Post by Flying Monkeys on Jan 22, 2022 5:16:35 GMT
Read this:
So he gets sight of the findings first. Uh huh. Bit of editing afterwards, perhaps....?
So it will be left to interpretation and we will simply have a "yes you did" / "no we didn't" argument as a result. In other words, pointless.
No wonder he wanted such a report - he knew she wouldn't investigate him.
Oh well, we're bound to get an honest assessment, then.
No wonder he's saying "wait for the findings" so much - he's rigged it already.
This is utterly, utterly pointless. A total sham that will say absolutely nothing and he'll just continue to refer to it as the final word - no doubt implying it is independent, even though he set the terms and can probably adjust what it says before publication.
What is Sue Gray investigating?
According to media reports, 16 gatherings allegedly took place in either Downing Street - where the prime minister lives and works - or other government departments during the Covid pandemic.
There was a Downing Street garden drinks event on 20 May 2020, where Mr Johnson said he stayed for 25 minutes to thank staff for their work. This was despite legal restrictions and guidelines being in place to limit the spread of coronavirus.
What sort of investigation is it?
Ms Gray has been asked to look at the nature and purpose of the gatherings, including who went to them "with reference to adherence to the guidance in place at the time". It is an internal investigation rather than an independent inquiry. It was ordered by Mr Johnson, he set the terms of reference and Ms Gray - who is required to be impartial - will report back to him.
According to media reports, 16 gatherings allegedly took place in either Downing Street - where the prime minister lives and works - or other government departments during the Covid pandemic.
There was a Downing Street garden drinks event on 20 May 2020, where Mr Johnson said he stayed for 25 minutes to thank staff for their work. This was despite legal restrictions and guidelines being in place to limit the spread of coronavirus.
What sort of investigation is it?
Ms Gray has been asked to look at the nature and purpose of the gatherings, including who went to them "with reference to adherence to the guidance in place at the time". It is an internal investigation rather than an independent inquiry. It was ordered by Mr Johnson, he set the terms of reference and Ms Gray - who is required to be impartial - will report back to him.
The investigation team has been able to speak to current and former members of staff. For example, the BBC has been told the PM's former adviser Dominic Cummings was approached by Ms Gray's team.
The results of the investigation will be made public, according to Paymaster General Michael Ellis. But it has been suggested that this will be a summary of the findings rather than a fuller report.
Will the investigation say whether the PM and others broke Covid rules?
Ms Gray's report is expected to give a factual account of what happened with reference to the guidance - this does not necessarily mean that she will say whether there have been breaches of it.
The results of the investigation will be made public, according to Paymaster General Michael Ellis. But it has been suggested that this will be a summary of the findings rather than a fuller report.
Will the investigation say whether the PM and others broke Covid rules?
Ms Gray's report is expected to give a factual account of what happened with reference to the guidance - this does not necessarily mean that she will say whether there have been breaches of it.
The terms of reference do not suggest that Ms Gray will decide whether laws have been broken. Also legal commentator David Allen Green points out: "[Ms] Gray cannot make a determination as to whether there is criminal liability, as she is not a court."
There have been both legal restrictions and guidance in place to tackle the spread of the disease. However, even the status of the guidance can be complicated - much was written down in a series of online pages, but the government also held a series of press conferences which advised people how to behave.
When it comes to the PM, Ms Gray may "touch on the role of the prime minister but it isn't [her] place to judge his behaviour", says Catherine Haddon, of the Institute for Government think tank.
There have been both legal restrictions and guidance in place to tackle the spread of the disease. However, even the status of the guidance can be complicated - much was written down in a series of online pages, but the government also held a series of press conferences which advised people how to behave.
When it comes to the PM, Ms Gray may "touch on the role of the prime minister but it isn't [her] place to judge his behaviour", says Catherine Haddon, of the Institute for Government think tank.
Will Sue Gray be able to take disciplinary action?
According to the inquiry's terms of reference: "If required, the investigations will establish whether individual disciplinary action is warranted".
Any specific HR action against individual members of staff - either civil servants or political advisers - would be confidential.
If there is evidence a minister has breached the Ministerial Code - such as potentially misleading parliament - it could be investigated by the prime minister's standards adviser Lord Geidt. Mr Johnson would need to give permission before any new inquiry was launched and he ultimately decides if any minister - including himself - has broken the code.
According to the inquiry's terms of reference: "If required, the investigations will establish whether individual disciplinary action is warranted".
Any specific HR action against individual members of staff - either civil servants or political advisers - would be confidential.
If there is evidence a minister has breached the Ministerial Code - such as potentially misleading parliament - it could be investigated by the prime minister's standards adviser Lord Geidt. Mr Johnson would need to give permission before any new inquiry was launched and he ultimately decides if any minister - including himself - has broken the code.
No wonder he's saying "wait for the findings" so much - he's rigged it already.
This is utterly, utterly pointless. A total sham that will say absolutely nothing and he'll just continue to refer to it as the final word - no doubt implying it is independent, even though he set the terms and can probably adjust what it says before publication.
