View Single Post
Old 04-05-2022, 16:43   #1929
Damien
Remoaner
Cable Forum Team
 
Damien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 32,763
Damien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver bling
Damien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver blingDamien has a lot of silver bling
Re: All those No.10 lockdown parties

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick View Post
No it is not, what part of the rule, you cannot share food with non-household members do you not understand?
Well, presumably the same issue the police had is that it's unrealistic to assume that people who are eating at work are breaking the law. The question is if it's a social or work gathering.

There is a lawyer who explains what the defence might be, and where that defense might fail, here: https://twitter.com/adamwagner1/stat...53930904211458


So the gathering is exempt under 'work' purposes and 'necessary for campaigning'. People need to eat at work so that probably isn't enough to trigger a fine. It's just if the beer turned it into a social occasion.

The beer (to me) is similar to the cake in it makes it seem more social. For example, no one is saying No 10 should be fined if they had a normal lunch during the lockdown in the same building.

If Starmer broke the law he should be fined too, especially since he voted for this laws so he isn't some random person. I am just pointing out why the police may not have fined him.
Damien is offline