Independent Leyton Orient Forum

StillSpike wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:23 pm I'm pretty certain that if it really was an "independent" review, BJ wouldn't smirk every time he referred to it. Neither would any of his henchpeople.

Dohnut wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:20 pm

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:41 pm

Dohnut wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:34 pm

I suspect they will be looking to see if the event was a party or a work event and whether is was reasonable for Boris to believe it was a work event.

And what, if any, Covid rules were broken and by whom.

Reviews like this remove the populist rhetoric and hysteria and look at cold, hard facts.

https://fullfact.org/health/outdoor-par ... -may-2020/

Rules in the workplace

As part of the government’s recovery strategy, it also published new guidelines for employers and staff on how to manage workplaces safely.

As a general principle, it advised employers that “you need to think about the risks [workers] face and do everything reasonably practicable to minimise them, recognising you cannot completely eliminate the risk of COVID-19.”

Assuming that Downing Street staff were considered essential workers who could not do their jobs from home, they were required to keep two metres apart whenever possible.

The workplace guidelines that applied in May 2020 do not say whether social gatherings between colleagues in the workplace were permitted, although they do advise that different teams should usually avoid mixing “as far as possible”.

The guidelines also say that meetings should usually be limited to “only absolutely necessary participants”. It also advised that these should be held outdoors or in well ventilated areas when possible. A separate document also said “workers should try to minimise all meetings and other gatherings in the workplace".

The guidelines said that breaks in common areas should usually be staggered and that any seating in these areas should be reconfigured “to maintain spacing and reduce face-to-face interactions.”

The government’s outdoor guidance on 20 May 2020 also said: “Businesses should also take reasonable steps to avoid people being gathered together.”

I have little doubt the review will examine the rules in detail and publish their findings. The review will consider the rules in their entirety and if see any exemptions can be applied or not. I hope and believe the outcome will be a fair and impartial review, as any audit should be.

What I do know is that snippets, such as you have identified, don’t always tell the full story. Life I rarely that simple.

The outcome could well mean Boris has little option but go. If so it will be as a result of an independent review.

Dohnut wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:39 pm

StillSpike wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:23 pm I'm pretty certain that if it really was an "independent" review, BJ wouldn't smirk every time he referred to it. Neither would any of his henchpeople.

I suspect and hope the review is thorough and fair. The person doing it has previous for doing just this. And her findings can be and probably will be rigorously tested. As the auditor her findings too are under the microscope.

Without doubt some will be unhappy with the findings, we await who.

Dohnut wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:39 pm

StillSpike wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:23 pm I'm pretty certain that if it really was an "independent" review, BJ wouldn't smirk every time he referred to it. Neither would any of his henchpeople.

I suspect and hope the review is thorough and fair. The person doing it has previous for doing just this. And her findings can be and probably will be rigorously tested. As the auditor her findings too are under the microscope.

Without doubt some will be unhappy with the findings, we await who.

StillSpike wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:23 pm I'm pretty certain that if it really was an "independent" review, BJ wouldn't smirk every time he referred to it. Neither would any of his henchpeople.

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 4:15 pm

Dohnut wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:20 pm

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:41 pm

https://fullfact.org/health/outdoor-par ... -may-2020/

Rules in the workplace

As part of the government’s recovery strategy, it also published new guidelines for employers and staff on how to manage workplaces safely.

As a general principle, it advised employers that “you need to think about the risks [workers] face and do everything reasonably practicable to minimise them, recognising you cannot completely eliminate the risk of COVID-19.”

Assuming that Downing Street staff were considered essential workers who could not do their jobs from home, they were required to keep two metres apart whenever possible.

The workplace guidelines that applied in May 2020 do not say whether social gatherings between colleagues in the workplace were permitted, although they do advise that different teams should usually avoid mixing “as far as possible”.

The guidelines also say that meetings should usually be limited to “only absolutely necessary participants”. It also advised that these should be held outdoors or in well ventilated areas when possible. A separate document also said “workers should try to minimise all meetings and other gatherings in the workplace".

The guidelines said that breaks in common areas should usually be staggered and that any seating in these areas should be reconfigured “to maintain spacing and reduce face-to-face interactions.”

The government’s outdoor guidance on 20 May 2020 also said: “Businesses should also take reasonable steps to avoid people being gathered together.”

I have little doubt the review will examine the rules in detail and publish their findings. The review will consider the rules in their entirety and if see any exemptions can be applied or not. I hope and believe the outcome will be a fair and impartial review, as any audit should be.

What I do know is that snippets, such as you have identified, don’t always tell the full story. Life I rarely that simple.

The outcome could well mean Boris has little option but go. If so it will be as a result of an independent review.

Ronnie Hotdogs wrote: ↑Fri Jan 21, 2022 10:51 am

Mate, there’s a couple rolling around on the grass in the top right hand corner.

Thor wrote: ↑Fri Jan 21, 2022 2:00 pm Boris is not going anywhere. He and the people in government have taken the piss out of us all. Some of us saw through it long ago and some of you are just waking up to it. Like spike and hotdog said above, they know its going to be stitch up cos he's relaxed, laughing and couldn't give two flying fucks about it.

I do feel for you all and how you’ve been played and mugged off.

Dohnut wrote: ↑Fri Jan 21, 2022 10:24 am

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 4:15 pm

Dohnut wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:20 pm

I have little doubt the review will examine the rules in detail and publish their findings. The review will consider the rules in their entirety and if see any exemptions can be applied or not. I hope and believe the outcome will be a fair and impartial review, as any audit should be.

What I do know is that snippets, such as you have identified, don’t always tell the full story. Life I rarely that simple.

The outcome could well mean Boris has little option but go. If so it will be as a result of an independent review.

Pretty clear many of you have not been to work events of this type. Nor do you need pens and paper to have a business discussion. Max said no booze at working events, I disagreed and Starmer proves that. I’ve “enjoyed” outside working events, with booze in moderation, lots of people, and too be honest lots of good stuff can come out of such informal work events. Sometimes more so than being stuck in a room.

I have no love for Boris and won’t be crying should he go. But the hysteria over this needs to be calmed down. As yet I have yet to see anything that suggests this was not a working event, even outside on a sunny day, even with wine.

What matters is if any Covid rules were broken. We can all accept the event was in poor taste, that is clear. Poor judgement, the issue is did it break any Covid rules, rules when looked at in their entirety, not cherry picking bits.

The review will not be influenced by the media frenzy, Boris being an bumhole, even the stories of others and their family loss. It will look at what happened and compare that to the laws. If laws have been broken, clear evidence will be provided. If that happens the calls for Boris to go will be hard to resist.

Thor wrote: ↑Fri Jan 21, 2022 2:00 pm Boris is not going anywhere. He and the people in government have taken the piss out of us all. Some of us saw through it long ago and some of you are just waking up to it. Like spike and hotdog said above, they know its going to be stitch up cos he's relaxed, laughing and couldn't give two flying fucks about it.

I do feel for you all and how you’ve been played and mugged off.

Dunners wrote: ↑Sun Jan 23, 2022 8:33 am Here's the thing. As bad as this is, I'm not sure it'll be the killer blow that Johnson's enemies think it will. Which is in itself quite telling.

Dunners wrote: ↑Fri Jan 21, 2022 2:58 pm Anyone on here from Hutton Hall near Brentwood? if so, ever see this Olivia sort?

greyhound wrote: ↑Sun Jan 23, 2022 4:05 pm https://uk.yahoo.com/news/no-10-officia ... 23680.html

FFS it beggars belief a f...... disgrace.
I will never vote again.nothing but a bunch of ?????