Matt Hancock

[ellal]

At least the revelations show that the reaction to the 'virus' was indeed politically led...

And corruption has been shown to be widespread...

The inquiry (that will take years and tens of millions of pounds) will conclude with no sanctions on anyone and a 'lessons will be learned' quip...

Hancock will end up in the House of Lards and nothing will be achieved, save putting an awful lot of money into a few people's pockets!

 

[motorbiking]

There will have been consideration (one of the elements of a contract) in exchange for working on the book. This doesn't have to come in the form of pay/money, it could literally have been credit for work, royalties on sales etc. Someone needed an NDA to be signed, because someone realised that disclosure of confidential material would cause damage. I'll leave it to Hancock and his publisher's lawyers to do the ground work on that. But the obvious one out of the door, is the revenue generated by the story, being received by the media. Then there is repetitional damage, leading to the loss of income/opportunity and the value of the book sales given the content has been leaked. A couple of million at least.

 

[Tigercubrider]

I disagree with her politics and Covid beliefs. I also dislike Handcock simply because he is a Tory Git.
However, she claims that the disclosure was "in the public interest" and arguably can use that as a defence in any legal proceeding.
One could also argue that the messages are Government Property, not MH's personal data.

If she has 100,000 What'sAp messages there is bound to be "something" that he wishes would stay out of the public eye.

 

[motorbiking]

Public interest defences are fairly limited.

Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998

An Act to protect individuals who make certain disclosures of information in the public interest; to allow such individuals to bring action in respect of victimisation; and for connected purposes.

www.legislation.gov.uk

 

[JP_]

I'm a bit late to this story. What did Hancock say that was so bad?

 

[diy_fun_uk]

It's Isabel that needs shafted!!!

I'll get my coat ...

 

[JohnD]

Then there is repetitional damage

Are you suggesting that the newspaper article will cause people to think less of Hancock than they did before?

Or that the revelations are untrue?

 

[motorbiking]

This isn't a defamation issue, it's a breach of contract issue.

 

[JohnD]

So what would you consider to be damages?

Can he show a financial loss?

 

[ellal]

So what would you consider to be damages?

The actual damages were to the health/education systems and the wrecking of the economy...

Senseless political/corrupt decisions made that created a nation of obedient jab junkies!

(Well some of us actually saw through the sham )

I'm just wondering what the jab junkies will say when the so called inquiry comes back with nothing of any value and when no heads roll?

Probably nothing to say, as is witnessed by their reluctance to comment on massive excess death figures from treatable illnesses/diseases that were ignored in the 'virus' hysteria!

 

[blup]

I'm a bit late to this story. What did Hancock say that was so bad?

Collateral damage from the eductn secretaray who suggested the teaching unions were a*ses, and teachers lazy.

Maybe gav can sue as well..............

Blup

 

[JP_]

Oh, so the usual political rubbish. Not good, but like anything that somebody might say in a private conversion. No defending him, but context is always important. Probably released now to most damage what with teacher strikes and talks of elections.

 

[blup]

I don't seehow the messages are confidential if it can be shown they would be disclosed under freedom of information. Coming across as a buffoon or an idiot is not a defence under foi afaik. Shades of the expenses scandal, prepare for the drip drip effect. Beware the May local elections, wipe out looms.

Blup

 

[ellal]

As more and more comes out we're well into 'you couldn't make this sh*t up territory'...

Hancock's deputy said...

"In fact, there was an idea at one moment that we might have to ask the public to exterminate all the cats in Britain"

No loss to be honest, but how would this have worked?

Typical of the bonkers approach to a 'virus' that is now something that 'can now be lived with'...

Could have been able to 'live with it' in the first place, but jab junkies are now dropping like flies of other treatable ailments!

 

[blup]

Bear in mind there are 100,000 messages.... Doubtless oakshchitt will leave out what is embarrassing to the hard right.

Blup