Cabinet reshuffle Feb 2020
Discussion
markyb_lcy said:
Harmony and concentrating control to number 10 are not the same thing.
Whomever he appoints to a ministerial position, it should be someone whom he trusts to chose their own advisors.
Control should always be with no10. Whomever he appoints to a ministerial position, it should be someone whom he trusts to chose their own advisors.
You cannot have every govt dept doing entirely it's own thing. There have to be common strategic and harmonised objectives. They have to work together.
king arthur said:
Crippo said:
My Mp has put Cannock on the map, .....go Amanda Milling...what does Minister without Portfolio do exactly?
Make the tea I think.One of our businesses has worked with her on a number of local issues and found her to be an extremely active and diligent constituency MP. Definitely the type who spends more time doing than posting vacuous social media posts just for the sake of being seen to be doing.
JagLover said:
Boris wants to be a radical transformative PM and he couldn't be that with a traditional chancellor. He needed a trusted deputy who would work with him in one seamless team.
This seems to be totally at odds with what's been reported,they are reporting that Boris did NOT want Javid to leave & spent an hour or more trying to convince him to stay...So I can't see where this not wanting a traditional chancellor idea you have is coming from... perhaps you enlighten us thusly old man...Brooking10 said:
stongle said:
Sorry, disagree. Whilst I think Javid is a good stick, you can't measure him in chancellor terms. Bigger game afoot. Cummings should (by MO) always have burned him.
It might be a negative outcome on budget responsibility NOT in EU negotiations.
Prepared for you're best shot.....
My best shot is pretty simplistic It might be a negative outcome on budget responsibility NOT in EU negotiations.
Prepared for you're best shot.....
I happen to agree with that you that Javid had the potential to be a dissenting voice BUT I don’t think we have seen enough to make a definite call in that regard.
More to the point however given the level of expectation for, and scrutiny there is going to be of, this govt’s first budget the timing and manner of this are exceptionally clumsy and not deliberate.
Short version - the long range thinking idea you advance is not implausible but I certainly don’t think definitively the case.
As a result Boris needs to be careful that he isn’t seen as taking a Trumpian approach. While some on here would love to see it it’s an exceptionally big gamble given all those “rented votes”
Net net - today’s events are messy and not a good reflection irrespective of any longer range thinking.
Anyway....Rishi is my constituency MP, he's endeared himself to a lot of people round here, he was originally viewed with suspicion as the 'southern candidate parachuted in' but worked very had for constituents (including me and my family). He's helped to keep a much loved local hospital open, talks to and listens to farmers and business owners and is a regular attendee at fetes, shows and with voluntary groups in the area. he's a visible and active constituency MP.
However, since Christmas he's been more absent, he's not in the local news smiling in front of a school minibus with a giant cheque - it's clear he's not been around much.
Which leads me to wonder if he's been busy.
Maybe preparing an 'alternative' budget, with advisors who are more politically acceptable to
Advisors who, along with Rishi were ready to replace Sajid's SpAds once he capitulated?
Only he didn't toe the line, and jumped ship instead. Leaving Rishi standing there, looking like the Head Boy who's suddenly been promoted to Deputy Headmaster. Bit of a b
k dropped but hell, we have 5 years to run and this is just the start.Rishi as puppet or loyalist probably depends on your personal politics, I do know he's a decent guy with only 5 years' experience in politics elevated to one of the great offices of state which could easily go one way or the other for him so good luck - but I doubt we'll be seeing him up here for a while though....
ettore said:
He would appear to be a bright boy. Son of a GP and a pharmacist who arrived in the UK from E Africa. Scholarship to Winchester, first from Oxford and a Fulbright scholar at Stanford, then Goldman Sachs and into hedge fund land. Oh, and married the daughter of the billionaire founder of Infosys and Chancellor before 40.
Many will hate that but this chap is no eejit.
Certainly puts Rebecca Long Baileys CV into perspectiveMany will hate that but this chap is no eejit.
Gerradi said:
JagLover said:
Boris wants to be a radical transformative PM and he couldn't be that with a traditional chancellor. He needed a trusted deputy who would work with him in one seamless team.
This seems to be totally at odds with what's been reported,they are reporting that Boris did NOT want Javid to leave & spent an hour or more trying to convince him to stay...So I can't see where this not wanting a traditional chancellor idea you have is coming from... perhaps you enlighten us thusly old man...The info is widely available - they want a combined team across PM and Treasury to achieve their goals instead of it being antagonistic behind the scenes between mandarins who feel they have separate mandates.
That isn't massively unusual, but is a departure from the norm in recent times. Blair/Brown is a very good example of how that separation can cause issues.
Javid didn't want to dismiss the separate team - doesn't mean he personally dislikes the aims, but was perhaps more of a 'traditional' Chancellor in wanting to keep that separation.
We've seen loads of examples of a PM driving initiatives, only for Treasury to leak the 'necessary evils' to pay for it - not giving any opportunity to explore alternative options and instead using the court of public opinion to rally against something they don't like. That's unprofessional.
Cameron/Osborne were perhaps the best recent example of how it can work.
markyb_lcy said:
One wonders if the condition attached to staying (sacking the advisors) was requested either for a show of loyalty or because PM (or rather Dom) feels that the advisors are the ones doing the actual work.
I think it's more that it's exceptionally difficult to actually make fundamental changes whilst you have two separate teams, each operating under a different mandate (whether that mandate is driven by the Chancellor or not, there's plenty of evidence of Treasury SpAds/advisors working to a different model to those of No10).markyb_lcy said:
One wonders if the condition attached to staying (sacking the advisors) was requested either for a show of loyalty or because PM (or rather Dom) feels that the advisors are the ones doing the actual work.
As Dom probably is doing all the work.I think Boris sees himself as Chairman of UK PLC and Dom is CEO.
If you are seeking to radically change direction, then it is not reasonable to expect George and Phil’s advisers to be the right people to help you achieve that.
The biggest issue was that it was not exactly what the press expected, so words need to be hurriedly crafted.
Murph7355 said:
markyb_lcy said:
Harmony and concentrating control to number 10 are not the same thing.
Whomever he appoints to a ministerial position, it should be someone whom he trusts to chose their own advisors.
Control should always be with no10. Whomever he appoints to a ministerial position, it should be someone whom he trusts to chose their own advisors.
You cannot have every govt dept doing entirely it's own thing. There have to be common strategic and harmonised objectives. They have to work together.
For the Boris-haters, here at least he has set himself up as the pivot point for everything, if it goes to rat s
t then there is no one to point a finger at and it's his to own, death or glory.For the Cummings-haters, there is a fetishisation about him - 'puppets', 'PM Dom', 'unelected bureaucrat' etc which is at best only surface [mis-]representation. If you think the country can carry on in an C18th fashion while the Chinese build a hospital in 15 days off the cuff, if you think that our institutions aren't labored with antiquated systems, a torporous attitude and lack of accountability just when we need to be agile, adaptive, innovative and far-thinking or if you think we occupy some protected position in terms of market share, life style and standard of living that won't change given the rapid pace of external development and our new place in the world then fair enough, keep on hating. Claret on the rug is unavoidable, but let's not throw the claret out with the bath water - there's trillions on the pavement, but we won't pick it up stumbling about as we have done in the past.
He's intimately coupled [oo-er] with BJ and will fall quickly, like Boris, if he doesn't deliver, and I'll be first in the queue for the kicking if that happens.
It's in the above context that the re-shuffle, the control-freakery and the unorthodox should be seen.
[And fair play to Sajid and the other recently dispossessed, all have taken it with an unusual grace which is both good strategy and also quite grown up. Fair do's.]
rdjohn said:
markyb_lcy said:
One wonders if the condition attached to staying (sacking the advisors) was requested either for a show of loyalty or because PM (or rather Dom) feels that the advisors are the ones doing the actual work.
As Dom probably is doing all the work.I think Boris sees himself as Chairman of UK PLC and Dom is CEO.
If you are seeking to radically change direction, then it is not reasonable to expect George and Phil’s advisers to be the right people to help you achieve that.
The biggest issue was that it was not exactly what the press expected, so words need to be hurriedly crafted.
andy_s said:
If you think the country can carry on in an C18th fashion while the Chinese build a hospital in 15 days off the cuff, if you think that our institutions aren't labored with antiquated systems, a torporous attitude and lack of accountability just when we need to be agile, adaptive, innovative and far-thinking or if you think we occupy some protected position in terms of market share, life style and standard of living that won't change given the rapid pace of external development and our new place in the world then fair enough, keep on hating.
I think this is critically important point.Moving forward, the PM, the government matters little, if we cannot adapt to a rapidly changing world.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
No idea. He was so fking useless that his complete ineptitude overshadowed all his other failings. He did make loads of solemn pledges and do or die promises that he failed to keep.
Politician in competency shock, really?king useless that his complete ineptitude overshadowed all his other failings. He did make loads of solemn pledges and do or die promises that he failed to keep. Now he has a large Commons majority after being widely seen as the least worst option (blue wall) that must be an even bugger shock, prompting all sorts of petulant pops and fizzles.
Almost like the referendum result...and yesterday's housekeeping is the icing on the cake.
Stay in Bed Instead said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
No idea. He was so fking useless that his complete ineptitude overshadowed all his other failings. He did make loads of solemn pledges and do or die promises that he failed to keep.
king useless that his complete ineptitude overshadowed all his other failings. He did make loads of solemn pledges and do or die promises that he failed to keep. 
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Stay in Bed Instead said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
No idea. He was so fking useless that his complete ineptitude overshadowed all his other failings. He did make loads of solemn pledges and do or die promises that he failed to keep.
king useless that his complete ineptitude overshadowed all his other failings. He did make loads of solemn pledges and do or die promises that he failed to keep. If you look back over almost his entire career it is littered with unfulfilled promises, and (in his words) bluff and bluster.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff