cheltenham_villa Posted June 2, 2023 Share Posted June 2, 2023 47 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: Dunkirk is a decent example. Would you expect your government to be sending each other telegrams and letters that discuss juicey contracts for boat fuel and stretchers alongside what knickers they’ve bought the new spad, alongside discussing how many deaths would be too many to try and get a good propaganda spin alongside policy decisions on the direction of the war? No, neither would I. Oh, and face to face meetings were definitely happening in government during the pandemic, we have the party photos that prove it. So the choice your making is getting to see a couple of text messages about government contracts at the expense of a future government having the freedom to discuss openly some difficult decisions without fear of those things being used against them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted June 2, 2023 Share Posted June 2, 2023 1 minute ago, cheltenham_villa said: So the choice your making is getting to see a couple of text messages about government contracts at the expense of a future government having the freedom to discuss openly some difficult decisions without fear of those things being used against them. The choice I’m making is a process in place whereby a country has to be run at least as competently as a small to medium sized business. That really doesn’t feel like a big ask. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheltenham_villa Posted June 2, 2023 Share Posted June 2, 2023 1 minute ago, chrisp65 said: The choice I’m making is a process in place whereby a country has to be run at least as competently as a small to medium sized business. That really doesn’t feel like a big ask. Don't disagree, I'm just debating the benefits of seeing a few messages vs what that may cost in the future. I think people want another stick to beat the tories with, doesn't feel worth it to me when a hundred sticks already exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted June 2, 2023 Author Moderator Share Posted June 2, 2023 1 hour ago, cheltenham_villa said: I don't think the world works face to face anymore. It definitely didn't during the pandemic. My opinion is that a place still needs to exist for conversations that my explore extreme scenarios, those conversations may not be best shown in the public light. That's my concern here, the precedent and the limits it may place on the future development of policy, to be clear im not bothered about who the tories are shagging. Imagine a scenario like Dunkirk and place it in the modern day. You would expect people to explore scenarios that may determine how many lives should be risked to save some. I think politicians and others need the freedom to have those conversations and challenge each other without it becoming public record. It’s a valid concern, but there’s no indication that the Government chosen and appointed judge is remotely going to make scenario exploring messages public. She wants to be the arbiter of what is relevant and she is right to do so. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fun Factory Posted June 2, 2023 Share Posted June 2, 2023 On 01/06/2023 at 00:00, OutByEaster? said: Rishi Sunak's inability to wear glasses properly is very weird. They Live. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted June 2, 2023 Share Posted June 2, 2023 30 minutes ago, cheltenham_villa said: Don't disagree, I'm just debating the benefits of seeing a few messages vs what that may cost in the future. I think people want another stick to beat the tories with, doesn't feel worth it to me when a hundred sticks already exist. I’m not interested in seeing any personal messages and if the government have appointed an inquiry chair they think isn’t competent enough to keep the secret and the irrelevant out of the public eye, then who’s fault is that but the government’s? This isn’t anti tory (plenty of my content is anti tory), it’s anti sloppy standards being accepted and becoming the norm. Imagine the next crisis, will you be ok with government by WhatsApp ladz bantz where we can’t see decision making and learn from it because it might be mixed in with some gifs and chat about side hustles? We won’t learn, if we can’t see the workings out. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted June 2, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted June 2, 2023 It's quite simple. It's how normal well run companies work. Work phone for work stuff. Private phone for private stuff. I'm not even allowed WhatsApp on my work phone. It's actually quite worrying that he's got a phone with God only knows what on there that he's probably ferrying around with him, leaving on the table in pubs and brothels full of official Prime Minister conversations. Bet he hasn't even changed his pin code from 0000. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted June 2, 2023 Share Posted June 2, 2023 Johnson is claiming he will bypass the cabinet office and hand the phone to the enquiry directly so it must have some juicy stuff from Sunak in there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 2, 2023 Share Posted June 2, 2023 2 hours ago, The Fun Factory said: They Live. Rowdy Rodder Piper vibes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xela Posted June 2, 2023 Share Posted June 2, 2023 3 hours ago, sidcow said: It's quite simple. It's how normal well run companies work. Work phone for work stuff. Private phone for private stuff. I'm not even allowed WhatsApp on my work phone. It's actually quite worrying that he's got a phone with God only knows what on there that he's probably ferrying around with him, leaving on the table in pubs and brothels full of official Prime Minister conversations. Bet he hasn't even changed his pin code from 0000. Yep. If I want to discuss anything with a work colleague that I wouldn't want read out by my boss, I do it on my personal device. Work phone is work property and I'm very careful with it. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheltenham_villa Posted June 2, 2023 Share Posted June 2, 2023 4 hours ago, chrisp65 said: I’m not interested in seeing any personal messages and if the government have appointed an inquiry chair they think isn’t competent enough to keep the secret and the irrelevant out of the public eye, then who’s fault is that but the government’s? This isn’t anti tory (plenty of my content is anti tory), it’s anti sloppy standards being accepted and becoming the norm. Imagine the next crisis, will you be ok with government by WhatsApp ladz bantz where we can’t see decision making and learn from it because it might be mixed in with some gifs and chat about side hustles? We won’t learn, if we can’t see the workings out. 3 hours ago, sidcow said: It's quite simple. It's how normal well run companies work. Work phone for work stuff. Private phone for private stuff. I'm not even allowed WhatsApp on my work phone. It's actually quite worrying that he's got a phone with God only knows what on there that he's probably ferrying around with him, leaving on the table in pubs and brothels full of official Prime Minister conversations. Bet he hasn't even changed his pin code from 0000. I've no interest in whatsapp banter, i just want people to have freedom to have open conversations without fear that they will become front page news. I don't work in a political environment but I do work in a highly regulated one. I've been part of incidents where we were compelled to make whatsapp messages on personal devices available, it didn't sit right with me and I'm not comfortable with the slow eroding of privacy. My issues are nothing to do with boris, I've heard he's making the messages available, I'm just not comfortable with the precedent, I don't think it'd a good think for any future government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xela Posted June 2, 2023 Share Posted June 2, 2023 11 minutes ago, cheltenham_villa said: I don't work in a political environment but I do work in a highly regulated one. I've been part of incidents where we were compelled to make whatsapp messages on personal devices available, it didn't sit right with me and I'm not comfortable with the slow eroding of privacy. Select all -> delete all I know what you are saying though. I've heard of that in the finance industry. Not comfortable with it at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyrusr Posted June 2, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted June 2, 2023 5 minutes ago, cheltenham_villa said: I've no interest in whatsapp banter, i just want people to have freedom to have open conversations without fear that they will become front page news. I don't work in a political environment but I do work in a highly regulated one. I've been part of incidents where we were compelled to make whatsapp messages on personal devices available, it didn't sit right with me and I'm not comfortable with the slow eroding of privacy. My issues are nothing to do with boris, I've heard he's making the messages available, I'm just not comfortable with the precedent, I don't think it'd a good think for any future government. But this issue is with accountability of those in charge of making decisions for the benefit of the country. I accept that the situation is highly testing and mistakes are likely to be made; the language would be perhaps a little looser than normal due to the format; but it is about understanding the decision making process. It also completely ignores that these messages are to go the inquiry and then the inquiry makes the decision as to wider disclosure. I am pretty sure them slagging off Hancock behind his back, whilst amusing, isn't going to add anything particular. They are trying to not disclose to the inquiry itself. That is showing a lack of accountability and respect for the country itself. Sometimes, you need to show your working. It is something that has massively eroded over the last 10 or so years in particular. Ministers who were caught out lying or doing something wrong almost without question resigned. The government now doesn't do anything because how can we hold them to account? Every 5 years, that's it. They will lose the legal battle, they will still need to disclose the documents. We won't see everything; nor should we, but we have a right to know whether they wanted to "let the bodies pile up." We have a right to know what the channels of communication were with the covid supply lines. Should the government use an alternative to WhatsApp? Quite possibly, but irrespective they should still be accountable. *Also, on your own issue, I am not entirely convinced you would have necessarily been required to disclose WhatsApp messages on a private device. With personal data it is still subject to GDPR so you should have some protection under that umbrella but obviously don't know the full picture/position. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted June 2, 2023 Share Posted June 2, 2023 27 minutes ago, cheltenham_villa said: I've no interest in whatsapp banter, i just want people to have freedom to have open conversations without fear that they will become front page news. I don't work in a political environment but I do work in a highly regulated one. I've been part of incidents where we were compelled to make whatsapp messages on personal devices available, it didn't sit right with me and I'm not comfortable with the slow eroding of privacy. My issues are nothing to do with boris, I've heard he's making the messages available, I'm just not comfortable with the precedent, I don't think it'd a good think for any future government. This is not about Johnson. I’ve been involved in an incident that required an HSE investigation. How were they going to know they had truly learnt everything they needed to know to stop another similar incident if my privacy trumped the risk of death remaining for others in similar circumstances? How was I going to prove I’d acted absolutely correctly if others were allowed to select what information they chose to share with the investigation? I guess the other thing here, is these people have put themselves forward for public service. They don’t have to if they don’t like the idea of someone finding something personal on a phone. 226,000 people died in the UK, we shouldn’t learn all the lessons in case someone gets embarrassed by something? Nah. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolta Posted June 2, 2023 Share Posted June 2, 2023 46 minutes ago, cheltenham_villa said: I've no interest in whatsapp banter, i just want people to have freedom to have open conversations without fear that they will become front page news. I don't work in a political environment but I do work in a highly regulated one. I've been part of incidents where we were compelled to make whatsapp messages on personal devices available, it didn't sit right with me and I'm not comfortable with the slow eroding of privacy. My issues are nothing to do with boris, I've heard he's making the messages available, I'm just not comfortable with the precedent, I don't think it'd a good think for any future government. Isn't this just a standard part of the legal process. 'Discovery' in the US—maybe it's called something different in the UK—'disclosure?'. Famously it's why we know so much about the conversations of the utter bullshitters that are Fox News, Steve Bannon etc. via the Dominion lawsuit. I guess in the past personal whatsapps weren't the standard way of communicating—when people might have had to give access to paper trails/letters/emails. In this case, whatsapps were used to conduct official business. I get that there's maybe a little informal banter in there too, but this stuff is the modern equivalent of official communication. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted June 2, 2023 Moderator Share Posted June 2, 2023 2022 - Sue Ellen resigns over misuse of personal emails. 2023 - Government refuses to release encrypted WhatsApp’s messages How did we get from one to the other with open and honest Rishi? Is the reason the government won't release the messages to its own initiated enquiry, that it will show Sunak in a bad light? I rather suspect that is what is at play here. Remember it was very much rumoured that Sunak as Chancellor was very much against the furlough scheme etc but was forced into it by Johnson, he hen took all 5e credit for it. I also suspect that that is exactly why Johnson is all to happy to release them anyway. This isn’t about the tittle tattle that the messages may contain, it’s about the actual government business that was discussed Also the idea that this about privacy and it’s erosion is utter nonsense, equating this to privacy issues us as subjects of he UK may or may not be losing is an absolute false equivalence. These are government ministers running the country on our behalf, there really shouldn’t be an expectation of privacy. The government finds it easy enough to seal records of certain events in the national interest. When the decision making is done you know in the accepted manner. But let’s be honest, none of this was done that way and also that this inquiry was started at their behest, it’s their own inquiry that they are refusing to cooperate with Also don’t think that this will somehow makes you WhatsApp messages available to any court in the land, hey already are and always have been as long as a judge orders it so The WhatsApp rumble is all about Johnson vs Sunak, the fight for control of the party and very little else. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted June 3, 2023 Author Moderator Share Posted June 3, 2023 14 hours ago, chrisp65 said: This is not about Johnson. I agreed with your post, but this tiny bit…it is in a way all about Johnson, because everything always is where he’s involved. And it’s a very bad thing. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted June 3, 2023 Author Moderator Share Posted June 3, 2023 13 hours ago, bickster said: it. I also suspect that that is exactly why Johnson is all to happy to release them anyway Isn’t this a misapprehension? He’s playing games. He’s apparently handed over, or said he’ll hand over, ones from his new phone, but his old phone, on the other hand…no, siree Bob. No, you see, um, I can’t turn it on, because dangerous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted June 3, 2023 Share Posted June 3, 2023 33 minutes ago, blandy said: Isn’t this a misapprehension? He’s playing games. He’s apparently handed over, or said he’ll hand over, ones from his new phone, but his old phone, on the other hand…no, siree Bob. No, you see, um, I can’t turn it on, because dangerous. ...and then if I'm told it's safe to turn it on, I'll go through and provide the messages that I think are relevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted June 3, 2023 Author Moderator Share Posted June 3, 2023 24 minutes ago, ml1dch said: ...and then if I'm told it's safe to turn it on, I'll go through and provide the messages that I think are relevant. Exactly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts