No 10 rule breaking gatherings during 2020.

[bramling]

The latest restrictions are not being enforced so if you don't like them, which i don't, you just ignore them.

I’m doing that, I’ve already clocked up a couple of hundred miles worth of mask-free rail travel since Monday.

The trouble is this in itself isn’t enough. There was a post somewhere on here a couple of days ago which laid things out pretty well - it isn’t just masks which is the fall-out from Saturday, but uncertainty. Will the proposed interest-rate rise to ahead? What effect will this have on businesses planning ahead? Could this fuel yet more inflation?

As you imply, mask mandates can be ignored (and what I’ve seen over the last two days is encouraging on that), the stuff that goes with it can’t.

Do you have a list of which laws you believe in and which you willfully ignore?

I'm looking for a new DVD and TV, perhaps I could pop round and nick yours seeing as you're so free and easy about obeying the law.

And this is the problem when we have a government which brings in laws which don’t have the respect of the population. Lots of people *are* choosing to disregard the mask law - at best people are continuing to follow Johnson previous line of “wear a mask if it’s crowded if you feel you want to”. And plenty of the unmasked people I’ve seen don’t appear to be the stereotypical types one might expect.

Combined with the scenes we saw of police beating people up on Clapham Common, this hardly bodes well.

 

[43066]

Do you have a list of which laws you believe in and which you willfully ignore?

I'm looking for a new DVD and TV, perhaps I could pop round and nick yours seeing as you're so free and easy about obeying the law.

What an absolutely ludicrous comparison. Wearing masks on trains is hardly the same as burgling someone’s house.

Do you think all laws should be blindly followed, irrespective of their content and efficacy?

 

[Baxenden Bank]

What an absolutely ludicrous comparison. Wearing masks on trains is hardly the same as burgling someone’s house.

Do you think all laws should be blindly followed, irrespective of their content and efficacy?

The law of the land is just that. No one is above the law. If you believe a law is wrong / unjust / stupid or whatever then you can campaign against it. If there are enough like minded people then the law will get changed. If you hold a minority opinion on that law, you'll have to accept it, or accept the consequences for ignoring it.

Society survives by people generally obeying the law with the ones that fail to do so being punished in some way. Failure to punish, or a failure to be seen to be enforcing the law fairly, erodes confidence in the law and therefore the bonds that hold society together.

The alternative to rule of law is some kind of selfish anarchy where everyone does whatever they like. Generally you would then end up with a collection of groups / tribes / clans who would devise their own laws enforced by themselves.

 

[43066]

The law of the land is just that. No one is above the law. If you believe a law is wrong / unjust / stupid or whatever then you can campaign against it. If there are enough like minded people then the law will get changed. If you hold a minority opinion on that law, you'll have to accept it, or accept the consequences for ignoring it.

To be fair I have a lot of sympathy with that view (but not with the burglary comparison I’m afraid ). However surely there’s also a good argument for principled “civil disobedience” in the case of laws which are manifestly stupid and unjust - as I would argue mask mandations on public transport are given the continuing lack of evidence they achieve anything of value.

The fact of the matter is also that this law is completely unenforceable in practical terms, because exemption (under the “severe distress” head) is effectively a completely subjective matter: if someone claims this exemption falsely that fact is unknown and unknowable to any enforcement officers. Therefore anyone wishing to simply ignore it is in practical terms completely free to do so.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

To be fair I have a lot of sympathy with that view (but not with the burglary comparison I’m afraid ). However surely there’s also a good argument for principled “civil disobedience” in the case of laws which are manifestly stupid and unjust - as I would argue mask mandations on public transport are given the continuing lack of evidence they achieve anything of value.

The fact of the matter is also that this law is completely unenforceable in practical terms, because exemption (under the “severe distress” head) is effectively a completely subjective matter: if someone claims this exemption falsely that fact is unknown and unknowable to any enforcement officers. Therefore anyone wishing to simply ignore it is in practical terms completely free to do so.

In answer to the comparison, simply insert another of your choice - I don't have to buy a ticket for my train journey because xyz, I can play my music loud all night because xyz. The purpose of the comparison was to try and get people to make the link between breaking the law themselves (when it suits) whilst also expecting to have the law upheld (when it suits). You can't have it both ways.

If the government wants people to respect it's utterances, and the laws it passes (via Parliament & HM the Queen), it needs to follow that law itself, preferably holding itself to a higher standard, rather than relying on loopholes such as 'Westminster / Whitehall technically aren't covered by the no party regulations' unless Westminster City Council specifically says so, or the Dominic Cummings wriggling around definitions. I say set an example for others to follow, preferably a good example rather than a poor one! If Boris doesn't need to wear a mask in hospital, why should I. If Boris and/or his staff can have a crimbo party, why can't I.

I would agree with your comment about mask mandates and the lack of evidence, especially around quiet shops if not crowded trains - but this is not a mask debate! Equally I would agree it is quite easy to circumvent that law by simply saying 'I am exempt' thus the law has not been broken. If the law required people to prove their exemption I would expect individuals to do so.

There most certainly is a case for civil disobedience, but that is not necessarily breaking the law. There are arguments for seemingly breaking one law to prevent a greater one being broken - activists smashed jets at British Aerospace to prevent them subsequently being used illegely against civilians. But as a non-lawyer I wouldn't wish to delve into the technicalities.

 

[stevetay3]

The law of the land is just that. No one is above the law. If you believe a law is wrong / unjust / stupid or whatever then you can campaign against it. If there are enough like minded people then the law will get changed. If you hold a minority opinion on that law, you'll have to accept it, or accept the consequences for ignoring it.

Society survives by people generally obeying the law with the ones that fail to do so being punished in some way. Failure to punish, or a failure to be seen to be enforcing the law fairly, erodes confidence in the law and therefore the bonds that hold society together.

The alternative to rule of law is some kind of selfish anarchy where everyone does whatever they like. Generally you would then end up with a collection of groups / tribes / clans who would devise their own laws enforced by themselves

To be fair I have a lot of sympathy with that view (but not with the burglary comparison I’m afraid ). However surely there’s also a good argument for principled “civil disobedience” in the case of laws which are manifestly stupid and unjust - as I would argue mask mandations on public transport are given the continuing lack of evidence they achieve anything of value.

The fact of the matter is also that this law is completely unenforceable in practical terms, because exemption (under the “severe distress” head) is effectively a completely subjective matter: if someone claims this exemption falsely that fact is unknown and unknowable to any enforcement officers. Therefore anyone wishing to simply ignore it is in practical terms completely free to do so.

The Torys think they are above the laws they make themselves Masks are useless anyway Boris thinks so, people that disagree can feel free to ware them if they want but is should not be mandated to those that do not

 

[brad465]

The Conservative Staff Christmas party this year is going ahead, with Oliver Dowden stating this on the news:

Christmas parties: Conservative staff event going ahead, says chairman

But government ministers are accused of giving mixed messages on events over the festive period.

www.bbc.co.uk

The Conservative Party chairman says he has no plans to cancel a staff Christmas party over concerns about the latest Covid variant.
Oliver Dowden said the planned festivities were in line with rules, and he would "urge people to keep calm and carry on with their plans".
On Thursday, Labour's deputy leader Angela Rayner said their MPs had called off a Christmas gathering.
But she said Labour was not urging the public to cancel their events.
Downing Street has said there will continue to be festive events this month, but would not specify whether or not that would include a No 10 staff party.
Asked whether one would take place, Boris Johnson's deputy spokesman said they wouldn't set out details of private functions in No 10.
It follows controversy over No 10 staff breaking Covid rules with a party last December at the height of restrictions.

Some health experts have questioned the safety of large gatherings this year since the emergence of the new Omicron variant of Covid earlier this month.

 

[westv]

I don't care if there was or wasn't a Christmas party at No. 10 12 months ago.
I don't care if there's a Conservative Christmas party this year.
The media loves to get hold of pointless "news" like a dog with a bone.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I don't care if there was or wasn't a Christmas party at No. 10 12 months ago.
I don't care if there's a Conservative Christmas party this year.
The media loves to get hold of pointless "news" like a dog with a bone.

Of all the things they have done this doesn't even register on my frustration with them! Agree completely.

 

[kristiang85]

I don't care if there was or wasn't a Christmas party at No. 10 12 months ago.
I don't care if there's a Conservative Christmas party this year.
The media loves to get hold of pointless "news" like a dog with a bone.

The main irritation is that I remember how miserable last Christmas was, and thinking that was due to a government diktat which they seemed to ignore themselves is pretty frustrating. Same with the maskless, hug-fest of a G7 meet earlier this year, whilst I was having sleepless night wondering what kind of wedding I was needing to plan.

This year we are allowed to have gatherings, so I couldn't care less what the Conservatives do - they can have the wildest jamboree ever for all I care. As for Labour, if they want to virtue signal by cancelling theirs, then that is their problem. Personally I will be making sure not a single booking or arrangement I've made is cancelled, and will be visiting all my favourite pubs this month.

 

[Yew]

I don't care if there was or wasn't a Christmas party at No. 10 12 months ago.
I don't care if there's a Conservative Christmas party this year.
The media loves to get hold of pointless "news" like a dog with a bone.

Indeed, this trivia is irrelevant for most people, what I really care about is the evidence base for restrictions, and if there are any concrete indicators that this new variant is actually bad.

 

[yorksrob]

Prsonally I will be making sure not a single booking or arrangement I've made is cancelled, and will be visiting all my favourite pubs this month.

Here here, me too.

 

[bramling]

To be fair I have a lot of sympathy with that view (but not with the burglary comparison I’m afraid ). However surely there’s also a good argument for principled “civil disobedience” in the case of laws which are manifestly stupid and unjust - as I would argue mask mandations on public transport are given the continuing lack of evidence they achieve anything of value.

The fact of the matter is also that this law is completely unenforceable in practical terms, because exemption (under the “severe distress” head) is effectively a completely subjective matter: if someone claims this exemption falsely that fact is unknown and unknowable to any enforcement officers. Therefore anyone wishing to simply ignore it is in practical terms completely free to do so.

And, although apparently untested in court, the "severe distress" is subjective, therefore someone claiming that would not appear to be breaking the law. Likewise making a bottle of water last the duration of a journey, though that one includes the word "reasonable" which could be open to challenge.

 

[Andyh82]

It’s still a bit suspicious to me why this has come out now, surely the press can’t have sat on it for a year, if things had gone differently with Covid it might not have still been relevant.

 

[yorksrob]

I'm sure all good journalists sit on stories until such a time as they're expected to have a greater impact. It seems pretty sensible to me !

As for these stories - highly hypocritical if true and Boris will no doubt face the political consequences - but a great thing as they undermine lockdown, restrictions etc.

 

[johnnychips]

Well, in a northern urban area, people’s attitude is - sigh - ‘well what do you expect’ then carry on wearing masks or not wearing masks without becoming angry at each other. I don’t know if this tolerance is a good or bad thing.

 

[bramling]

I'm sure all good journalists sit on stories until such a time as they're expected to have a greater impact. It seems pretty sensible to me !

As for these stories - highly hypocritical if true and Boris will no doubt face the political consequences - but a great thing as they undermine lockdown, restrictions etc.

Yes to be honest anything which discredits Boris is no bad thing. It isn’t wonderful from the media, but if it works let them do it. If it persuades a few people to think “stuff it I’m not wearing a mask in Tesco’s” then good.

I certainly have a few friends who have come to that conclusion now, people who wouldn’t normally be the types to stick their fingers up. Any straw which breaks the camel’a back good as far as I’m concerned.

 

[stevetay3]

Of all the things they have done this doesn't even register on my frustration with them! Agree completely.

People were passing away while this law breaking event took place

 

[farleigh]

People were passing away while this law breaking event took place

People pass away all the time. Don't really begrudge them a knees up.

 

[stevetay3]

It’s still a bit suspicious to me why this has come out now, surely the press can’t have sat on it for a year, if things had gone differently with Covid it might not have still been relevant.

It’s come out now because of the by-election and the electors have made it quite clear what they think about this shameful rabble.

 

[farleigh]

It’s come out now because of the by-election and the electors have made it quite clear what they think about this shameful rabble.

Voted them back in

 

[stevetay3]

People pass away all the time. Don't really begrudge them a knees up.

They do but it’s not reported like covid on the media , covid accounts for 8% of total deaths ons.gov.uk

 

[farleigh]

They do but it’s not reported like covid on the media , covid accounts for 8% of total deaths ons.gov.uk

Yes I agree. The media have loved hyping Covid up. Irresponsible IMO

 

[stevetay3]

Voted them back in

Yeah they were never going to loose here but 10% swing from Tory’s tells us something let’s wait for more marginal by-elections and see what happens, remember Amersham & Chesham ?

 

[Cambus731]

It's reading this fascinating thread that makes me realise how atypical my boarding school was compared to most.

 

[farleigh]

Yeah they were never going to loose here but 10% swing from Tory’s tells us something let’s wait for more marginal by-elections and see what happens, remember Amersham & Chesham ?

Mid term in the middle of numerous failures and scandals?

i think if the opposition can't do it now they never will..

 

[Eyersey468]

I can't say it surprises me, just yet another act of hypocrisy from this government.

 

[yorksrob]

Yes to be honest anything which discredits Boris is no bad thing. It isn’t wonderful from the media, but if it works let them do it. If it persuades a few people to think “stuff it I’m not wearing a mask in Tesco’s” then good.

I certainly have a few friends who have come to that conclusion now, people who wouldn’t normally be the types to stick their fingers up. Any straw which breaks the camel’a back good as far as I’m concerned.

I have a feeling that Boris will be visited by the men in grey suits soon. But who will replace him I haven't a clue.

 

[bramling]

I have a feeling that Boris will be visited by the men in grey suits soon. But who will replace him I haven't a clue.

That's the problem, it's wall-to-wall rubbish on both sides. This is largely the reason we ended up with Johnson in the first place.

Yesterday's by-election did drop one bombshell, albeit quietly. That is, had the same swing occurred in Uxbridge, a certain Alexander Johnson MP would have lost his seat. *He* may think "that wouldn't happen to me", but you can bet others will not be considering the possibility. If this same swing gets replicated in other by-elections then he is finished.

Were I Starmer, I'd be throwing the kitchen sink at Uxbridge.

 

[yorksrob]

That's the problem, it's wall-to-wall rubbish on both sides. This is largely the reason we ended up with Johnson in the first place.

Well yes, they didn't really have any alternatives. Theresa was the most prime ministerial of them, and Brexit did for her.