johnson admits attending Downing Street party during lockdown"

Politicians here in California and the US are no different. The rules they advocate, mandate and prescribe to the masses do not apply to them.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/heatherknight/article/S-...

https://abc7news.com/london-breed-french-laundry-san-francis...

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-12-03/skelton-...

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/18/opinions/california-gover...

https://www.brproud.com/news/former-president-obama-celebrat...

I can't read all of those because of stupid geo restrictions, but it looks like most of those were "advice" rather than law.

This was most certainly against the actual law that the PM himself brought in.

This is one of the stupidest scandals I’ve ever seen. It makes Labour look very bad and deluded. They think the PM is going to resign because he stepped outside to the Downing St back garden for a short break and a glass of wine on a sunny day?

Hall Monitor mentality in full effect.

Couldn't agree more. The stupid thing really is that he didn't just fess-up at the outset and it would all be forgotten about by now.

If we'd "fessed up at the outset" we'd be fined.

Yes, like everyone else that broke the rules. You clearly don't live in the UK.

Not everyone did and anyone caught would pay a fine.

I live in London. Lots of people did get fined. I remember someone local back when I lived in Palace that got fined for loitering at a train station for a bit.

Why should joe public be fined for breaking the rules, and not the political elites for breaking the same rules?

Here you go, £12,000 fine for a party.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/prince-philip-downing-...

It is not the crime in politics and PR that most matter in many occasions. We are human and we make mistakes. Apology and if fined pay; after times the public has more important fish to fry to care a drink or two. Yes, it is very bad for those lose their love one etc and they may be still around. But the general public? Down to 70+% reported last night want him to go. I wonder.

Politics is about public sentiment a lot.

It's the double standard. People were being demanded to make great personal sacrifice on the orders of the government either being fined up to thousands for doing what they were doing or not being able to physically say goodbye to their loved ones, whilst No. 10 was flaunting the rules without consequence.

Why exactly should we follow rules when those that set them do not?

I think you are missing the sentiment of the general public. A poll yesterday suggested two thirds of Brits would like him to resign [0] and another 56% [1], the public have had enough of him.

Just wait for the polling from today after his statement to parliament, I suspect it will be even worse for him.

Quite right though, he won't resign on his own accord, he will stay until he is pushed. But there is a very strong chance that is going to happen soon.

0: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson...

1: https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1480931525235462145

I'm not defending Boris here, but polls are never accurate and hardly ever correct when compared to actual elections. If polls were a real reflection of how the public are thinking why would we ever bother for a full-blown election?

The best thing to do with polling is to ignore them.

Without wanting to argue on the object level whether he was right or wrong, I don't think Labour is tone-deaf here. 42% of his own voters want him gone: https://twitter.com/SavantaComRes/status/1480922753867911179

These sorts of polls don’t mean much when he has a massive majority and years to run in his term.

He's being seen as an electoral liability by his own back benchers, who'd like to keep their job at the next election.

They provided cover for him on several occasions and then he u turned and made them look really bad to their constituents.

This specific issue is also causing a lot of public anger. It certainly isn't the worst thing he's done by a long mile. It's just becoming the straw that broke the camel's back.

That's not the point. The point is that this was an organised event at a time when such an event was illegal.

For public confidence in the system during extraordinary times, it is important that the people in charge lead by example. This clearly has not happened. It looks really bad when people can't visit their dying relatives in hospital, or have more than 15 people at a funeral, yet there are parties going on at the Prime Minister's office (and home).

He won't resign. Far more likely is that his own party will organise a vote of no-confidence in his leadership of the party. That will probably happen because many of his colleagues are worried about holding their seats at the next election, and are now seeing him as an electoral liability. To try to save themselves they will ditch him.

I think it’s more about the series of deceptions as this has come out.

It's Boris AND the 100 or so alleged Tories attending.

Bring your own booze and attending a gathering any other way would have resulted in fines and in some cases people going to court.

Its fine to say your bias because you vote Tory. I'll understand.

30 people who were working in the Downing St buildings stepped out to the garden to talk to colleagues. It’s not a big deal. Indeed they would be safer outside than inside. Safer than the NHS nurses posting dance videos on TikTok from their ward. We’re not talking about an illegal rave in a Whitehall basement here.

So much of not a big deal that Douglas Ross (leader of the Scottish Conservatives), as wel as numerous other Tory MPs said that the PM would need to resign if it turned out that he attended.

Why is it that you enjoy being lied to?

I just don’t care about things which are of no consequence, rather than frothing with rage about possible minor breaches of protocol. Try it.

More fool you. It's not even the crime, it's the lying. You trust liars.

I think we deserve these types of leaders as they are a reflection of us and society.

You wouldn't mind being decieted or lied to nor would you mind doing the same it would seem if you were in the same position.

It all boils down to whether people want a PM that is a pathological liar, or one that doesn't even know if he's in a work meeting or a party.

It’s pretty normal for workplaces to have meetings where the main purpose is just some kind of team bonding or socialising between colleagues.

I'm not saying it's not normal, I'm saying it was illegal at the time.

Yeeees, PM lies and obfuscates, and lies some more and tells half-truths and hides behind an investigation to find out what HE was was doing (rather than just simply say if he went or not).

But it's Labour that looks bad .... right-so.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com