‘Acrimonious’ Patel in hiding – and avoidance of parliamentary scrutiny not the strangest aspect
Home Secretary Priti Patel has refused four times to answer questions from the Home Affairs Select Committee of MPs, sending ‘acrimonious’ responses to invitations and claiming she would deign to appear toward the end of April.
Such arrogance on the part of Patel is hardly new – she has only appeared once before the committee since she was appointed to the position last July.
Far stranger is Patel’s entire invisibility during the coronavirus crisis, in spite of the fact that her department has oversight of the ‘lock-down’, including the police response.
Yet Patel has appeared on the nation’s television screens to issue platitudes, let alone to answer questions.
Last November, she appeared in a car-crash a BBC interview in which she blamed people and their local councils for poverty:
Are Patel’s handlers afraid she would be equally disastrous now?
Is she afraid she might be questioned about the multiple ‘tsunamis‘ of bullying accusations against her, including legal action brought by a former senior civil servant?
Is she hiding from questions about her incompetence over the Streatham terror attack by an early-release prisong in February?
Or is it simply the towering arrogance endemic in Boris Johnson’s supposed ‘government’?
Priti Patel has ample reason to run from scrutiny – but the invisibility of a Home Secretary during a national crisis is no less bizarre for that.
The SKWAWKBOX needs your support. This blog is provided free of charge but depends on the generosity of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here for a monthly donation via GoCardless. Thanks for your solidarity so this blog can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.
If you wish to reblog this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
This virus is showing very clearly that we have a government completely unfit for task.
It’s pretty clear: she’s being hidden in order to avoid embarrassing the government, just as Rees-Mogg was hidden during the election campaign in case he reminded the voters who they were really voting for.
That’s what happens when you surround yourself with 2nd rate brown-nosers and put Essex girl in charge of the state security apparatus.
Is she on holiday in Israel?
”Or is it simply the towering arrogance endemic in Boris Johnson’s supposed ‘government’?”
Summed up by patel’s ‘rictus grin’.
she’s out of the country negotiating the content , with Israel , for the next set of instructions to be given to Starmer imo.
Have you checked out the secret meetings in Israel?
Why not? The rest of them have run away!
Anyway, who’s arsed that there hasn’t been a woman fronting the coronavirus *ahem* ‘briefings’ over the past few weeks?
Nowt to do with sexism (Before the likes of ‘mizz balls’, greasy or harman get on their high horses); it’s because they’re all as utterly fucking useless as the ‘men’ (term used EXTREMELY loosely) in that cabinet.
Perhaps Priti Patel is avoiding questions on the recently released results from the Home Office Staff Survey into bullying.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/mar/27/survey-home-office-staff-bullying-claims
The Home Office people survey, which was conducted in autumn 2019 and was completed by 21,095 employees, is part of a civil service-wide assessment.
The results show 16% of respondents claim they had been discriminated against at work in the past 12 months, roughly equal to 3,375 individuals.
And 14% said they had been bullied or harassed at work in the same period, roughly equal to 2,950 employees.
The survey comes shortly after bullying allegations erupted at the top of the Home Office, with the home secretary, Priti Patel, accused of belittling officials and presiding over an “atmosphere of fear”.
The explanation may be quite simple :
Who would put Patel on the front burner if you were trying to give this bunch of Spivs credibility? She represents the base line of their credibility – on anything.