Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Plenty of news outlets have used the phrases “if fined” and “if found to have broken the law” interchangeably, especially in their headlines. It I is very unlikely Starmer has distinguished these as two distinct alternative outcomes and I can’t find any written evidence that he has done so.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien
He hasn't. He made it clear that he is saying the fine is what decides if he has broken the law.
I also don't think it's likely the police will outright say he broke the law but they won't fine him. I think in the result they don't fine him any wording will stop short of saying he broke the law and instead say he broke 'guidance' or he 'may' have broken the law.
Starmer didn't change position here and i think the press knows that but it's an angle to keep the story going a bit.
|
I have to say, you both clearly didn’t take in everything Starmer stated last week. Sky’s Beth Rigby specifically asked him, linked his potential FPN, only being a resigning matter, Starmer referred her to his earlier remark that he would resign if he got a FPN. Even the guardian considered his position, having a “loophole”.
For reference here is his full statement:
There was lots of it being discussed that Starmer was using the
“Dominic Cummings, get out jail free card.” That Durham wouldn’t retrospectively issue a lockdown fine, given they didn’t with DC.
---------- Post added at 16:54 ---------- Previous post was at 16:07 ----------
I think what’s sparked this Express story about Keir supposedly changing his position, he’s been on Loose Women, he’s apparently said on there today:
Quote:
|
"I came in to make a difference & I want to show that we're not all the same & that, in the event I'm wrong, & that the police say I have done something wrong, then I will step down & do the honourable thing"
|
Causing Labour to thrash it out by saying:
Quote:
|
“An FPN is the only outcome if they conclude he broke the rules”.
|
Which it wasn’t in the case of Dominic Cummings.