Johnson rewriting the Ministerial Code.

[Workingman]

In his favour, of course.

Guardian version, others are similar.

Spectacular timing given that his law breaking is to bring him before the Privileges Committee.

Gone is his own...

“There must be no bullying and no harassment; no leaking; no breach of collective responsibility. No misuse of taxpayer money and no actual or perceived conflicts of interest.

“The precious principles of public life enshrined in this document – integrity, objectivity, accountability, transparency, honesty and leadership in the public interest – must be honoured at all times; as must the political impartiality of our much admired civil service.”

In comes...

“Thirty years after it was first published, the ministerial code continues to fulfil its purpose, guiding my ministers on how they should act and arrange their affairs. As the leader of Her Majesty’s government, my accountability is to parliament and, via the ballot box, to the British people.”

The new version also makes the PM the arbiter of any action - he decides if he is accountable or not.

[Kaz]

It's a disgrace, he is a disgrace, degrading our once proud democracy

[Workingman]

It's a disgrace, he is a disgrace, degrading our once proud democracy

This. He is a very dangerous person for the country he is supposed to serve.

[saundra]

He just won't go he is a disgrace I agree but all of parliament is no better all the lies and deceit from all sides of our government

[Suff]

I've been waiting for this but I wasn't sure which side would do it.

Ministerial code has been weaponsied to try and break government for quite some time now. The press were even setting traps and trying to suck in ministers who would probably never have reached out in the first place.

What goes around comes around. Now they can't do it.

OK he's using it for himself. But what did you expect? There is a war going on here between the goverment, the civil service and the liberal press. You expected him to fold? Well that was stupid wasn't it?

There seems to be some myopic view that everyone around the government can attack them in any way they want and the government will "act the gentleman" and fall on their sword. Blair broke that and it is broken for all time. Boris just extended it.

I've no time for it.

[Kaz]

[Workingman]

:lol:

When things are not going their way in comments sections the Tory fans often resort to "Imagine what it would be like if Corbyn was in charge".

Ok, I'll do that....

Imagine if Corbyn was in charge and pulled Johnson's latest stunt. The Tory fans would be going ballistic. There heads would be exploding with cries of "Communist!", Marxist!", "Traitor!", "To the Tower and hang him."

And I might agree, but without the exploding head.

[Suff]

Actually I'm not saying imagine what it would be like. Corbyn wasn't that smart, Blair was.

All I'm saying is that this was a natural eventual outcome of the staged political war that has been going on for decades now.

Boris? He's just the one to do it. He did it then ignores it. Had it been Cameron I would have said the same but Cameron was too concerned about the image to do it.

[Workingman]

All I'm saying is that this was a natural eventual outcome of the staged political war that has been going on for decades now..

Centuries, but it took your man to make it about him and his ambitions.

He is a danger to our democracy and you bloody well know it. But he is you boy so it's OK.

The MC precursors were in the 80's under Thatcher and Major, Thje Questions of Procedure for Ministers (QPM),. Blair's was the first Ministerial Code. and Brown left it alone. It was in the hands of the Committee on Standards in Public Life. That has changed, it's now the PM.

There are ten sections and they are largely unchanged. What is now in place is that the arbiter of what constitutes an infringement rests with the sitting PM. He, or she, can now decide what is right or wrong - minor or major - and they can do it on their own actions. It is about as anti-democratic as things can get.

This should be the preserve of an independent committee of all parties. If Corbyn or Starmer was doing this there would be howls of protest, but it is your boy, so it's OK.

Not in my book.

[Suff]

Ah, yes, democracy in the hands of committees? Or quangos?

I see this as a warning. Stop it or the consequences could be much more than you ever considered.

The final arbiters of the honesty and integrity of any MP are the public. However when they are in government, their actions during the government reflect on the leader of the government, the PM. Now the PM has the ability to say "yes I want that person" or "No I do not want that person". Nobody is able to take away a team the PM has put together and this allows the PM more certainty of government.

If the ministers misbehave and the PM does not deal with them, then the people can vote the government out. At which point the PM is totally on the chopping block. It is like saying to a CEO "Well you can suggest a team, we'll decide if you can have that team and then if one of the team misbehaves we'll decide whether they can stay or not". Nice figurehead. Well the accountable person just got more power to decide who runs the things they are "accountable" for.

How our government runs internally is not a matter of democracy. You getting a free and fair vote is democracy. If you don't like what they do, then vote for someone else. Yes I know you are going to do that anyway. But don't go on about the internal workings of the government as if it is the core of our democracy. It is not. Your vote, your representatives and the two houses are our democracy. Not if the PM has the power to hire or fire for conduct unbecoming a minister.

So, no, I'm not going to stand against this change because I think it is about damned time that the government in power started telling the press and the interested parties to go do one and take it on the chin in the polls.

My ire at the 2019 parliament, running wild, taking briefings from what was essentially a foreign power and then trying to sabotage the workings of our government and the will of the people. Now that. THAT exactly, is a massive threat to our democracy and the people responded to it by giving a person they didn't really like or trust a mandate to stop it in its tracks.

Yes WM you liked what the 2019 parliament was doing because it might just have undone a decision that you didn't like or even believe people really meant. So you didn't see what they did as an attack on our democracy.

Take a long hard look. Because what Boris just did is the merest twilight twinkling star in the face of the full desert sunlight of an attack on our democracy carried out by the very people we are supposed to trust to uphold and protect it.