Current Affairs 2023

[Gill W]

Schofield: I think the issue is that Schofield, a man in his 50s at the time, met the young person when the boy was just 15, kept in contact via social media, got the boy a job, and the relationship became sexual as soon as the boy turned 18. There’s a whiff of grooming about it, to say the least. We only have Schofield’s version of events, not the young man’s. It is said that the young man is subject to a court injunction, so he can’t speak publicly about this.

There’s two sides to every story. And if there is an injunction against the young man to keep him quiet, then it suggests there’s more to it than what has already been made public.

It is also said that the injunction runs out in July. We shall see.

COVID Enquiry.If the government won’t provide the evidence requested by the enquiry, the question has to be what are they hiding. Under normal circumstances I’d find it astonishing that a UK government would act like this - but we are talking about THIS government, so it’s only to be expected. When Sunak became prime minister, he trumpeted that his government would be open and honest, yet here we are, with them desperately trying to avoid scrutiny and accountability

[Mervyn and Trish]

I think there is a complicated problem here. Yes, without doubt the inquiry should have everything that is relevant to ensure they can do their job. However they are asking for EVERYTHING. Every WhatsApp message, every hand written note about EVERYTHING the government was doing and they say they'll decide if it's relevant or not. The reluctance I very much suspect is based on the recent experience of the number of confidential government documents that with the help of opposition supporters and Civil Servants mysteriously find their way into the hands of the media. If I was in government I too would be very sceptical about handing over anything that was not 100% relevant.

[Mervyn and Trish]

On a different subject, diesel prices. I read that the average price is now £1.47 per litre. I am slightly baffled as to why on our current cruise we've seen it a good 10p cheaper than that on the Orkneys, one of the most remote parts of the UK, where it was actually 1p cheaper than unleaded petrol, and in Northern Ireland. If it can be so much cheaper there why not the rest of the UK?

[oldbluefox]

We have just come back from Scotland and diesel was cheaper in many petrol stations (not all) than unleaded. It's a strange one.

[david63]

What's all this diesel/petrol stuff?????

[oldbluefox]

What's all this diesel/petrol stuff?????

Would that be Duracell Man asking?

[Mervyn and Trish]

It's very clever. Latest thing. You can get cars with a range of 600 miles that you can recharge in 2 minutes, with public recharging stations with multiple charging points all over the place. Much cheaper to buy than those old ones running on AAA batteries too. It's the future.

[Stephen]

While back on planet earth

[screwy]

This day (4/6/74) I walked out the gates of Tidworth Garrison, Discharge papers clutched firmly in hand and began my integration back into Civvy Street. 50 years ago. Where has that gone. And I would do it all again albeit a bit differently.

Proud to have served.

[screwy]

This day (4/6/74) I walked out the gates of Tidworth Garrison, Discharge papers clutched firmly in hand and began my integration back into Civvy Street. 49 years ago. Where has that gone. And I would do it all again albeit a bit differently.

Proud to have served.

God knows why I put 50 . Maths was never my favourite subject.

[Stephen]

Now, about that £50 you owe me

[Mervyn and Trish]

Or is it £51?

[Manoverboard]

It may be legal but was it responsible to sow his oats in an ITV dressing room. There must surely be restrictions placed by one's employer regarding ' acts of a sexual nature ' on their premises during paid working hours.

I doubt its listed as not allowed in any contract terms, and whilst it might not be the done thing, I am with Ray on this, its nobody's business but their's.

Contracts relate to the job one is doing and the agreed targets relating to it.

Most employers would also have a code of practice which meant that if one was caught bonking the secretary in the reception area one would be presented with a P45.

[Stephen]

Or is it £51?

I’m not going to quible over a pound. Cash though, no cheques please.

[Gill W]

I think there is a complicated problem here. Yes, without doubt the inquiry should have everything that is relevant to ensure they can do their job. However they are asking for EVERYTHING. Every WhatsApp message, every hand written note about EVERYTHING the government was doing and they say they'll decide if it's relevant or not. The reluctance I very much suspect is based on the recent experience of the number of confidential government documents that with the help of opposition supporters and Civil Servants mysteriously find their way into the hands of the media. If I was in government I too would be very sceptical about handing over anything that was not 100% relevant.

The question is, who gets to decide what’s relevant? If it’s the government, then they can withhold what ever they want, under the excuse of ‘not relevant’.

I think the government should hand over anything that the independent enquiry requests, and let them decide the relevance of the documents.

Otherwise, trust in the process will evaporate - the government must not be allowed to manipulate an independent public enquiry.

[david63]

The question is, who gets to decide what’s relevant?

That should, in my opinion, be a joint decision between the inquiry and the Government with the caveat that it is presented to the inquiry at the appropriate time.

[Mervyn and Trish]

And with the caveat that if any material finds its way directly to the media the person responsible is identified and fired. My trust in the Civil Service is way lower than my trust in the Government.

[towny44]

It may be legal but was it responsible to sow his oats in an ITV dressing room. There must surely be restrictions placed by one's employer regarding ' acts of a sexual nature ' on their premises during paid working hours.

I doubt its listed as not allowed in any contract terms, and whilst it might not be the done thing, I am with Ray on this, its nobody's business but their's.

Contracts relate to the job one is doing and the agreed targets relating to it.

Most employers would also have a code of practice which meant that if one was caught bonking the secretary in the reception area one would be presented with a P45.

You must have worked for some hard nosed firms in your time Moby.

[oldbluefox]

I hope this 'independent' panel is more independent than the last one which was headed by one who had already declared her dislike of Boris adjudicating with the help of a report compiled by a left wing sympathiser who is soon to be in Starmer's pocket.
If something positive comes out of it then I think it will be worthwhile but if it's only purpose is to have a whinge at the actions of the government at the time the money could be better spent.

[david63]

if it's only purpose is to have a whinge at the actions of the government at the time

I suspect that the majority of this inquiry will revolve around one "expert" disagreeing with another "expert" over what should have been done and when.

At the end of the day nobody will be able to say with any certainty what the outcome would have been if a different course of action had been taken - it may have been better, it may have been worse or it may have not made the slightest bit of difference.

I am sure that there are some areas where lessons have already been learnt and "action plans" updated and undoubtable mistakes were made but it is all too easy to apportion blame after the event.

[towny44]

History tells us that as a country we are not very good at learning from mistakes of the past, so why do we keep spending fortunes on so many reports . Look at all the reports there have been on the NHS and Social Services, on things like poor maternity care child abuse as well as racial intolerance in various police forces. As a result I doubt this report will do anything but finger point at people or departments that did not perform well, but if we are never going to learn from the errors of the past, why do we continue to demand these reviews.
It's now almost 6 years since Grenfel tower, and there are still hundreds of tower blocks with unsafe cladding. That was a single issue event where everyone knew immediately the problem, and yet our legal system seems hell bent on making sure that those responsible dont have to pay for the replacement of the cladding, and even when it does the legal system allows companies to go bust so avoiding paying, and then allows them to reinvent themselves and continue trading.
Maybe it's our legal system that's not fit for purpose.

[david63]

why do we continue to demand these reviews

Because there are some who are hell bent on having someone to blame - in this instance there is the Bereaved Families and no doubt the opposition parties will jump on the bandwagon.

Does anyone know how many years this is due to take?

This has all the makings of becoming another Hillsborough.

[Stephen]

If you can believe what the papers say.

Now there's a surprise

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertain ... e-30117562

I can hear Keith crying in his hanky

[oldbluefox]

This has been widely reported for a while now. If true I wonder where it will leave Harry who has put his own family to the sword and a damaging and expensive custody battle for his children.
Maybe he will write a sequel to his last book..................SPARED?

[Ray B]

If you can believe what the papers say.

Now there's a surprise

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertain ... e-30117562

I can hear Keith crying in his hanky

Not seen Keith on here for a while, I do hope he's keeping well and is just taking a break.