I want to see Johnson made to pay for actions during Covid pandemic
LIKE many other people, I watched Boris Johnson being questioned by the Commons Privileges Committee on Wednesday where he tried to justify all the gatherings that had taken place in Downing Street during lockdown due to the Covid pandemic.
It became very apparent that the rules and regulations laid down by him which everyone duly followed did not apply to him or his staff in Downing Street. In his opinion, it was acceptable to have these gatherings and he stated it was “right and proper and essential” to thank and motivate staff throughout the Covid pandemic – and, as far as he was concerned, he never meant to mislead Parliament.
Well, exactly what planet is Mr Johnson on? One rule for us to follow and another rule for him and his staff – there is absolutely no way he can begin to justify these actions
During the pandemic period, all the people who lost love ones who never got to say goodbye, all the stress and strain they were put under then and are still struggling with now, I can’t begin to put into words how they must have felt watching and listening to Boris Johnson trying to convince the committee he did absolutely nothing wrong, it was pathetic.
I hope he is made to pay for his actions, I hope the book is thrown at him and I sincerely hope his political career is finished once and for all. I think everyone has had their fill of Boris Johnson.
EK
Crookston
A DECLARATION of interests: I was a director of Club 1872 for the one- year term in 2017- 2018. I am a season- ticket holder and a
small shareholder and have supported Rangers for almost 60 years. think the article ( How Club 1872 can become major players at Rangers again after failed Dave King buyout, March 24) makes a number of good points.
I believe represented supporter investment can make a valuable contribution, particularly in leagues such as the Scottish League.
I think that Club 1872 has not pursued its strategic objectives with sufficient vigour since inception in 2016. I believe this to be for a number of reasons, not all of which are the responsibility of the various boards, but some are.
I think that co- ordination of the voices of any group of football supporters is a huge task that can only be performed with strong leadership and good communications with a positive agenda. The agenda must be strategic, but with other elements.
The article recalls the time of the RST and Rangers First. I don’t accept that either of these would have not struggled in the same way as Club 1872.
The current board have worked hard, they are volunteers and are time- limited. In my experience, they have committed a lot of their personal time without payment, even on expenses.
The investment in Rangers, even with the reservations expressed in the article, has been significant. Perhaps one of the strategic policies overlooked is the need to professionalise. Not to be mistaken for a bad use of funds, but the opposite. If this is to succeed, there may need to be salaried people beyond the current administration salary.
In the present day, criticism is at a personal level and often very harsh. If any person of ability and reputation is going to enter the fray, that reputation will be put at risk. I think this is the simple reason why many do not put themselves forward.
I think everyone who takes on such positions of responsibility has a period during which they are effective after which someone else should take on the role. Club 1872 is no different. All benefit from such change, if it is evolutionary.
Rangers supporters need to decide if they can value and commit to such an organisation – it requires money as well as words. The benefits for our club could be significant.
In my opinion, it is not about supporters owning the club in the way that Hearts supporters do. However, a significant supporter investment has to be represented; why would you invest if you do not have a voice and there is no process by which that voice can be articulated?