Current Affairs

[Gill W]

Technically there is no CJJ against the PM (not that we know of) as this application was invalid on two counts:

1. It was not in his correct name.
2. It was not delivered to his known place of residence.

My guess is that it was delivered to 10 Downing Street, opened by one of the office staff and treated as junk mail, of which I suspect there is plenty, and binned. I doubt that Boris even saw it.

The CCJ has been registered, so it exists, with all the problems that entails.

[Gill W]

Maybe Boris was busy. I seem to recall he has had a few minor issues on his plate that might distract him from a malicious CCJ claim by a known serial claimant. Still if some wish to give more credibility to a Covid denier than the PM that is up to them.

The issue I have is not the contents of the CCJ or if the person who lodged the application was credible.

My issue is the state of Boris Johnson

[Mervyn and Trish]

You were happy to accept a single source for the original story.

[david63]

The CCJ has been registered, so it exists, with all the problems that entails.

Not denying that a CJJ has been registered - but who has it been registered against? Legally not the PM

[Mervyn and Trish]

Who knows, I might have a CCJ against me but if it had been sent next door would I know?

[Mervyn and Trish]

BBC News - County court order against Boris Johnson struck out, says No 10
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-57099607

So there we go. Is that good enough Gill?

[oldbluefox]

According to the BBC the CJJ has been struck out. So pleased I wasn't taken in by it. More important issues at the moment than some scurrilous mischief making.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-57099607

Merv beat me to it!! B*****r!!!

[Gill W]

You were happy to accept a single source for the original story.

No, I checked that several trusted sources were talking about it before I posted on here

[Gill W]

BBC News - County court order against Boris Johnson struck out, says No 10
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-57099607

So there we go. Is that good enough Gill?

Good enough for what?

It doesn’t change that he had a CCJ registered against him

[Gill W]

According to the BBC the CJJ has been struck out. So pleased I wasn't taken in by it. More important issues at the moment than some scurrilous mischief making.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-57099607

Merv beat me to it!! B*****r!!!

it appears the report that a CCJ was registered was correct. Are you saying you weren’t taken in by something that was factually correct at the time it was reported?

[oldbluefox]

No I wasn't taken in by a bit of scurrilous mischief making otherwise why has it been struck out. Food for the more gullible.
I would rather concern myself with more important matters.

[towny44]

According to the BBC the CJJ has been struck out. So pleased I wasn't taken in by it. More important issues at the moment than some scurrilous mischief making.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-57099607

Merv beat me to it!! B*****r!!!

it appears the report that a CCJ was registered was correct. Are you saying you weren’t taken in by something that was factually correct at the time it was reported?

You are ignoring the old adage that when one is in a hole it's best to stop digging......just saying.

[Mervyn and Trish]

You were happy to accept a single source for the original story.

No, I checked that several trusted sources were talking about it before I posted on here

There was a single source. Private Eye. All the rest were reporting what Private Eye were saying.

[Mervyn and Trish]

According to the BBC the CJJ has been struck out. So pleased I wasn't taken in by it. More important issues at the moment than some scurrilous mischief making.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-57099607

Merv beat me to it!! B*****r!!!

it appears the report that a CCJ was registered was correct. Are you saying you weren’t taken in by something that was factually correct at the time it was reported?

I was waiting for the full facts. Now we have them it was scurrilous and has been struck out. That is the full story.

If Private Eye reports you are a shop lifter and then 24 hours later the conviction is quashed on appeal does that mean we should all assume you're a shoplifter anyway?

[Stephen]

Could it be automation has allot to answer for!

[Onelife]

I see Portugal has responded to the needs of the Portuguese tourist industry….and we have responded by allowing stupid/selfish people to go there.

[Gill W]

I see Portugal has responded to the needs of the Portuguese tourist industry….and we have responded by allowing stupid/selfish people to go there.

I really don’t know why people even want to go abroad for holidays at the moment. The situation is so fluid that it’s almost impossible to plan anything with a degree of certainty that the holiday will proceed or whether it will be disrupted.

On the subject of Covid, I think we put India on the red list far too late, and it has seeded the outbreak of the Indian variant.

Pakistan and Bangladesh went on the red list on 2nd April, and India was already in a worse state than those two countries. The announcement to put India on the Red List wasn’t made until 19th April, when India was a really bad state, to take effect from 23rd. This 4 day delay allowed lots of people to travel from India.

I have an opinion as to why there was such a delay in putting India on the Red List. I will not share this opinion, as everyone will get irate again.

But, it looks to me as if we still haven’t learned our lessons and took action too late.

I think the Indian variant will affect the next stage of unlocking on 21st June. As I always thought the dropping of all legal restrictions from the date was too much, this isn’t necessarily a bad thing.

[Manoverboard]

Getting a Trade deal with India has got zilch to do with Covid restrictions ... just saying.

The problem, imo, was that the Indian population could fly in via Turkey which was not red listed.

[Stephen]

But surely whatever route they came in by immigration should have tested and quarantined them or sent the back.

[Gill W]

Getting a Trade deal with India has got zilch to do with Covid restrictions ... just saying.

The negotiations for the trade arrangement didn’t have to be done face to face.

India wasn’t put on the red list until you know who cancelled his visit.

Odd coincidence, that. Just saying

[Manoverboard]

But surely whatever route they came in by immigration should have tested and quarantined them or sent the back.

The way it works, or so I believe, is that if such-a-body arrives from a red listed Country he/she will have to go into a designated Hotel and remain there until there is a period of 7 days without a negative test. If the Country is not red listed then it is ok to self isolate in one's own home.

[Manoverboard]

Getting a Trade deal with India has got zilch to do with Covid restrictions ... just saying.

The negotiations for the trade arrangement didn’t have to be done face to face.

India wasn’t put on the red list until you know who cancelled his visit.

Odd coincidence, that. Just saying

As you correctly point out .... it's a coincidence.

[oldbluefox]

Just what I thought...............coincidence.

[Stephen]

But surely whatever route they came in by immigration should have tested and quarantined them or sent the back.

The way it works, or so I believe, is that if such-a-body arrives from a red listed Country he/she will have to go into a designated Hotel and remain there until there is a period of 7 days without a negative test. If the Country is not red listed then it is ok to self isolate in one's own home.

I thought that's what I basically said.

[Ray B]

But surely whatever route they came in by immigration should have tested and quarantined them or sent the back.

I am sure a reporter said that some who missed the deadline to fly back had flown to another country, did the quarantine and then flew on to UK, which then just required a test.