Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party.

[yorksrob]

Nothing will be the final straw until there is a general election. It will go on and on.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

This isn't a bombshell, this is a nuclear bomb straight to the heart of the government.

Well that depends on a lot. So far all we have is a link to an article that's behind a paywall, so I guess none of us can read it. Firstly, is it true? We'll know that soon enough by whether it appears in other papers. Secondly, if it is true, did the hack result from Liz Truss failing to take basic security precautions, or was it a sophisticated hack that succeeded despite Liz Truss taking all precautions she reasonably could? If it's the former, then you could be correct, depending how many/which people didn't take precautions and whether those people are still in Government, or whether they left with Liz Truss. If it's the latter than it would be extremely worrying from a security point of view, but probably not politically significant.

 

[Busaholic]

Please, please, please for the love of all that is Holy, tell me this isn't true!

I don't for one second disagree with your sentiment, but I'd suggest caution at this stage. First, if it's true it's been known to be true for some time. Second, why is it being leaked now and who chose Dan Hodges to be the recipient? Of all the 'serious' political correspondents he seems to be the most contentious, some might say biased, even allowing that most work for right wing media. Even today he's suggesting that Sunak has already usurped Starmer in the polls based on one question (of many) that a small sample were asked and showed Sunak ahead by one percentage point on that. At the very least, to say there's a hidden agenda here is the least of it, and we may never know the purpose. If the leak came from the Security Services then a suspicion that it's all linked to the reinstatement of Braverman by Sunak must surely be behind it? I shall personally resist buying the Mail on Sunday tomorrow or reading it online, but I daresay other commentators will be speculating/commenting.

 

[Strathclyder]

The Mail on Sunday via Dan Hodges have, to put it mildly, dropped a bombshell:

https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1586387389358178306

https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1586387648608112642

https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1586387898395668481

In short, we've just seen why Government Ministers are not permitted to exchange top secret Government Business via personal devices; while Truss is no longer PM, this will be highly damaging.

Please, please, please for the love of all that is Holy, tell me this isn't true!

My first instinct upon reading this is to put my head through the nearest wall in a mixture of renewed disbelief, white-hot anger and a total lack of surprise given this Government's conduct with respect to personal devices and highly sensitive Government business (looking at you Braverman), but I'd suggest showing restraint and caution for now until we know more about this and whether or not there is any truth to it. Once other sources start reporting on it, we should, hopefully, get a better sense of it.

On it's surface though, this is yet another spadeful of dirt out of the hole the Tories are digging for themselves and merely reinforces my belief that a General Election is desperately needed.

 

[Gloster]

The Grauniad is also carrying the story, although it is making clear that it is ‘reports’, and says it was known about in the summer when Truss was running for PM, but details were suppressed by Johnson. The Telegraph, via my yahoo news feed, is saying that it was her personal ‘phone.

 

[GusB]

This is the article that the Guardian/ Observer has at the moment:

Government urged to investigate report Liz Truss’s phone was hacked

Breach discovered during Tory leadership in summer but details suppressed, the Mail on Sunday reports

www.theguardian.com

The government has been urged to launch an urgent investigation after reports that Liz Truss’s phone was hacked.

The breach was discovered when Truss, then the foreign secretary, was running for the Tory leadership in the summer, but details were suppressed by the then-prime minister, Boris Johnson, and the cabinet secretary, Simon Case, the Mail on Sunday reported.

Spies suspected of working for the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, gained access to sensitive information, including discussions about the Ukraine war with foreign officials, the newspaper said, citing unnamed sources.

It also claimed private conversations between Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng criticising Johnson fell into the hackers’ hands, leaving them at risk of blackmail.

Opposition parties are demanding an investigation into the alleged attack, which will raise questions about the UK’s cybersecurity, as well as the judgment of Johnson and Case.

If this had emerged during the leadership contest, we could have been spared the whole Truss as PM nonsense.

 

[Peterthegreat]

The BBC are now running the story.

Liz Truss phone hack claim prompts calls for investigation

The Mail on Sunday claims the ex-prime minister's phone was hacked while she was foreign secretary.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[brad465]

This could also be another example of "it's not the crime, it's the cover up". Even if it turns out no laws/rules were broken on the part of Truss (i.e. she wasn't using a personal phone to discuss Government business), the fact that senior staff both in Government and in the Senior Civil Service (chiefly Simon Case) tried to cover it up has only made the story look worse.

 

[Thirteen]

It always surprises me that MPs or anyone in Government would be mad enough to use their personal mobiles for sensitive information. That why work phone exists.

In other news which I'm not sure if it was mentioned but Huw Merriman has been made Minister for Transport, he was been part of the Transport Committee since 2015 and the chair since 2020 so a good pick as he's engaged with the unions in that previous role so I would hope he might be able to advise Mark Harper in how they can solve the current rail situation.

 

[Falcon1200]

Firstly, is it true? We'll know that soon enough by whether it appears in other papers. Secondly, if it is true, did the hack result from Liz Truss failing to take basic security precautions, or was it a sophisticated hack that succeeded despite Liz Truss taking all precautions she reasonably could?

Valid points, to which I would add; If, as reported on the BBC just now, the conversations hacked were between Liz Truss and others regarding the war in Ukraine, why have the hackers not, as far as we know, made any use of what they obtained?

This could also be another example of "it's not the crime, it's the cover up".

Normally I would agree 100%, but OTOH it is understandable that any Government would not want the hacking of their Minister's phones publicised!

 

[Typhoon]

In other news which I'm not sure if it was mentioned but Huw Merriman has been made Minister for Transport, he was been part of the Transport Committee since 2015 and the chair since 2020 so a good pick as he's engaged with the unions in that previous role so I would hope he might be able to advise Mark Harper in how they can solve the current rail situation.

Living in Southeast Today land, Merriman is often being interviewed (not just on transport matters). I'm quite impressed with him, he actually tries to answer questions rather than ranting, delivering catch phrases, or going on about what Labour (or the Lib Dems) have said. My concern is who will chair the Transport Select Committee in his place, From the list, all the candidates have made no impression on me whatsoever; and one is a whip so I guess that rules him out.
The trouble is, such has been the turnover in the government payroll, almost anyone with ability is in Sunak's government, or been discarded at some stage. If only there was someone who had recent experience of (say) international transport, an expressed interest in public transport, who had experience of being ultimately responsible for it in (say) a very large metropolitan region, who, unexpectedly, now has a lot of time on his hands, doesn't have a grudge to bear and has a reputation for being hardworking and good with detail (maybe not).

 

[takno]

It always surprises me that MPs or anyone in Government would be mad enough to use their personal mobiles for sensitive information. That why work phone exists.

In other news which I'm not sure if it was mentioned but Huw Merriman has been made Minister for Transport, he was been part of the Transport Committee since 2015 and the chair since 2020 so a good pick as he's engaged with the unions in that previous role so I would hope he might be able to advise Mark Harper in how they can solve the current rail situation.

People are surprisingly aggressive about wanting to use their personal device for work. I can understand not wanting to carry two phones, but we don't actually require them to. Even when presented with the opportunity to switch off from work entirely for a chunk of the day, many people will angrily demand the opportunity to read work email at all times.

 

[nw1]

I don't for one second disagree with your sentiment, but I'd suggest caution at this stage. First, if it's true it's been known to be true for some time. Second, why is it being leaked now and who chose Dan Hodges to be the recipient? Of all the 'serious' political correspondents he seems to be the most contentious, some might say biased, even allowing that most work for right wing media. Even today he's suggesting that Sunak has already usurped Starmer in the polls based on one question (of many) that a small sample were asked and showed Sunak ahead by one percentage point on that. At the very least, to say there's a hidden agenda here is the least of it, and we may never know the purpose. If the leak came from the Security Services then a suspicion that it's all linked to the reinstatement of Braverman by Sunak must surely be behind it? I shall personally resist buying the Mail on Sunday tomorrow or reading it online, but I daresay other commentators will be speculating/commenting.

By possible (unproven, of course!) "hidden agenda" do we hypothetically mean making Truss look bad in order to shore up the Sunak government? i.e. "It's ok, you can vote for the Tories again now Truss/Boris (delete as applicable) are not in charge!"

In other news I see that Boris is planning to attend COP27, when Sunak is not. It does seem, and I will grudgingly admit this, that Boris does have a genuine interest, certainly more than Sunak at any rate.

It's clear to me now that Boris himself was never the problem. Nor Truss, for that matter, though she did have some pretty crazy ideas. The problem was, and still is, the current, post-2019 Conservative Party as a whole, their lust for retaining power, their self-serving nature, and their arrogant refusal to admit that they have made mistakes.

 

[najaB]

Secondly, if it is true, did the hack result from Liz Truss failing to take basic security precautions,

If, as reported, it involved a personal phone then that's it, no further questions need to be asked.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

In other news I see that Boris is planning to attend COP27, when Sunak is not. It does seem, and I will grudgingly admit this, that Boris does have a genuine interest,

Most generous of you

It's clear to me now that Boris himself was never the problem. Nor Truss, for that matter, though she did have some pretty crazy ideas. The problem was, and still is, the current, post-2019 Conservative Party as a whole, their lust for retaining power, their self-serving nature, and their arrogant refusal to admit that they have made mistakes.

How do you square your assertion about an 'arrogant refusal to admit that they have made mistakes' with Sunak's first public speech as PM, in which he said:

But some mistakes were made.

Not borne of ill will or bad intentions. Quite the opposite, in fact. But mistakes nonetheless.

And I have been elected as leader of my party, and your Prime Minister, in part, to fix them.

 

[edwin_m]

Valid points, to which I would add; If, as reported on the BBC just now, the conversations hacked were between Liz Truss and others regarding the war in Ukraine, why have the hackers not, as far as we know, made any use of what they obtained?

Normally I would agree 100%, but OTOH it is understandable that any Government would not want the hacking of their Minister's phones publicised!

Since we don't know exactly what information they obtained, nor for certain who they were working for, it would be difficult to ascribe anyone's actions to having that information. In any case, if the spies are doing their job, they will be careful not to do anything that gives away that they have access to this information, or the other side might cut off the supply. For similar reasons, if the security services found out what was going on, they might be wanting to conceal that fact, while feeding false information to the spies.

Or perhaps I've read too many books about Enigma, and it's just a political cover-up...

 

[Herefordian]

Maybe that's because almost no-one on the threads that I read uses insulting nicknames and other abuse against politicians on the centre or the left? Whereas in these railforums threads I very regularly see abuse directed against right-wing politicians - often not just by one person, but with the abuse then repeated by multiple other posters.

To be clear, I regard abuse as wrong, no matter who it's directed at or what side of the debate they are on. But it's very clear to me that there is a particular problem on the left, where people on the left - including even senior politicians - seem to think that it's OK and culturally acceptable to abuse people on the right (remember Angela Rayner's 'Tory Scum' speech? Could you even imagine a senior Tory politician today making a speech declaring that Labour people are scum? It just wouldn't happen because - at least in the UK - that culture where abuse of opponents is considered socially acceptable simply isn't there in mainstream politics on the right.).

You must have missed the post calling Keir Starmer "Sir Beer" then.

 

[Gloster]

I think the point with personal ‘phones is that official communications should be made through official channels: a record is made of what is said on an official ‘phones. If a minister uses a personal ‘phone for state business there is no record of what was said and possibly no knowledge outside of the lucky inner group that a conversation took place.

If it is a personal ‘phone that has only been used for personal business then there is not really a problem: arguments with a spouse over whose turn it is to collect the kids or do the shopping may be mildly embarrassing, but no more. Of course, there could be evidence of unethical behaviour, such as tipping off friends in the City about international developments that affect the markets before they have been made public, but that is still not quite so serious.

If these allegations are true, then Truss has been grossly careless about security and has ignored the basic rules of good government. The cover-up, if there was one, and continued promotion of Truss display a quite appalling level of arrogance and contempt for the public and the rules.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Oct 2022 ==

You must have missed the post calling Keir Starmer "Sir Beer" then.

I was considering making the same point a day or two ago, but a quick search revealed that Dynamic Spirit did not appear to have used the word ‘Beer’, so I abandoned the post.

 

[brad465]

Normally I would agree 100%, but OTOH it is understandable that any Government would not want the hacking of their Minister's phones publicised!

If this was her work phone being hacked I'd agree, but it's reported to be her personal phone with work related information obtained. What should have happened was instant dismissal and a criminal investigation launched to make an example of Truss. At least then the Government could put all the scandal down to her and move on.

 

[nw1]

If this was her work phone being hacked I'd agree, but it's reported to be her personal phone with work related information obtained. What should have happened was instant dismissal and a criminal investigation launched to make an example of Truss. At least then the Government could put all the scandal down to her and move on.

Much as I am not a fan of Truss, I think subjecting her to a criminal investigation would be a bit over the top here. After all she was not actually knowingly colluding with Russian intelligence. However, I would agree that, if what is alleged did happen, it made her unsuitable for the role of Foreign Secretary, or Prime Minister for that matter (even if her pulling out as a result would necessitate a contest re-run).

Also I'd hope we do not reach a situation where Truss and Boris (again, much as I am no fan of either) are treated as the scapegoats when the real problem is arguably the Conservative Party as a whole. It would be really concerning if people are fooled by Sunak and we end up with a Tory win next time, just because "it's not Truss or Johnson". Unlikely, on balance, but possible.


== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Oct 2022 ==

How do you square your assertion about an 'arrogant refusal to admit that they have made mistakes' with Sunak's first public speech as PM, in which he said:

Maybe, but I'd like to see some specifics of what these mistakes are. It's not just Truss and her mini-budget; other mistakes have been made, IMO. Plus (and I realise that not everyone agrees) genuine acknowledgement that they had repeatedly made mistakes would be shown by offering to have a general election next spring.

Then, people can choose, sooner rather than later, whether they want to see the Tories continue in power, or whether they would prefer an alternative.

 

[jon0844]

If, as reported, it involved a personal phone then that's it, no further questions need to be asked.

It's very clear that the Tory line is now 'she apologised so time to move on'. I guess if Liz did far worse, then it makes sense to take this line because there may well be other stories to come - potentially involving other people - so you don't want them getting in trouble.

 

[nw1]

It's very clear that the Tory line is now 'she apologised so time to move on'. I guess if Liz did far worse, then it makes sense to take this line because there may well be other stories to come - potentially involving other people - so you don't want them getting in trouble.

Though we, as a country, really need to know.

If there's a systemic problem within the Tory Party then it needs to be made public.

 

[317 forever]

I find it fascinating that the Tories have managed to have three female PMs and the first non white PM whereas Labour hasn't even had a female Opposition Leader aside from temporary ones like Margaret Beckett and Harriet Harman. It does make me wonder if Starmer were to stand down, if they'd go for someone who's the polar opposite of Sunak like Angela Rayner or Lisa Nandy.

I wonder whether it was really worth their while having Liz Truss as Prime Minister, even for 7 weeks, just to add 1 more female Prime Minister to their tally.

With some of Boris Johnson's cabinet back such as Michael Gove and Dominic Raab, just a week after Grant Shapps came back, it reduces how much of a fresh start we really have since Boris's departure. Oh, and lest we forget, Rishi Sunak had a partygate fine too.

 

[najaB]

Much as I am not a fan of Truss, I think subjecting her to a criminal investigation would be a bit over the top here. After all she was not actually knowingly colluding with Russian intelligence.

If what has been reported is true then she will have been in breach of the Official Secrets Act:

Safeguarding of information.

(1)Where a Crown servant or government contractor, by virtue of his position as such, has in his possession or under his control any document or other article which it would be an offence under any of the foregoing provisions of this Act for him to disclose without lawful authority he is guilty of an offence if—

(a)being a Crown servant, he retains the document or article contrary to his official duty; or​

(b)being a government contractor, he fails to comply with an official direction for the return or disposal of the document or article, or if he fails to take such care to prevent the unauthorised disclosure of the document or article as a person in his position may reasonably be expected to take.​

 

[317 forever]

There is a difference between insults and nicknames.

When the Russians referred to Mrs Thatcher as "The Iron Lady", they meant it as an insult, but she turned it into a virtue.

However when a journalist referred to Liz Truss's cabinet as "The Coconut Cabinet" that definitely crossed a line, and was in my view unacceptable.

But if it is acceptable to call the Home Secretary "Cruella", then it is also acceptable to refer to the Leader of the Opposition as "Captain Hindsight". Referring to Sir Keir Starmer as "Old Ham Face" is going a bit too far though.

I agree that you can't have double standards in these matters, and you should treat other people as you would like to be treated yourself.

In part, Suella got her nickname Cruella as they rhyme. Mind you, I have recently seen a new nickname for her Leaky Su.

Talking about rhyming nicknames, Chris Grayling was famously nicknamed Failing Grayling.

 

[jon0844]

Though we, as a country, really need to know.

Of course. I was just speaking from the perspective of the Conservatives. Best to play down the seriousness now so it can continue to be played down.

 

[Thirteen]

Living in Southeast Today land, Merriman is often being interviewed (not just on transport matters). I'm quite impressed with him, he actually tries to answer questions rather than ranting, delivering catch phrases, or going on about what Labour (or the Lib Dems) have said. My concern is who will chair the Transport Select Committee in his place, From the list, all the candidates have made no impression on me whatsoever; and one is a whip so I guess that rules him out.
The trouble is, such has been the turnover in the government payroll, almost anyone with ability is in Sunak's government, or been discarded at some stage. If only there was someone who had recent experience of (say) international transport, an expressed interest in public transport, who had experience of being ultimately responsible for it in (say) a very large metropolitan region, who, unexpectedly, now has a lot of time on his hands, doesn't have a grudge to bear and has a reputation for being hardworking and good with detail (maybe not).

Yeah I’m not sure who will takeover Merriman as Chair of the Transport Committee but I think he’ll be a good asset to the DfT.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Living in Southeast Today land, Merriman is often being interviewed (not just on transport matters). I'm quite impressed with him, he actually tries to answer questions rather than ranting, delivering catch phrases, or going on about what Labour (or the Lib Dems) have said. My concern is who will chair the Transport Select Committee in his place, From the list, all the candidates have made no impression on me whatsoever; and one is a whip so I guess that rules him out.
The trouble is, such has been the turnover in the government payroll, almost anyone with ability is in Sunak's government, or been discarded at some stage. If only there was someone who had recent experience of (say) international transport, an expressed interest in public transport, who had experience of being ultimately responsible for it in (say) a very large metropolitan region, who, unexpectedly, now has a lot of time on his hands, doesn't have a grudge to bear and has a reputation for being hardworking and good with detail (maybe not).

Huw is a good choice but Sunak seems to have lifted all the better select committee chairs to cut them down to size over their ability to hold government to account and get them in the tent on side.

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

Being required to use an official phone I can understand, but are calls recorded?
..
My prediction: Sunak struggles to the end of the parliament, Sir Keir wins the general election and becomes PM, Sunak resigns as tory leader, BoJo returns as tory leader after being cleared (or not) of wrongdoing, BoJo becomes PM again later.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Being required to use an official phone I can understand, but are calls recorded?
..
My prediction: Sunak struggles to the end of the parliament, Sir Keir wins the general election and becomes PM, Sunak resigns as tory leader, BoJo returns as tory leader after being cleared (or not) of wrongdoing, BoJo becomes PM again later.

Labour should win but they won't command a big majority as Sunak government has reinstated semi-competence and that lead in the polls will soon be back in the teens. Braverman issues will blow over although i hope they don't but at the end of the day most people will recognise that they've dropped clangers with phones themselves and issue will run out of miles. Labour will try and play it but it will expose that they are limited to latching onto government weakness rather than promoting themselves. There maybe tough times ahead but Hunt is talking up the gloom so he can come in better than expectations.