Current Affairs The Conservative Party

Status
Not open for further replies.
tsubaki said:
they were security breaches though - they just weren't treated as such by the government of the time
Click to expand...
No they weren't

One got the push because she was feathering her own cap. Despicable it may be but not a security breach. The other was scapegoated by May. He denied the allegations, refused to resign and said bring on an enquiry. A guilty man doesn't do that.
 
Barnfred 55 said:
No they weren't

One got the push because she was feathering her own cap. Despicable it may be but not a security breach. The other was scapegoated by May. He denied the allegations, refused to resign and said bring on an enquiry. A guilty man doesn't do that.
Click to expand...

Patel was negotiating with ministers of a foreign country, without approval from (or even knowledge of) the PM or the Foreign Secretary, without British diplomatic staff being present and then she either lied to the PM or failed to disclose exactly what she had done. I'd have though that was a fairly obvious security breach, but it seems not.

As for Williamson - "a guilty man doesn't do that" is just daft. There was an inquiry; it established he was the most likely source of the leak and stated that he did not cooperate fully with it.
 
tsubaki said:
Patel was negotiating with ministers of a foreign country, without approval from (or even knowledge of) the PM or the Foreign Secretary, without British diplomatic staff being present and then she either lied to the PM or failed to disclose exactly what she had done. I'd have though that was a fairly obvious security breach, but it seems not.

As for Williamson - "a guilty man doesn't do that" is just daft. There was an inquiry; it established he was the most likely source of the leak and stated that he did not cooperate fully with it.
Click to expand...

Somebody and someone's inside the 22 have decided to cut Hancocks puppet strings. Not sure I should feel offended or we all should worry and feel for those who worry about security breaches and their naivety... Shock horror 1922 committee pulls the strings...
 
Just heard Buckland the justice secretary defending Bullingdon saying he is very popular and did not mishandle hancock resignation farce , also people still vote for us so nothing matters , the sheer breath-taking arrogance of this mob is truly nauseating , they truly believe they are untouchable , as Aneurin Bevan once said - the tories lower than vermin
 
tsubaki said:
Patel was negotiating with ministers of a foreign country, without approval from (or even knowledge of) the PM or the Foreign Secretary, without British diplomatic staff being present and then she either lied to the PM or failed to disclose exactly what she had done. I'd have though that was a fairly obvious security breach, but it seems not.

As for Williamson - "a guilty man doesn't do that" is just daft. There was an inquiry; it established he was the most likely source of the leak and stated that he did not cooperate fully with it.
Click to expand...
Patel was guilty of privateering on government time. Despicable in itself and was rightly sacked. There is no evidence, and neither has there been any indication of any, that she released government information to a third party. Which is, of course what we were talking about here.

Williamson was subjected to an informal enquiry (otherwise known as witchhunt) the results of which were never released, other than May saying "I have evidence". Williamson denies it, refused to resign, and welcomed a formal enquiry. May wanted him out of cabinet for whatever reason, and she got him out.

I'm not defending either of these by the way. Patel deserved what she got and I wish Williamson stayed out of government because he's been a total mess in education. I just think you're wrong in this particular argument about them releasing sensitive government information.
 
Barnfred 55 said:
Patel was guilty of privateering on government time. Despicable in itself and was rightly sacked. There is no evidence, and neither has there been any indication of any, that she released government information to a third party. Which is, of course what we were talking about here.

Williamson was subjected to an informal enquiry (otherwise known as witchhunt) the results of which were never released, other than May saying "I have evidence". Williamson denies it, refused to resign, and welcomed a formal enquiry. May wanted him out of cabinet for whatever reason, and she got him out.

I'm not defending either of these by the way. Patel deserved what she got and I wish Williamson stayed out of government because he's been a total mess in education. I just think you're wrong in this particular argument about them releasing sensitive government information.
Click to expand...

er - the “releasing sensitive government information” is a distinction you’ve made; I said they were security breaches (which negotiating with a foreign government for your own purposes 100% is)
 
tsubaki said:
er - the “releasing sensitive government information” is a distinction you’ve made; I said they were security breaches (which negotiating with a foreign government for your own purposes 100% is)
Click to expand...
Not really. You have absolutely no idea what was being discussed. If the security forces had any issues they'd have most certainly followed them up
 
Alan Whittle said:
Unless politically it was best to sweep it all under the carpet as soon as possible.
Heaven forbid!
Click to expand...
100% it would have been politically. Not doing that with National Security though. She's in charge of them now FFS. Do you not think the guy who claimed bullying wouldn't have totally buried her if he had anything on her.
 
Barnfred 55 said:
100% it would have been politically. Not doing that with National Security though. She's in charge of them now FFS. Do you not think the guy who claimed bullying wouldn't have totally buried her if he had anything on her.
Click to expand...
Maybe, maybe he didn’t know. I’m not sure how you know tbh, but you seem sure?
 
Barnfred 55 said:
Not really. You have absolutely no idea what was being discussed. If the security forces had any issues they'd have most certainly followed them up
Click to expand...

How do you know they didn't? We already know there was an inquiry into Williamson's conduct that found against him (yes, he didn't agree with the conclusions but then the obviously guilty rarely do), and there could easily have been with Patel too.

Of course then you come to the problem of what to do with these people, which is where politicians come in to it. The best thing I could say there is watch what happens with this - which as you say is a security breach, albeit one leaked to a pro-Government paper and with a pro-Government journalist on the byline. I certainly won't be holding my breath for any prosecutions for this.
 
Barnfred 55 said:
100% it would have been politically. Not doing that with National Security though. She's in charge of them now FFS. Do you not think the guy who claimed bullying wouldn't have totally buried her if he had anything on her.
Click to expand...

he got a settlement of several hundred thousand pounds btw, long before it got to an Employment Tribunal
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top