A £0.01 switch from the EU bill to NHS funding would make what has been said
perfectly truetechnically true, although utterly misleading.
FTFY
FTFY
No you really didn't. The statement would be true, that you, and the population at large read something it doesn't say makes you wrong, not the writing on the bus.
It's written to deliberately imply one thing whilst actually saying another, granted, but as with so many things, what's not said [gross for instance?] is more important than what is.
Isn't the bus a bit of a red herring though?
Having read the judges decision linked above the case seems to hinge on the fact that Boris repeatedly quoted the £350 million figure in print, on TV and radio and indeed stood in front of a bus.
The crucial bit seems to be that there seems to be evidence that he demonstrably knew that the figures were wrong when he kept saying it, making it a deliberate porky.
It's not about the writing on the bus, it's about the words that came pouring out Boris.
I work for a telesales company, and if one of our staff said that on a call it would be classed as a critical fail and would require us to contact the customer to correct the misleading statement.
No you really didn’t. The statement would be true, that you, and the population at large read something it doesn’t say makes you wrong, not the writing on the bus.
It’s written to deliberately imply one thing whilst actually saying another, granted, but as with so many things, what’s not said [gross for instance?] is more important than what is.
So technically true, but utterly misleading?
Isn’t the bus a bit of a red herring though?
Having read the judges decision linked above the case seems to hinge on the fact that Boris repeatedly quoted the £350 million figure in print, on TV and radio and indeed stood in front of a bus.
The crucial bit seems to be that there seems to be evidence that he demonstrably knew that the figures were wrong when he kept saying it, making it a deliberate porky.
It’s not about the writing on the bus, it’s about the words that came pouring out Boris.
This ^
I hope this case makes Bojo and the rest of our self serving politicians think a bit more about what (and how) they speak. Populist politics have no place in our country and we should do everything in our power to stay it out.
Dangeourbrain - on the bus maybe but not on all the accompanying pr:
https://images.app.goo.gl/7kFgnCSLVuYWiW4y8
The suggestion is clear but at no point does that say “give it/use it/spend it”
And yet,
I suppose you're going to argue now that it's only a suggestion and they didn't say they were actually going to do it.
We all know he's a lying sack of shit and we all know the semantics of the (various) statements have been carefully worded to avoid this type of court case.
I suspect that the fact that this is actually going to court means he slipped up on the wording his PR team fed him.
It’s not about the writing on the bus, it’s about the words that came pouring out Boris.
I've just skimmed the preliminary court hearing where they decided whether there was a case to answer or not. It says,
"During both time periods outlined above [MP and Mayor], the (proposed) defendant repeatedly lied and misled the British public as to the cost of EU membership, expressly stating, endorsing or inferring that the cost of EU membership was £350 million per week. Whilst doing so he was acting as a public officer and using the platforms and opportunities offered to him by virtue of his public office. Further the defendant knew that such comments were false or misleading in that he had on other occasions used accurate figures and showed a clear understanding of how to quantify UK spending in respect of the EU. Lying on a national and international platform undermines public confidence in politics, undermines the integrity of public referendums and brings both public offices held by the (proposed) defendant into disrepute.
...
The kernel of the offence is that an officer, having been entrusted with powers and duties for public benefit, has in some way abused them, or has abused his official position."
There's no mention anywhere about the bus specifically, this is a red herring. Rather, the accusation is that he lied repeatedly and intentionally in order to mislead, whilst in an influential role.
Oh, linky to that court report if anyone else wants to read it.
Jinx
I'm sure bojo will get off. Once it goes far enough up the court system influence will be brought to bear and he will get away with it. The establishment will protect him
The establishment will protect him
I'm sure Gove et al will give him their full support.
I’m sure bojo will get off. Once it goes far enough up the court system influence will be brought to bear and he will get away with it. The establishment will protect him
I think you need an extra layer of tinfoil on your hat. It’s possible the DPP could intervene to take on the case and then discontinue but I think the DPP would probably rather not get involved. If you are thinking that the Judiciary will be influenced by MPs I think you underestimate how much they pride themselves on their independence and would see any attempt to influence it as an affront. That is not to say that at some stage between now and the end of any trial that the legal argument falls down in Bojos favour, or the evidence doesn’t stack up.
If the establishment were going to do anything I’d have thought it was make sure that such a liability doesn’t become PM - and protecting this case from outside interference (even if they expect a jury to find not guilty) would help achieve that.
This is an interesting read.
https://www.legalcheek.com/2019/05/the-private-prosecution-of-boris-johnson-what-happens-next/
The establishment will protect him
I don't know about that, Jeffrey Archer did a bit of bird.
P-Jay
for me it was the “let’s give it to the NHS” part that was a lie, there was never £350bn to give to anyone, there wasn’t even £250bn in fact as we (remainers) all know in reality we’ll likely have to suffer more cuts as our GDP and tax revenue falls
Two points. Firstly we are not all Remainers. And secondly, there is an alternative opinion which claims that remaining in the EU will have a long term detrimental effect on the NHS.
koldun Member
We all know he’s a lying sack of shit .....
Indeed. I'm not sure however how widespread that awareness is among the general public. I myself, despite being aware of his long history of lying, was surprised to learn recently just how far back it goes. Apparently he was sacked for lying when he was a young trainee journalist working for The Times newspaper. Lying appears to be deeply ingrained into his personality.
If nothing else this court case will focus attention to this aspect of his personality.
Two points. Firstly we are not all Remainers. And secondly, there is an alternative opinion which claims that remaining in the EU will have a long term detrimental effect on the NHS.
I’d be interested to hear it.
ajaj: The district judge did address this point in her decision.
OOB: Great, Linky?
Poly: Outofbreath:
Here you go – https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/marcus-ball-v-alexander-boris-de-pfeffel-johnson/
Thanks Poly, that's great.
Addresses the point but seems to have near little faith that it's valid:
Mr Power has referred me to the Law Commission’s paper on Misconduct in a Public
Office, dated 20 January 2016. The commissioners observe in respect to “acting as
such” that it appears to be sufficient that there is an improper use of the opportunity afforded
by a public office. All that this element serves to exclude is an act performed by the officer in a
private capacity to which his or her position is simply irrelevant (paragraph 2.119) Relying
on a Law Commission paper may not be the applicant’s strongest point.
I’d be interested to hear it.
Really? Sure? OK, but I've got a bit on right now, I'll try to get back later, or tomorrow.
And yet
I'll rely on semantic whinging here.
"Yes miss. But he said BUS miss"
I don't disagree, he deserves everything he gets and, were it about something else I'd be at the front of the queue for seats in court but I do think that, of all the things BJ has ever lied about this is about the worst one to choose to drag him over the coals about.
But yes, that particular poster is clearly untrue, because regardless of the veracity of the 350 figure as a "a" figure it demonstrably can't and never could all be given to anything else. I'm actually quite pleased to see it because it does mean the case will be about something other than gross or net.
Really? Sure? OK, but I’ve got a bit on right now, I’ll try to get back later, or tomorrow.
*Starts digging Anderson shelter*
Okay P-Jay ..... let me tell you "The Strange Story of Doctor David Qwen". And are you sitting comfortably in your shelter raybanwomble?
Dr David Owen was of course the leading protagonist in the infamous "Gang Of Four", the group of MPs who in 1981 broke away from the Labour Party to form their own political party. This course of action split the Labour vote and in no small way help to keep Margaret Thatcher as Prime Minister for 10 years.
Dr David Owen's motivation was based on 3 major Labour Party policies which he claimed he could never under any circumstances support, ie, nationalisation of the banks, unilateral nuclear disarmament, and withdrawal from the European Community.
Dr David Owen was a particularly strong supporter of the European Community. Indeed he felt so strongly about it that resigned from Harold Wilson’s shadow cabinet in 1972 over Labour’s refusal to back British entry to the EEC. His new party, the Social Democratic Party, formed an electoral alliance with the equally pro-European Liberal Party.
Eventually in 1988 the two parties formed the Liberal Democratic Party, at which point Dr David Owen appears to disappear into political oblivion.
Now I don't know when, nor whether it was a gradual process or a Road to Damascus moment, but at some point between then and 1996 Dr David Owen transformed himself in a Eurosceptic. I know that it wasn't after 1996 because he claims that Tony Blair attempted to seduce back into the Labour Party then with promises of a bright political future. A believable claim imo as Owen had been quite a political heavyweight previously in the Labour Party. He had been, among other things, Shadow Secretary of State for Energy, Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, and Minister of State for Health and Social Security.
However he turned down the offer when he apparently realised that Blair was committed to taking Britain into the European currency (I think Gordon Brown won on that one) Owen claims that it was the "best decision I ever made in my life”.
Owen then pops up again in the political limelight just before the EU Referendum during the campaign. He is now a totally committed Brexiteer. Although the former physician hasn't practised medicine for a long time healthcare and the NHS is still his passion, and he argues forcefully that it is vital to leave the EU to save the NHS. He led the Vote Leave 'Save Our NHS' campaign.
Ironical if he hadn't done what did in a previous life Labour might have won the 1983 general election and the UK would have left the European Community.
Anyway that was the background, here is the alternative opinion that you requested. It's by the now Lord David Owen. It's a speech he made last year. It's quite long, about 13 pages. It starts off quite interesting but then becomes a bit boring and tedious as it focuses details and technical issues.
Btw I'm no fan of David Owen among my many criticisms of him is that he was a crap Foreign Secretary. During his tenure as Foreign Secretary he claimed that the only opposition to Shah of Iran consisted of communists. Let's hope his grasp of healthcare issues is better than his grasp of foreign affairs was. I suspect that it probably is.
I see the far right on the forum are still resorting to straw man tactics, rather than making a direct point.
I see the far right on the forum are still resorting to straw man tactics
They could, of course, fund a private prosecution against Blair in the same way. Set up a donation fund and see how much money they get in the same way that this private prosecution against Johnson was funded.
Put their money where their mouths are.
Why would they do that? My understanding is that Tony Blair was the darling of the Right. They went in their droves to the polling stations to vote for him...... a couple of alt-right punters on here have openly admitted to voting for him.
Even right-wing Tories such as Margaret Thatcher have publicly declared their admiration for Tony Blair. She famously said that New Labour was her "greatest achievement".
Besides there have already been attempts for private criminal prosecutions against Tony Blair, they failed. The courts decided that he was immune from prosecution. Which of course isn't likely to act as a deterrent to any future Prime Minister who considers launching a bloody foreign war based on a bunch of lies, and which results in hundreds of thousands of deaths.
Plus the Attorney General successfully blocked the prosecution because apparently it could “involve details being disclosed under the Official Secrets Act”. Tony Blair has got his arse well covered.
Mind you I hope attempts to prosecute him are never completely abandoned. I want the thought of the risk of prosecution to be somewhere in the back of his mind every day for the rest of his life. Not because I think he might fear the punishment, but because of the devastating blow to his ego the thought of going down in history as a convicted criminal would cause.
So Ernie, you said that it was nothing to worry about because it's never happened here.
I see the far right on the forum are still resorting to straw man tactics, rather than making a direct point.
NewsThump is far right ?
So Ernie, you said that it was nothing to worry about because it’s never happened here.
That is perfect correct. I also said that of course anything can happen. If you want to consider all possibilities then you must consider the possibility that TJ will become PM, Drac will become Minster of Information, and Chewkw will become Foreign Secretary. How can you be sure that it won't happen?
You gave the example of the Interior Minister of Austria as an example of what could happened in the UK. I stated that it was not feasible to assume that a similar thing could happen here. Without tediously repeating everything I previously said, I pointed out that the Austrian Interior Minister was a member of a party whose first leader had been a former Nazi Ministry and a SS officer.
The Freedom Party in Austria is a neo-Nazi organisation which among other things is fanatically Islamophobic and anti-Jewish.
I also pointed out that, unlike Austria, Fascists and Nazis have never got a foothold in UK politics, they have been trying for the last 80 years or so. They have never managed to get one single MP. I further pointed out that, unlike most of Europe, the far-right has been in retreat in the UK for the last 10 years. The BNP, which is undoubtedly fascist and neo-Nazi like the Austria Freedom Party, can't manage to get one single councillor anywhere in the UK.
And I pointed out that every single Home Secretary for the last few hundred years has been a member of the Liberal Party, Tory Party, or Labour Party. The possibility of the next Home Secretary not being a member of one of those parties is extremely remote, to say the least. The possibility that they will be a member of a neo-Nazi party, such as the BNP, is even more remote, if that is possible.
Now if you want to pretend that the Brexit Party is a neo-Nazi party, while completely ignoring the fact that it was formed as a direct result of UKIP swinging to the far right and embracing the Islamophobia of fascist parties in Europe, such as the Northern League, the Freedom Party, and Golden Dawn, and on the basis of one opinion poll you're now getting all hysterical because you think they are going to form the next government, then that's up you.
But please don't use it to justify allowing Alexander de Pfeffel Johnson to get away with deliberately and repeatedly lying, allegedly, to the British people. Try to think of a better reason.
BTW just to add. I am acutely aware that 2 things above all else help fascists achieve power. The first is an economic crises, and the second is people not taking the threat that they pose seriously.
So I will never be dismissive of a genuine fascist threat.
*drops mic*
So just to bring things back to reality..
We can crash out, Go with the WA or cancel it all and have a rethink.
There are only 3 options.
To bring things back to reality and very vaguely back to the topic of the thread, ie, what is the truth about the effect on the NHS of leaving the EU (there is an extensive thread about whether to stay or leave the EU)
A day or so ago I mentioned that there was an alternative opinion concerning the effects on the NHS of leaving the EU. Someone asked me to provide it, so I posted this :
Now my experience of Remainers on here is that they are straining on their leashes to have a go at someone who dares to suggest that leaving the EU could be beneficial. So you can imagine my surprise when it received not one single response. I was so sure that it would get a response that I had already prepared mine, ie, I was going to say "well I'm not going to argue about it, either accept or reject it". But nothing.
Still, if everyone is happy with what Dr David Owen had to say then I'm cool with that.
Still, if everyone is happy with what Dr David Owen had to say then I’m cool with that.
just read it - seems to have a lot of meat behind it.
points out some of the serious screw-ups in policy, some of which Cameron precided over, and the fact that not being in the EU gives us scope of reversing/changing them, whereas being in the EU doesn't really as those decisions are in line with where DO reckons the EU is heading.
I'll accept it 🙂
Just started to read that Owen piece. glaring factual errors right from the start. a classic case of making the facts fit the theory.
Thanks Ernie. This forum has missed your input.
My take from that article is UK govt has been doing just fine damaging the NHS through tendering out services and increased use of management consultants without the EU, although its in line with EU policues on competition?
Teej, would welcome your evidence to support your comment please?
The EU did not force competition on the NHS. What they did was ensure any competitive tendering element was fair and that contracts awarded could not be taken away without due process. There was no need under EU law to open up the NHS to competition at all. But once it is then tendering must be done in line with EU regs. So its actually the UK governments that opened up the NHS to competative tendering not the EU
aslo brexit is damaging to the NHS in far greater ways than remaining in the EU
I only got a few paragraphs in because once he started arguing from false premise then everything after that becomes valueless.
Thanks TJ
tjagain Member
So its actually the UK governments that opened up the NHS to competative tendering not the EU
So you obviously didn't read the link then. If you had actually read it you know that that is exactly the point that David Owen makes, he couldn't be clearer. He blamed Labour, the Tories, and the LibDems.
glaring factual errors right from the start. a classic case of making the facts fit the theory.
Why for the love of god would David Owen do that? Do you actually know who David Owen is? Did you read my original post? I can reposted if you want, it's easy enough to do.
I think what happened TJ is that you started to read the link and very quickly realised that it was going to make you feel extremely uncomfortable as it was going to challenge your own personal views on the EU, with in-depth, detailed, and carefully researched analysis, so you decided to abandon it.
You then posted "a classic case of making the facts fit the theory" without even reading it properly - which your later comment proves. You were probably trying to convince yourself as much as everyone else.
Thanks Ernie. This forum has missed your input.
Thank you. I doubt however that it's a universally held opinion.
ernielynch
Member
Thanks Ernie. This forum has missed your input.
Thank you. I doubt however that it’s a universally held opinion.
I think you might be surprised. One of the things I value this forum for is the multitude of views and few if any have your viewpoint. Anyway no one has called me a wishy washy pale pink liberal for a while 🙂
