BS: Brexit & other UK political topics

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Feb 22 - 06:03 AM

An interesting piece in Labour List this morning. Googleable I hope...

"Why Sue Gray should pass her report to Boris Johnson, immediately and in full" written by John Whitting QC.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 01 Feb 22 - 05:45 AM

I agree that the Met will not release such a statement, and that is why I think a humble address to get at the full report is unlikely, unless, after the Met finish whatever they are up to, Johnson decides not to release the full report after all.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Feb 22 - 04:19 AM

I think that the chances of Cressida Dick doing that in anything like a hurry are about as likely as a duff bottle of Hirondelle, or, if you don't remember that one, look into the heavens to check for aerially-mobile pork. By the way, she's keeping her head well down, isn't she? She's thoroughly his woman...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 01 Feb 22 - 02:24 AM

The humble address would not be for a confidence vote. It would be to release Gray's full report immediately.

The Tory defence would undoubtedly be "we must wait for the Met to finish their investigation."   So the only way it could really succeed would be if the Met had issued a statement beforehand that they have reached the point its release in full would not impact their investigations.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 31 Jan 22 - 08:50 PM

It looks as if Boris has given way on that - Its been promised that Sue Gray will present an up dated version of her report when the police have done. And the signs are she'll go in hard.

Of course a promise by Boris is as trustworthy as anything else he says, but that should be a hard one to get away with breaking. Though l imagine he will try to find some way to do that.

If Cressida Dick were able to fix the inquiry that might help him, but I think she'd have major problems with that.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Jan 22 - 07:45 PM

Those were my thoughts too. I feel that the pressure to release the unexpurgated Sue Gray report, not some watered-down Met Police version, should be kept up.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 31 Jan 22 - 07:15 PM

A humble address would only succeed if a whole lot of Tories voted for it, or sat on their hands. I suspect that there are a good few Tories who might vote against Boris in a party vote of confidence who would hesitate to vote for a motion tabled by the Opposition. A matter of tribalism.

It still might be worth having a go. Even if only to show up the Tories.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 31 Jan 22 - 04:51 PM

There was talk of using the "humble address" last week, so if there is a possibility, I think it could happen.

Meanwhile, an ITV reporter tweeted this after the evening meeting of the Conservative MPs:

An MP who is critical of the PM, comes out of the meeting with him and says “they are f***ing deluded… there is no way we are getting 54 letters”.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Jan 22 - 04:47 PM

Reading not-so-much-between-the-lines, Sue Gray is clearly embittered by the way her report has been kicked about, and she has done her damnedest to make what's left of it to tell it as much as possible like it is. Good for her. Apparently, there is a parliamentary way of forcing the government to release the whole, unexpurgated thing. Dunno how possible it is, but the opposition could table a "humble address", which, if successful, could force Johnson's hand. Thing is, I'm not sure that Starmer wouldn't prefer to leave him where he is...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 31 Jan 22 - 01:41 PM

When I click in the Independent feed for the 300 photos and 500 pages of text handed to the police as a result of the Gray enquiry I get this appropriate advertisement

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 31 Jan 22 - 01:15 PM

I was surprised by the business with the speaker trying to get Ian Blackfrord to pretend that he believed that Boris Johnson had been "inadvertant" in saying stuff that was untrue to the House. I knew there was a rule against using the word "lie", but I'd always taken it that, if phrased properly, it was in order to make the accusation.

That is irrational. If it has be accepted that lying cannot have taken place, how can it be that a minister who lies must resign, since it is officially impossible for them to do so.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 31 Jan 22 - 01:04 PM

I forgot one (and it get 2900!)

That bizarre little moment when, following the report a while back of drugs being found at 11 out of twelve places tests (if I recall correctly), one MP asked if as well as a drinks culture there was a drugs culture led to Johnson saying that should be directed at the Labour benches.


I imagine some drug taking happens on both benches, but that was very dodgy way to address it. Expect evidence on drug taking at No 10 to follow. In fact, in the 300 photos, there could already be evidence of it.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 31 Jan 22 - 12:43 PM

That went about as badly for the Prime Minister as it could, short of him actually breaking down. There were a few striking moments:

1. Starmer's speech was heard in virtually complete silence. The standard barracking of PMQs was noticeably absent.

2. Ian Blackford's battle over the 'inadvertedly' restriction should make the edited highlights.

3. Almost the entire defence was 'wait for the met'. Everything else was look at these other things we have done - most of which were disputable anyway.

4. Theresa May got a good chance at revenge, and I am pleased Ian Blackford took the opportunity to commend her question.


It was also notable that Johnson is refusing to commit to releasing the full report whatever happens, and that few of the questions from the end were from Conservatives. The Independent reports that this is because the Conservatives ran out of people willing to make them, but I can't confirm that either way. The absence was, however, notable.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 Jan 22 - 11:22 AM

I see he is sorry again and promises a shake up of Number 10 and the cabinet office. I refer you to my post Dated 26 Jan 22 - 04:25 AM

My own thoughts on why Bozo is happy about the police investigations is that a few members of staff will be thrown to the wolves to appease the masses while Boris will be exonerated as not being involved. The sacrifices have probably already been well rewarded and told what to say.

Does a "shake up" sound like sacrificial lambs to you too? I would be interested to see what happens to those in the crosshairs. I can pretty much guarantee that they will not be at the job centre next week.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 31 Jan 22 - 10:47 AM

Yep, it’s a good ‘un, innit!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Jan 22 - 09:21 AM

By the way, I've decided to add "hepatobiliary" to my lexicon. I'll be using that a lot!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Jan 22 - 09:20 AM

I've just got home. I had a scan this morning for a deep vein thrombosis, following a nasty dose of cellulitis (my third in 20 months) which left my lower leg the size of a football. Thankfully, all was clear and I'm well on the mend. Another very friendly and positive hospital experience, except that the medic seeing to me was a Man U fan. Tsk.

I do appreciate all the good wishes. Cheers!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 31 Jan 22 - 08:42 AM

Battered though the NHS may be, I don't think a day passes without me feeling grateful for the Fact we've still got it.
Right now I’ve got a special reason for that, with a cataract operation a couple of weeks ago. Amazing - less discomfort than a haircut, and now everyday it feelsss if the sun has come out, and I don't need my glasses.

I'm always puzzled how it is the Conservative party always seems to fail to recognise that in damaging cherished national institutions like the NHS (and the BBC) they are betraying the founding. principle expressed in their name.

I am pretty sure that most Tory voters I know feel that way about the NHS. But the party follows the money.

And you get properly well, Steve.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 31 Jan 22 - 08:23 AM

It’s an excellent hospital. My consultant/surgeon was one of the top hepatobiliary surgeons in the country. I was most impressed when, in 2014, he was featured in a BBC TV series repairing the burst liver, and thus saving the life of, a farmer who had been crushed when one of his animals fell on top of him. The whole operation was conducted in a calm, matter-of-fact, ‘all in a day’s work’ atmosphere, nothing at all like the manic, rushing around, everyone-shouting-at-the-same-time kind of pandemonium we see on American TV dramas such as ‘ER’.

Long Live the NHS. And God Help Us if we’re ever reduced to a US-style healthcare system.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Jan 22 - 06:05 AM

Surprising as it may seem coming from a Cornishman, I was sent by my GP to Queens in 1996 to get my knee sorted out! Seems that it was some sort of centre of excellence for sports injuries. Nice B&B in Nottingham too!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 31 Jan 22 - 05:17 AM

An echo to everything Steve and Dave say above. Between 2005 and 2014 I spent months in Lincoln County Hospital and Queen’s Medical Centre, Nottingham, had two major abdominal surgeries, and drainage and treatment for a liver abscess which necessitated the drain being inserted under CT Scan, and which included several days in ICU. The care I was given was at all times exemplary. The fact that I’m still here typing this post is down to the care I received in both hospitals.

One heartwarming thing that has stayed with me is how in 2014, and not having been in QMC since 2007, I was admitted there for the liver abscess, and several of the nurses and ancillary staff in ward E15 remembered me, we’re very kind to me indeed, and made me feel like a long-lost buddy. When you feel like shite, little things like that become very important.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: fat B****rd
Date: 31 Jan 22 - 04:22 AM

Sending positive "vibes" Steve
Charlie

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 Jan 22 - 03:06 AM

Good luck, Steve. Hope you are OK.

Same for both Mrs. G and me. Airedale General Hospital has never let either of us down and we have been there a lot in the last few years. It makes me so angry when the bastards who are trying to line their pockets try to take credit for all the hard work and professionalism of the underpaid and undervalued NHS staff. How anyone supports the shower of shits that are asset stripping this gem of a service is beyond me.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Jan 22 - 07:47 PM

Just a slight diversion. I spent most of today in A&E in North Devon District Hospital in Barnstaple. I have a recurring condition that needn't concern anyone and which probably won't kill me. I was there for over five hours, not just waiting around (though there was a fair bit of that) but also being triaged, tested and treated. I have to go back tomorrow for a scan, but that should be a bit quicker.

From starting to get worried on Saturday afternoon and doing the 111 thing, to being sorted out today, took less than 24 hours. I received the friendliest, most sympathetic, most thorough and most professional treatment I could have wished for. At the same time, with my eyes wide open, I saw a hospital which was understaffed and which was under extreme stress.

I salute the amazing staff at that hospital (at which it's been my misfortune to have to have attended many times in recent years, including for the death of my mum, for which the fantastic nurses bent the lockdown rules a bit so that I could be at her bedside and hold her hand as she passed away). I've never had a negative moment there, not once.

So when I hear Johnson and co claiming the credit for all the amazing good calls they've made, well shit on them. And I hate the fact that this last paragraph is here, but it needs saying in m' humble...

Wish me luck for tomorrow! :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 30 Jan 22 - 10:04 AM

TBH, I’d sooner trust anyone, including Vlad Putin, than our proven liar of a PM.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Jan 22 - 09:42 AM

I imagine he'd sooner there wasn't a war, at least not directly involving the UK, and that he could present himself as the Man Who Averted War, but needs must. It's a powder keg, and it's dangerous playing with matches.   I'd much sooner trust the Ukraine president than the Prime Minister when it comes to the facts about the Russian build-up.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 30 Jan 22 - 09:23 AM

Why not? Thatcher did it to save her scrawny political neck, why not The Liar Johnson?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Rain Dog
Date: 30 Jan 22 - 07:47 AM

"The big danger is that Boris could decide that ratcheting up things in Ukraine offers the best way out for him, and thathe precipitates a war"

Seriously?

I know that most here do not like the tory party, people who vote tory, and Boris, but still.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Jan 22 - 07:40 AM

What would upset things is if Sue Gray decide that, since there is no legal force to the police request, she should ignore it and provide an undoctored report to Johnson. He could then do the doctoring himself. Of course he could lie and say that Sue Gray had done the dirty deed herself, but I doubt if that could stand up long, and that could be one lie too far.

The big danger is that Boris could decide that ratcheting up things in Ukraine offers the best way out for him, and thathe precipitates a war - it sounds as if the Ukraine government is not worried about that, pointing out that there is in fact no build up ofRussian forces over the level of the past few years.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 30 Jan 22 - 03:31 AM

Today Johnson and Sunak have written a joint article in "The Sunday Times" that the NI rise is will take place.

This is an important statement. Johnson, of course, cares little whether it goes ahead and will be very aware of the large number of Tories who want to scrap it. If he thinks that will benefit him, he will scrap it.

But Sunak was already tied into going ahead with it by rumour, and has now made that his position in writing.

So we have reached yet another point of instability. If Johnson does backtrack, Sunak may resign and we are into an open contest for leader. But does he want to do that over an essentially unpopular tax? And if he does not, how diminished is his authority? It is a finely balanced decision.

Equally, though, does Johnson want to trigger that contest with Sunak? Probably not.

So at the moment, the tax stays. But it could change in days and what then happens then is extremely hard to predict. The options are clear, but which one will be taken I could not guess.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Jan 22 - 07:37 PM

Johnson has played a blinder in getting the Met to issue that statement at the last ditch moment. He'll be having wet dreams tonight when he thinks how lucky he is to have Cressida Dick in his pocket/as his little poodle. She means everything to him, but to the rest of us she's about as useful as tits on a boar.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 29 Jan 22 - 12:39 PM

If this is getting the job done I would rather get someone else in.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Jan 22 - 10:42 AM

Open breaking of the law which the police accept, and collude in ensuring those responsible gets away with it means one thing - a broken system of law, and a broken country.

Yes, Boris did the job alright.

I'm reminded of Easy Rider - "We've blown it.'

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 29 Jan 22 - 08:22 AM

You are just trying to defend the indefensible Nigel. I have not accepted that it was not breaking the law. That is to be seen. It was not in the spirit of the law and that is the important point. To use loopholes to wriggle out of what was blatantly a smack in the mouth to all who adhered rigidly to the guidelines only adds insult to injury.

Mussolini and Hitler also got the job done. That is no excuse.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Jan 22 - 07:36 AM

Nigel, we have photos and emails which confirm that gatherings took place in clear contravention of the rules that obtained at the time. None has been denied and several have been apologised for (though, naturally, illegality has not been admitted to). I do admire your valiant attempts to defend the indefensible, I must say.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 29 Jan 22 - 06:52 AM

Dave:
It is a fact that Bozo is a liar. Do you want me to post the list of lies again? If that were not enough it is also a fact that there were gatherings at Downing Street which, even if they were within the letter of the law, were certainy against the spirit of it.

Allow me to split that down:
It is a fact that Bozo is a liar.
Is that consistently? Like one of the two men stood at doors to death or freedom, one of which always lies, one of which always tells the truth?

Do you want me to post the list of lies again?
No really. I've seen it before and it seems to be based on the idea that if you throw enough mud, some of it will stick.
Some of the claims in it may be deliberate lies, but as I recall some are statements of intent which were later overtaken by 'real life'. Some were statements of facts as he understood them at the time.

it is also a fact that there were gatherings at Downing Street which, even if they were within the letter of the law, were certainy against the spirit of it
Thank you for that acceptance. It is breaking the letter of the law which is illegal. Lawyers make a fortune arguing over the precise meaning of the written law, and it is the written law which can be enforced.

Apparently the 'ministerial code' requires Boris to resign if it is shown that he has deliberately misled Parliament. If this is so, and it can be shown that he has done this, then he should resign.
The election of a leader is then up to the Conservative Party. I would hope that Boris gets proposed for the post.
He may appear a buffoon at times, he may mislead (either deliberately or otherwise) but he gets the job done.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 29 Jan 22 - 04:50 AM

I see that Truss the Terrible is due to visit Moscow too. Maybe she will seduce Vlad...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 29 Jan 22 - 02:39 AM

Nigel. It is a fact that Bozo is a liar. Do you want me to post the list of lies again? If that were not enough it is also a fact that there were gatherings at Downing Street which, even if they were within the letter of the law, were certainy against the spirit of it. The only unknown in all this is how Bozo will wriggle out of it. The report will probably limit his options which is why he is delaying it.

I see he is now talking to Putin. Knowing his ineptitude for tact and diplomacy I would guess that he is deliberately trying to provoke a war to detract the focus from his failings. Hopefully Putin, a real bully boy, will see him for what he is. The stupid little kid pulling his tongue out at the big lads through the school railings.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 29 Jan 22 - 01:43 AM

When I say 'for hypothetical purposes' I should have been clearer and said something like. "To take a hypothetical example which is not directly based on any of the reported events, ..."

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 29 Jan 22 - 01:40 AM

There is no necessary contraction between knowing an illegal activity took place and needing an investigation. You might, for hypothetical purposes, know one or two people who admit to being at a gathering of say 20 people, but still need to investigate to find out who the rest were.

So even the redacted report could say that a gathering for social purposes took place in prima facie or definite breach of the rules and guidance but who was at it be redacted.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 28 Jan 22 - 08:19 PM

From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 28 Jan 22 - 07:06 PM

The whole point here is that, investigations apart, we already know the facts. We know that an honestly-published report (a phrase I use advisedly, and nothing to do with Sue Gray) would finish him. The only thing that is "in his interests" is delay, delay, delay. That's what he and Cressida Dick (who owes him one) are up to. We are living in a corrupt country. It's a tragedy.

I've asked before what information you have which is not available to the rest of us. You continue not to say, but to make unsubstantiated pronouncements.

Saying:
I'll say what the Beeb and the papers daren't say for fear of their being sued. A couple of days ago, the Met said that they had no issue with the publication of the report. Today, yes they suddenly do have an issue. The most damaging accusations, and presumably the most damaging findings, are to be kept from us. Maybe for weeks if the Met gets its way. How ideal for Johnson. Let it all fade from the headlines and the public perception. Then, down the line, we get told that there isn't enough evidence to secure convictions. Bingo. This all happened today when the report was on the cusp of being delivered. It's a stitch-up. Cressida Dick is a big mate of Johnson's, and almost certainly wouldn't be in post but for him. You can bet your ass that they've been in touch during the last 48 hours to fix a whitewash. There, I've said it, and I'm not scared of being sued. Because it's all just my opinion, guv. ;-) includes a lot of 'statements' which appear to be of 'fact'. Adding a small disclaimer, at the end, that it is just your opinion, does not mollify the tone of the earlier claims.

Your previous claim (with no attached caveat) was:
From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 23 Jan 22 - 07:50 PM

The gatherings were illegal, Nigel.

I asked how you could know something which others still believed they needed to investigate to see whether it was true, and answer came there none!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Jan 22 - 07:09 PM

Sorry, I meant "corrupted."

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Jan 22 - 07:06 PM

The whole point here is that, investigations apart, we already know the facts. We know that an honestly-published report (a phrase I use advisedly, and nothing to do with Sue Gray) would finish him. The only thing that is "in his interests" is delay, delay, delay. That's what he and Cressida Dick (who owes him one) are up to. We are living in a corrupt country. It's a tragedy.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 28 Jan 22 - 06:22 PM

Everyone except Johnson's interest of course, though the Conservative thought should the full report clear him that would also be in his interests

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 28 Jan 22 - 06:17 PM

On Newsnight on 28 jan, there was an ex supreme Court judge, a Conservative, and a Labour representative.

All three agreed there was no reason to redact the report, and it was in everyone's interest to release it in full without waiting for the Met to do their thing.

It is fairly unusual to have a Newsnight debate where everyone agrees with the others.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Jan 22 - 02:12 PM

There was a story in the Telegraph of all places pretty strongly implying what Steve wrote there - pretty clearly indicated how weak was the case for claiming that a full report would do anything to interfere with the police investigation, and saying it wss very hard to justify any delay or censoring.    They didn't go as far as pointing a fupinger at Cressida Dicks.

Being pretty cynical I wonder if the remarkable knack of Cressida Dicks survival, under several Prime Ministers, may be based on her knowing where the bodies are buried. Something that Boris seems to have overlooked when he sacked Dominic Cummings.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 28 Jan 22 - 01:40 PM

It's not often I can say this without getting some funny looks

We need a leak!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Jan 22 - 12:53 PM

You know very well that this is not a row "over nothing," Nigel. Only someone who has had his fingers in his ears shouting "la la la" for three months would think that.

As for the report being evidence that might prejudice court cases, etc., let's find the bottom line here. The public interest in all this is not going to be served by the satisfaction of knowing that a bunch of wealthy Tories have been whacked with hundred quid fixed penalties. It will be served by our getting the whole and unvarnished truth about what has happened apropos of the parties. That's what Sue Gray is supposed to be delivering, that's what the public will judge the prime minister on and that's what will provoke Tory MPs into deciding whether he stays or goes. I don't give a damn about court cases and piffling fines, frankly. I want to know what went on. The whole story.

I'll say what the Beeb and the papers daren't say for fear of their being sued. A couple of days ago, the Met said that they had no issue with the publication of the report. Today, yes they suddenly do have an issue. The most damaging accusations, and presumably the most damaging findings, are to be kept from us. Maybe for weeks if the Met gets its way. How ideal for Johnson. Let it all fade from the headlines and the public perception. Then, down the line, we get told that there isn't enough evidence to secure convictions. Bingo. This all happened today when the report was on the cusp of being delivered. It's a stitch-up. Cressida Dick is a big mate of Johnson's, and almost certainly wouldn't be in post but for him. You can bet your ass that they've been in touch during the last 48 hours to fix a whitewash. There, I've said it, and I'm not scared of being sued. Because it's all just my opinion, guv. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Jan 22 - 11:08 AM

"If that is the case then the whole show was blown up over nothing."

Directly lying to the House of Commons, and persisting in doing that, is no kind of criminal offence, but has always been seen as a fatal offence for any government minister, including a Prime Minister, requiring them to resign. In fact Boris Johnson this week stated he agreed tgat to be the case.

Evidence confirming that Mr Johnson has done that is very far from being "nothing", however trivial the legal penalties might be.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 28 Jan 22 - 10:10 AM

Lord McDonald: It is really to say that if we are simply talking about lockdown breaches and fixed penalty notices, this move by the police this morning seems to be disproportionate.
If that is the case then the whole show was blown up over nothing.

Nazir Afzal: A purely factual report by Sue Gray cannot possibly prejudice a police investigation.
They just have to follow the evidence, of which the report will be a part.
The report may form part of the evidence if the matter goes to court. Putting that evidence in front of the public before it is even decided whether the matter is serious enough to go to court could prejudice any court outcome.

It seems to me that neither of these two quoted persons is quite on top of his brief.