-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)
- Thread starter SpurMeUp
- Start date
Whatever your views you have to admit Andre Neil is a really good journalist, dismantled Tories, Lib Dems and Labour all in the space of 45 minutes on QT yesterday. Seemed to be the only person who'd properly prepared as well. He has a great way of getting his points across and questioning others.
Gilzeantoscore
Justin Edinburgh
Who is the minister for funny walks?
monkeybarry
Jack Jull
I bet it's actually in complete compliance with their records retention policy. And rightly so to be fair.
It's highly likely only meeting minutes have an extended RRP.
Mikey10
Jimmy Neighbour
Everyone else’s (bar Sunak’s - what an amazing coincidence) were retained. All of Johnson’s from the period post the inquiry being called also still exist.
He was obviously just really unlucky that his disappeared for the period most likely to land him with criminal charges.
Glenda's Legs
Paul Walsh
I find it amazing that use of WhatsApp is permitted within government.
In my company it's not allowed at all, other than for simple messages such as "running late for our meeting" or similar.
However, even if Johnson had "inadvertently" wiped his phone, the messages must still be obtainable via those with whom he was corresponding? Which in the context of the covid enquiry could be ringfenced to, give or take, half a dozen key people. Mind you, Rishi seems to have suffered from the same technical issues, so maybe factory resets are more common than you might think.
Imagine how damaging those messages must be.
In my company it's not allowed at all, other than for simple messages such as "running late for our meeting" or similar.
However, even if Johnson had "inadvertently" wiped his phone, the messages must still be obtainable via those with whom he was corresponding? Which in the context of the covid enquiry could be ringfenced to, give or take, half a dozen key people. Mind you, Rishi seems to have suffered from the same technical issues, so maybe factory resets are more common than you might think.
Imagine how damaging those messages must be.
monkeybarry
Jack Jull
I'm not doubting it's almost certainly shady as hell. But it's highly unlikely to be against policy, probably quite the opposite. (Spoken as a data protection specialist in the civil service).
And, unless there is good ground to suspect a crime (sadly being a narcissist isn't a crime, nor is being a liar, nor is being brick at your job), there is nothing for the police to look at.
There might be scope for misconduct in public office after the enquiry, but the bar for that is quite high and unlikely to be reached. Some level of negligence resulting in deaths might come out, although again it's unlikely to produce the evidence base to meet the test for manslaughter.
Robspur12
Nick Barmby
Aren't most data retention periods for public bodies 6 years? They certainly have been in the councils I have worked in?
monkeybarry
Jack Jull
Depends on what the data is, the legal basis for processing and the justification to retain it. There is no blanket position. Policies are set based on a reasonableness balanced against business need, public need and excessive holding of personal data.
There are certain areas that are set in law and certain in best practice.
Mikey10
Jimmy Neighbour
I work in a school. Our records have to be retained for 6 years. Seems incredible that government records wouldn’t be kept for at least that long - and surely should be for a lot longer.
Baleforce
Arthur Rowe
That’s the records in your approved and provisioned systems though.
If you start passing notes in the corridor who can enforce the retention policy.
They are using WhatsApp because it’s not managed.
Mikey10
Jimmy Neighbour
All of the messages were sent and received on government issued phones, which changes the nature of the material when it comes to retaining it.
It is as clear as it can be that the messages were deliberately deleted. Only two people’s messages have ‘disappeared’ (Johnson’s and Sunak’s) from government phones; and the 10,000 or so messages which have ‘disappeared’ are from the period that the inquiry is most interested in. Makes you wonder just what was in them. Hard to get away from the conclusion that they must have contained potentially incriminating material.
Baleforce
Arthur Rowe
Oh I agree it was wilful destruction, likely to cover up some kind of crime.
I expect personal phones and WhatsApp accounts were in use too though.
K.D.D.D.D.Soc
Ian Walker
Who on earth advised Michelle Mone to go on TV and put her side of the story? It was a PR nightmare. People in her position just can't see anything they do is wrong, they do not expect the rules to apply to them and their mates.
Glenda's Legs
Paul Walsh
Yes. Not quite in the same car-crash-interview league as the Prince Andrew one but even with a soft interviewer like Kuenssberg it was as you say a PR disaster and whatever they wanted to achieve, it failed
Interesting to see if anything comes out from her husband’s statement that he was told the police investigation could go away if he paid money - not sure who to or how that would have worked but a serious allegation nonetheless.
markysimmo
Johnny nice-tits
It's a joke
Michelle Mone has admitted that she stands to benefit from tens of millions of pounds of profit from personal protective equipment (PPE) sold to the UK government during the pandemic by a company led by her husband, Doug Barrowman.
In an interview with the BBC, the couple apologised for denying their role in the deal for more than three years.
But a defiant Baroness Mone said: "I don't honestly see there is a case to answer. I can't see what we have done wrong."
PPE Medpro was awarded government contracts worth more than £200 million to supply PPE to the NHS during the pandemic through a so-called "VIP lane", introduced to help the government choose between huge numbers of supplier offers.
In November 2021, the government revealed that Baroness Mone was the "source of referral" for PPE Medpro getting a place in the VIP lane.
Millions of gowns the company supplied were never used but the couple say these were supplied in accordance with the contract.
PPE Medpro is being sued by the UK government for £122m plus costs for "breach of contract and unjust enrichment".
Having previously denied gaining directly from the contracts, which yielded profits of around £60m, the former Conservative peer and lingerie tycoon admitted she and her children were beneficiaries of financial trusts where the money is held.
Baroness Mone said "of course" she stands to gain, adding: "If my husband passes away before me, then I am a beneficiary, as well as his children and my children."
She told the BBC her life had been "destroyed" by allegations about their PPE profits, even though "we've only done one thing, which was lie to the press to say we weren't involved".
She said that was "not a crime" and added: "No-one deserves this."
Mr Barrowman said that Baroness Mone "was always going to benefit, and my family will benefit in due course… her family benefit, my family benefit".
"That's what you do when you are in a privileged position of making money," he said.
But Baroness Mone insisted that neither she nor her children had yet seen a penny of the money that is being held in the trust. Nor had the couple used the proceeds of the deal to buy a yacht, she said.
She also suggested she would not benefit if "GHod forbid, we get divorced after this show".
The Scottish businesswoman was made a Conservative peer by David Cameron but is no longer in the party
