You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Both the front pages you posted are from the Daily Mail, not the Mail On Sunday.
You may want to look at them again
I still think it's surprising mail quite happy to ignore plenty of other (Tory) indiscretions that other papers lead with
Either way I think this might finally be the end for braverman, even if she's found to have not broken ministerial code
Either way I think this might finally be the end for braverman, even if she’s found to have not broken ministerial code
If you really believe that then you shouldn't be surprised that the Mail On Sunday treated the story with the importance that it deserves - they couldn't simply ignore it or barely cover it.
If I am surprised by anything is that the pro-Tory Times newspaper broke the story, unless they knew that someone else would if they didn't, which is likely the case.
The Tories are not in a good position to win the general election next year they really can't afford to have onboard people who embarrass them and do them no favours. For that reason I tend to agree with you that this has possibly the potential to be end of Braverman's current cabinet career.
And I can't see the Tory press remaining particularly loyal towards other Tory politicians whose behaviour makes it harder for them.
Other than Sunday Times and MoS, it doesn't make the front pages.
What is the Observer leading on?
ITN this evening made Braverman their second story. Their top story was Phillip Schofield ffs.
Either way I think this might finally be the end for braverman, even if she’s found to have not broken ministerial code
I don't think so. This government is utterly shameless. Braverman will only go if Sunak decides it advantages him, and even then, he's not shown much sign of the courage to be ruthless.
I think the question to ask is why has this story broken now when it happened about a year ago?
Is it simply a coincidence or is there a connection with Braverman seen by many to be making a bid for the Tory leadership last week?
Yet another example of where just taking the points would have been the end of the matter but instead it's got to go through the whole "special treatment, exposé, cover up, denial..." phase all over the news.
Anyway, I thought the evil old crone was a fan of a points based system... ?!
Ernesto, Observer first edition front page - dodgy money from major donor to tories and Martin Amis' death.
Later editions may have different front page.
Both the Indie and ITV News see it differently to the Guardian TJ
https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/rishi-sunak-suella-braverman-speeding-points-b2342875.html
Yet another example of where just taking the points would have been the end of the matter but instead it’s got to go through the whole “special treatment, exposé, cover up, denial…” phase all over the news
She’s not very good at this politics lark, is she?
All this nonsense all over the papers for what? 3 points and a bit of a fine?
I see Rishi is taking the Arsene Wenger approach when questioned about it?
I think the question to ask is why has this story broken now when it happened about a year ago?
The thought did cross my mind too.
I’m sure it definitely didn’t come from Rishi and his aides because, as they’ve made quite clear, they didn’t know anything about it
At least if they’re busy doing their favourite thing – knifing each other – they have less time to devote to taking people’s basic human rights away, wrecking the economy and pumping shit into our rivers
Continue doing nothing about the shit and the rest of the shit.
according to the daily fail comments it's lefty AGC civil servants that dun it :/
We should have known it’d be the pesky Guardian-reading, tofu-eating wokerati that were behind it all!
I really don't get this.. 3 points and a reletivley small (reletivley zero compared to MPs take home pay if you take into consideration all the expenses waivers and side-gigs they all seem to have).
No one would reaally bat an eyelid if they just paid the fine, took the points and moved on.
But the covering up and wriggling and squirming to get out of it, and dishonesty...
It all just suggests that they really do think they are exceptional and should be immune to such rules of law, we see this time and time again.
I think there was a story going round that she had queried if speeding fines could be put through on expenses when she first became an MP.
That may have been up, or leaked as a prequel to the main feature here...
3 points would have been so easy to take I bet she drives all of a few miles a year anyway. she seems the type that likes having "staff" the ones we pay for anyway.
MCTD - she, reportedly, asked that question of IPSA and was told...no.
So much for MPs and, particularly, the governing party being held to a higher standard than the general population.
I'm old enough to remember when something like this happened the MP would've resigned by tea time
They can always get a taxi /chauffeur anyway for what it costs them... That could actually be put through expenses anyway.
It's just pure entitlement/elitism to try and wriggle out of a speeding ticket.
Absolutely hate that it's being spun as "she paid the fine so it's all OK". Nobody's bothered that she got a speeding fine, nobody's impressed that she paid it, but it's all just about pretending that's what the conversation is about rather than "politician doesn't think the rules that apply to everyone else should apply to them, again".
It's not looking particularly good for Braverman
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65659053
"On Monday the prime minister will meet Sir Laurie Magnus, the independent official who opposition parties want to examine the claims, when he returns from the G7 summit in Japan".
And:
"This kind of headline, while he is wrangling world leaders abroad, is a headache at home that he certainly does not need."
Yup.
It’s not looking particularly good for Braverman
Maybe she'll have to resign and then be reappointed 6 days later (again).
Previous resignation was for (checks notes) oh yes...breaches of the ministerial code.
Amazing how many "honest mistakes" you can make like that isn't it?!
She’ll already have told little Rishi how this is all going to play out
I think she'll be gone within 2 weeks. The tide has turned against her.
So she made a pitch to be next the PM and then all this comes out. Makes you think eh?
Or not.
Very good
I think she’ll be gone within 2 weeks. The tide has turned against her.
I'm not so sure, she's pushed very hard to become the Headbanger's darling, giving voice to all sorts of horrible little ideas to curry favour with the influential bastard fringe... I think it's worked for her.
Rishi's grasp on power is pretty weak, and there are plenty within his party (and his cabinet) who see him as a lame duck (probably quite rightly), unlikely to win the next election. They will happily undermine him to try and force another change of leadership, even if it means taking a few hits along the way.
It's worth keeping track of how far off the GE is (Jan 25 at the latest). Cruella and all the rest will have been told to get in line, or get out by mid July, the following 18 months will be a gradually ramped up campaign telling us how we've never had it so good and trying to keep a lid on their various little scandals and lies. You can bet your arse Rishi wants her gone, but she's not going to go without damaging him on her way...
She's toxic to the Tories on the national stage but knows how to play a dog whistle for the membership, so she'll thrive on the back benches and even once they're in opposition... She was made for the culture wars not for actual government...
So she made a pitch to be next the PM and then all this comes out.
It does seem a bit of a coincidence as the story presumably could have broken any time in the last year, it does suggest someone might have kept their powder dry for the right time.
Although it's pretty fanciful for her to believe that she stands any chance of a bid for the Tory leadership - she did very badly in last July's leadership election getting eliminated after the second round. And unlike Penny Mordaunt she didn't even get a look in at last October's contest.
Braverman isn't popular with the public either.
binners
Full MemberShe’ll already have told little Rishi how this is all going to play out
As much as I'd like to belive you are wrong, I fear you are correct.
Since when did MP's litteraly stop doing what they are paid for, and just fighting each other for cash?
It's like a really bad episode of big brother, or dancing on ice.
Don't aswer, it's a rhetorical question.
As much as I’d like to belive you are wrong, I fear you are correct
She’s the anointed mouthpiece of the association of right wing nutjobs that now make up a serious rump of Tory MPs and the entirety of their elderly racist membership
Rishi knows she’s got far more support in the party than he does. He may be the leader, in name only, but he’s just the latest hostage to the ERG Brexiteer/NatCon headbangers and the irradiated gerbil is calling the shots.
The Tory party is now just an ungovernable mess of fruitloop idealogical zealots who lost all sense of reason or rationality in 2016.
Don’t forget that nobody voted for Rishi. He’s there by default. The people who are making the decisions all thought that the best person for the job of running the country was Liz Truss. They’ve been in denial about their own stupidity ever since and are now lining up behind Cruella
the anointed
Doused in bergamot, patchouli, and mumufied... best place for her.
Breaking news..
Eygbitian goddess braverman has accepeted 3 points on her nonsense.
Interesting interview with Mr Loophole* on 5Live just now.
The course providers will offer private courses to high profile people whose attendance may disrupt a group course. Or their lawyer can request it on that basis - in which case it remains private under legal privilege.
You'd think the government's top lawyer (at tbe time) would know this....
*yes, I was surprised too.
This won't get rid of Braverman. She is too shameless, the nutters are digging in more as they lose more of their best positioned acolytes and it doesn't really seem 'enough'. It is obviously little Rish's play to take a bit of wind out of her sails after getting a shellacking in the locals and Cruella spouting off at that definitely not a fascist conference.
As for Tories being distracted so they can't pump our rivers full of more shit - we'll, that's plain daft. They don't do it themselves. They give the green light to their mates to do it so they can take bonuses and pay dividends. That ship has sailed - into a minefield of turds and used dobbers.
The whole Tory government does have the whiff of death about it, though. But there's still 18 months of environmental, societal and reputational damage they can do to the UK.
Rishi knows she’s got far more support in the party than he does.
There is no evidence of that. When there was talk of replacing Liz Truss during her disastrous premiership Rishi Sunak was the second most popular person among Tory Party members after Boris Johnson.
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnson-favourite-among-tory-25291273
Were Liz Truss to buckle to pressure and resign, Tory members would most want to see Boris Johnson brought back to replace her. One in three (32%) say he is the person they would most want to take over, followed by 23% for former chancellor and leadership rival Rishi Sunak and 10% for defence secretary Ben Wallace.
And even if Suella Braverman was somehow more popular among members it would make no difference to Rishi Sunak as he is vastly more popular than she is among Tory MPs - the only people who can trigger a leadership election and choose which two candidates are allowed to stand.
Suella Braverman might have a misplaced belief her own self-importance, I don't know, but I have no idea what it could possibly be based on. The last Tory leadership contest Braverman had the good sense not to bother to throw her hat in the ring and declare her intention to stand - the only other person who did apart from Rishi Sunak was Penny Mordaunt, someone vastly more popular than Braverman.
The whole Tory government does have the whiff of death about it, though. But there’s still 18 months of environmental, societal and reputational damage they can do to the UK.
Indeed and in some ways the infighting is a good thing, if they spend the next year and a half focussed on their various internal power struggles and generating more headline scandals it's all more fuel for the pyre.
The only real worry is just how short the voting public's collective memory seems to be.
The only real worry is just how short the voting public’s collective memory seems to be.
And how susceptible to posters and FB ads showing brown people in boats. 🙄
I think its both interesting and telling that the media is far more open to negative stories about the tories than they were a few years ago. Its like they are no longer afraid of retaliation from the tories.
I agree. Just read in Bringing Down Goliath that there's a sense in the judiciary that a lot of political capital was expended in ruling the Johnson cancellation of parliament illegal, so they're less likely to rule against the government as a result. Scary stuff...
Fun watching Yvette Cooper tearing a strip this afternoon during me break.
She normally sends out a minion to be torn a new one by Yvette Cooper
I agree. Just read in Bringing Down Goliath that there’s a sense in the judiciary that a lot of political capital was expended in ruling the Johnson cancellation of parliament illegal, so they’re less likely to rule against the government as a result. Scary stuff…
That is conflating two issues to an extent, though.
The point was the press (even the nastier, more bigoted end) seem to be turning on the Tories to an extent. Or at least not suppressing embarrassing stories about them. This has been a thing as long as I can remember - John Major nervously rang the editor of the Sun after the ERM pullout and near collapse of Sterling - to ask how his rag would play it. He was told "I've got a big bucket of shit and I'm going to pour it right over your head". Press interactions with politicians and who holds the whip hand is part of a free press and a democratic society. Putting aside all the wealth begets wealth ownership and obvious natural affiliations for a minute - no one in the press wants to be seen backing a loser. In a country with assured, competent leadership, politicians shouldn't run scared of the press because they should just be able to point to a record of achievement and say that it speaks for itself. But, we are lumbered with a bunch of over-promoted no-hopers right now - who hitched a ride on the Brexit wave. Now it is starting to fall apart (as us remoaners said it would) and the press is turning to some extent.
But that is the press.
The point about a supposedly independent judiciary expending political capital is very, very worrying. A judiciary should be apolitical - and ours, generally, does a very good job of being so. This is why bastards (and I use the word deliberately) like Johnson politicising the rulings of the judiciary (he certainly didn't loudly condemn the 'Enemies of the people' headline) is so dangerous. He will have thought it was a wizard wheeze to outplay the judiciary, but he doesn't give a toss about what happens later, so long as he gets what he wants now.
I'd rather have a press in the pockets of the Tories than the judiciary, that is for goddamm certain.
😡
^^^
Just to clarify - our judiciary has apparently been found wanting numerous times - Bloody Sunday, Hillsborough to name two.
But that has to the most extent because politicians have employed a combination of:
Limiting the scope of an investigation.
Briefing the press to get a story out to the court of public opinion.
Closing ranks and employing moves like national security to deny admissibility of evidence.
Etc.
Cruella gave this interview to Geebeebies earlier and repeated the same answer, word for word, in parliament to Yvette Cooper. Both times completely failing to address the question asked, which definitely wasn't "did you receive a speeding ticket?"
She's obviously been briefed to repeat it like a malfunctioning droid whatever anyone asks her to avoid the truth.
"In my view I’m confident nothing untoward has happened." is not an answer. Its just waffle.
I think Braverman is toast. The story is too prominent and the noises from no10 too equivocal
I think you're massively underestimating how completely shameless these lot are.
Do you fancy losing our usual bet again?
I'm saying Rishi waves it away, there is no sanction on her at all and she remains in post.
The usual pastry-based wager?
😀
Ok - score is one each IIRC.
gone in a month?
I agree with TJ - she is cooked. Not because Sunak thinks what she has done is wrong, but because firing her will allow him to eliminate a popular rival and look tough
"but because firing her will allow him to eliminate a popular rival and look tough"
If he does fire her then he's going to have all the bullies lined up against him. In which case I expect them to turn him up side down and shake him untill any political capitol he has left falls to the ground.
I hope you're right because I want to watch it happen.
I wish one of the reporters would go full “thick of it - Jamie” on her…….
Just answer the ****ing question……….
firing her will allow him to eliminate a popular rival and look tough
If she was a popular rival, and I don't think she is, it would probably be safer for Sunak to have her in cabinet and subject to cabinet discipline than on the backbenches causing more trouble.
Boris Johnson tops the list of people Conservative party members would most want to see take over if Liz Truss resigned
And if you had to choose from the same list, who would you most like to take over if Liz Truss resigned in the next few weeks? % of 530 Conservative party members
Boris Johnson
32
Rishi Sunak
23
Ben Wallace
10
Penny Mordaunt
9
Kemi Badenoch
8
Jeremy Hunt
7
Suella Braverman
3
Nadhim Zahawi
1
Tom Tugendhat
1
Michael Gove
1
Grant Shapps
0
Someone else
2
Don't know
2
Ok – score is one each IIRC.
gone in a month?
I’ll take that. She’ll definitely still be there in a month. She’s clearly going to brazen it out and Rishi is too weak to sack her as it’ll upset the headbangers
The pies you sent as my winnings last time were absolutely lush!
yer on!
Funniest part of this was Sunak's reply in Japan to Chris Mason - "Do you have any question on the summit?"... "Others will". Great one off retort from Mason given that Sunak was probably jet-lagged and only read it in the Sunday Times that morning (Maybe, probably put it there a few days earlier). I think she's toast too. It's Grayling's time...
She’s obviously been briefed to repeat it like a malfunctioning droid whatever anyone asks her to avoid the truth.
The Tories are good at producing "malfunctioning droid" ministers. Shame she's not boiled it down to a three-word-slogan yet though, i think that shows a certain lack of effort on her part.
Theresa May had it down to a fine art with "Brexit Means Brexit".
How long before speed cameras are a woke leftie conspiracy against our God-given freedoms to drive as fast as we like? It's especially ironic given her diktat to police chiefs last year to concentrate less on woke diversity training (her words) and more on fighting crime.
Here we are Cruella, we're fighting the crime of speeding.
NO, NOT LIKE THAT!!
How long before speed cameras are a woke leftie conspiracy against our God-given freedoms to drive as fast as we like?
Judging by my local Facebook community group this is already a widely held view.
Perhaps Suella Braverman leaked the speeding story herself - it turns out that she could probably do with an excuse to resign!
Apparently new figures out this week are likely show legal immigration at another record high, that won't go down well with her faction of the party.
Perhaps what was seen last week as a bid for the Tory leadership was actually her preparing for an excuse to resign from the government - "I don't agree with Rishi Sunak's policies on immigration".
She could use the fuss over her speeding incident as an excuse to resign portraying herself as the victim of a smear campaign.
The question is how soon she needs to resign to avoid bearing responsibility for the government’s failure to stop people crossing the Channel. The longer she stays in post, the harder it will be to say “I told you so”. Martyrdom is elusive once you’re complicit.
On Thursday (25 May), immigration figures will be released that are expected to be well over half a million. Her resignation letter writes itself: these figures prove that No 10 should have heeded my advice. What better time to go?
How long before speed cameras are a woke leftie conspiracy against our God-given freedoms to drive as fast as we like?
Doesn’t that place the Tories into an uncomfortable position though, because aren’t they supposed to be the party of Law and Order? The ones advocating increased surveillance and increasing numbers of cameras?
Although Wiltshire removed all of its speed cameras, and even the cash cow camera on the Batheaston Bypass has been deactivated, and that’s BANES; it’s always amusing following cars out of Bath, and watching drivers stick to just under 50 as they approach the camera heading East.
I don't think she is that clever Ernie. also she could resign on a point of principle rather than leak damaging info about herself
because aren’t they supposed to be the party of Law and Order?
And economic responsibility!
Doesn’t that place the Tories into an uncomfortable position though, because aren’t they supposed to be the party of Law and Order?
They’re very selective about which laws they want enforced though. Financial fraud over multimillion pound PPE contracts, say? Let’s just forget about that, eh? Would you like a knighthood to go with that yacht?
Glueing yourself to a bridge? Throw away the key!!
Rishi is too weak to sack her as it’ll upset the headbangers
Yep. They have little Rish by the balls.
This really isn't a law and order issue, it is a ministerial code issue. The ministerial code states that you have to separate out your private interests as a minister from your public duties,
It is widely accepted that if she had simply taken the points or the speed awareness course that would have been the end of the matter.
The only reason there is a problem is because she is alledged to have asked a civil servant to deal with a personal and private matter on her behalf.
The only reason there is a problem is because she is alledged to have asked a civil servant to deal with a personal and private matter on her behalf
The only reason there’s a problem is because yet again we have a Tory MP who thinks that the laws, rules and conventions that apply to everyone else, shouldn’t apply to them. She also thinks that civil servants are there purely to facilitate this for her and unquestioningly do her bidding
The sheer arrogance of it.
Isn’t the chief whip being quoted as saying ‘the problem with Suella is she thinks she can just do whatever she likes’
Hardly a novel attitude when it comes to the most high profile Tories, is it?
Well Simon Jenkins of the Guardian also manages to miss the point:
"There are many reasons the home secretary may not be right for the job, but this inflated drama isn’t one of them"
IMO Jenkins is right when he dismisses the speeding as trivial, it is. But of course Braverman should be sacked if she has yet again broken the ministerial code.
Rishi Sunak promised integrity in government, he can't reasonably expect to be taken seriously if he has a serial ministerial code breaker as Home Secretary.
And just to emphasise that he has completely missed the point Jenkins ends up waffling on about whether some speed limits and low-traffic neighborhoods are justified.
Does anyone view anything Simon Jenkins writes as anything other than total bollocks?
Exclusive:
One Tory insider said........
Why is the Guardian getting exclusive briefings against Braverman from a 'Tory insider'?
Are the knives out for Braverman?
Maybe some of them (the less far right neo nazis amongst them) see that yet more 'one rule for the plebs no rules for the leaders' from pretty much the top (home office is arguably the 3rd highest job after PM and Chancellor) is going to rile the general public further and consign even more of them to losing their seat at the election.
The only reason there is a problem is because she is alledged to have asked a civil servant to deal with a personal and private matter on her behalf
In the version I heard, asked the CS, get told no, and then instead gave it to an advisor to sort out with them.
The original enquiry I can sort of see - wasn't avoiding the offence, asking if a driving course was a possible alternative and if that can be private because there ARE possible reasons why someone like her might need to avoid attending a public course.
It's being told no and then as a lawyer, the ex-head of the profession in the UK, and now the Home Sec using unfair influence for potential private gain because you don't like the answers breaks the integrity test to me.
Might be minor compared to illegal proroguing parliament, but it is systemic in this lot. That's the issue.
"Honesty, integrity, accountability" was the promise from the steps of No 10. Can only mean one thing in my mind. But I'm not so sure in theirs.
The original enquiry I can sort of see – wasn’t avoiding the offence, asking if a driving course was a possible alternative and if that can be private because there ARE possible reasons why someone like her might need to avoid attending a public course
Curious to know the valid concerns which would prevent the SSHO attending an online course? Surely it would be more beneficial for the party of law and order to show justice applied to all?
As an aside I know a guy who works for the Home Office, got caught speeding, in his own car, off duty, put his hands up straight away, three points etc, nobody had any knowledge of his employment. Reports it to work - written warning; bringing the employer into disrepute. Going to be hard to justify that if the bosses take the piss without sanction.
Curious to know the valid concerns which would prevent the SSHO attending an online course?
Yes, that's the thing - video off in an online course is about avoiding political embarrassment, not ensuring security.
Reports it to work – written warning; bringing the employer into disrepute.
Really? Seems a bit unlikely..
I don't know what the concerns that may have been cited were, but the fact they exist indicates there must be cases where deemed appropriate. Freeman claims it's because the presence of 'celebrity' means that instead of concentrating on the course, everyone is sat there open mouthed because they're in a room with <celebrity criminal>
Conversation should have gone.
'I got done for speeding. Will I be offered a course instead of fine and points, and if so do I have to go to a public one, etc?'
'Nope. If you get offered a course, which we have no influence over, you'll have to do it like anyone else. No-one can be seen to be above the law, especially given the shitstorm already being created by perception. Suck it up'
'Ah OK, was just checking'
- I could live with that.
Curious to know the valid concerns which would prevent the SSHO attending an online course? Surely it would be more beneficial for the party of law and order to show justice applied to all?
High profile people get 121 sessions if their participation might disrupt a group session. The course providers or their lawyers can request it, works both ways. And it's fairly common.
The fact that the "governments top lawyer" at the time didn't know this speaks volumes.
as an aside.... you can do them online? Minimal inconvenience and you can be playing on your phone at the same time - who's to know otherwise, as long as you have half an eye on the course.
Surely that can't be appropriate?
As an aside I know a guy who works for the Home Office, got caught speeding, in his own car, off duty, put his hands up straight away, three points etc, nobody had any knowledge of his employment. Reports it to work – written warning; bringing the employer into disrepute. Going to be hard to justify that if the bosses take the piss without sanction.
Hopefully said person is composing a strongly worded email as we speak. It is a similar thing to a hypothetical situation where a new variant of covid with far higher mortality arises. If, heaven forbid, we did have to lockdown again or impose strict measures - I would say a significant minority or even narrow majority of the population would tell the advisors to shove it up their arses citing Johnson's behaviour.
With Braverman, the progressives who want her out need to be a bit careful because it will spun, obviously, as Home Secretary Ousted Over Three Speeding Points. This needs to be done with a great big billboard behind shouting how she was dismissed for breaking the Ministerial Code, then given another top job 6 days later - but has broken that code on at least one other occasion.
Remember this is all framed by the culture warriors as the blob getting rid of Raab by squealing to teacher about his bullying, now it is a Home Secretary being ousted over 3 points on her licence (not my framing, but plenty of gammons on other social media are pushing this). I strongly suspect there are a few Labour MPs and wannabe ministers who are having a think about how they have handled some issues and how it could play out.
I want the Tories gone at all costs, but I'd like it to be replaced by something much, much better.