Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2023 9:23:23 GMT
They've missed a trick here should have included buy a whippet and a flat cap đ This does bring to mind our former MP up here in Westmoreland and Lonsdale, the incredibly tone deaf Tim Collins who was regarded as a rising star of the Conservative Party until he lost his seat to Tim Farron.
His given address was Kensington & Chelsea, but in his election leaflets he claimed to have a great affinty for the area owing to the fact his mother owned a holiday home in the Lake District.
|
|
|
|
Post by barbara on Apr 22, 2023 9:40:06 GMT
My 2c. Being "bullied" was once considered a "rite of passage" as you started as a 'grunt' and worked your way up. The very same argument has been used to justify all sorts of bullying behaviours. Thankfully things have now changed. That's a good thing. That kind of attitude is a symptom of toxic people. Where a man ( and it is usually a man) thinks that in order to be a 'man' he has to be tough - either in bullying others or in taking bullying on the chin. A kind of 'suck it up and get on' mentality. It's prevalent amongst men who were beaten as children and aver that it never did them any harm when 5 minutes with them demonstrates the opposite. Fortunately the world has changed and thank goodness young people no longer accept the inevitability of a workplace where that sort of behaviour is acceptable. Even the term 'snowflake' is part of this mindset. That feeling upset is somehow weak. It's this version of masculinity that leads to the sorts of behaviours we are now hearing about in the Met Police. Interesting though that like all bullies, now someone has stood up to Raab he's busy spinning a narrative that he's the victim here. Nothing more 'snowflaky' than that. |
|
|
|
Post by hireton on Apr 22, 2023 9:45:30 GMT
Good to see all the roc's piling in to support a proven bully and buying into Raab's victim blaming.
In the meantime, a poignant moment in history:
|
|
|
|
Post by barbara on Apr 22, 2023 9:59:54 GMT
Just to clarify. It is entirely appropriate that politicians do not manage civil servants. The two jobs are completely different. Politicians are elected to exercise governance and deliver their manifesto by being clear about processes and outcomes and civil servants carry that out for them to ensure effective outcomes. Permanent Secretaries do that by managing their teams within the department and that includes managing their team's performance. It also includes them giving clear advice about whether the policy can be delivered using the minister's preferred delivery mechanism and advice about alternative strategies that might be more effective.
When I was a Director of Education I had a Lead Councillor responsible for Education and we worked closely together. Such Councillors were accountable to the Cabinet and Council Leader for their delivery and I was accountable to my CHief Executive for my role in that. Whoever was my Lead Councillor this always involved robust discussions about the best way to go about delivery and on some albeit very rare occasions where we couldn't agree and I had severe reservations I asked, in writing for a Cabinet direction - also in writing which I then carried out.
I always instructed staff below Asst Director level that if they received an instruction or critical feedback from any Cpuncillor they should always discuss it with their line manager. This was essential to ensure that all delivery was in line with the agreements my Lead Councillor and I had made and this was also essential to avoid chaos. I always made clear to Councillors that if they had any concerns about my department or any staff they should raise them with their Lead Councillor who would then raise them with me and I would undertake to deal with it. I also had on occasion a need to speak to my Lead Member about other Members' behaviours and he undertook to deal with that in his turn.
That is how good and effective governance, leadership and management works and Westminster is no different.
|
|
|
|
Post by barbara on Apr 22, 2023 10:01:59 GMT
They've missed a trick here should have included buy a whippet and a flat cap đ Perhaps they should follow the advice in this Victoria Wood song. "Pretend to be Northern." www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHscyhDp6Nk |
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Apr 22, 2023 10:10:28 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w "The impact of things like house prices, private sector energy prices, unemployment, the legacy of Thatcher and Blair, the impact of constraints on subsidies etc., gets ignored by you right wingers as just something to be accepted, no interest at all at the impacts. A wholesale acceptance of the basic Tory approach to economics, as with many of the Liberals." That really isn't consistent at all with any of the thinking of any liberal democrats I know. But to be fair the present iteration of the liberal democrat party would by most definitions fit into the category of mainstream left of centre social democracy and excluding the Orange book Clegg interruption it mostly has. I wasn't a member of any political party at the time as a serving police officer and enthusiastic Labour voter but I really couldn't see much to object to about the lib dems under either Ashdown or Kennedy, neither of whom I would have thought likely to have accepted the Tory coalition under the terms agreed and both of whom were superior leaders to either Sunak or Starmer. I don't think that Vince Cable would have negotiated an agreement on those terms either, but sadly (for what I understand were personal reasons) he chose not to stand for election as leader either against Ming Campbell, or against Nick Clegg and Chris Huhne. Had he done so, I believe that he would have won easily and the subsequent history of the Lib Dems could have been very different. |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Apr 22, 2023 10:19:49 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w "The impact of things like house prices, private sector energy prices, unemployment, the legacy of Thatcher and Blair, the impact of constraints on subsidies etc., gets ignored by you right wingers as just something to be accepted, no interest at all at the impacts. A wholesale acceptance of the basic Tory approach to economics, as with many of the Liberals." That really isn't consistent at all with any of the thinking of any liberal democrats I know. But to be fair the present iteration of the liberal democrat party would by most definitions fit into the category of mainstream left of centre social democracy and excluding the Orange book Clegg interruption it mostly has. I wasn't a member of any political party at the time as a serving police officer and enthusiastic Labour voter but I really couldn't see much to object to about the lib dems under either Ashdown or Kennedy, neither of whom I would have thought likely to have accepted the Tory coalition under the terms agreed and both of whom were superior leaders to either Sunak or Starmer. I don't think that Vince Cable would have negotiated an agreement on those terms either, but sadly (for what I understand were personal reasons) he chose not to stand for election as leader either against Ming Campbell, or against Nick Clegg and Chris Huhne. Had he done so, I believe that he would have won easily and the subsequent history of the Lib Dems could have been very different. But Cable went along with the Coalition . He was not forced to serve in it - but he did and bears some of the responsibility for the disastrous consequences. It is a pity he did not join Charles Kennedy in opposing it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2023 10:32:14 GMT
Gordon Brown was reprimanded by Sir Gus O'Donnell, the cabinet secretary,for his abusive behaviour and foul temper according to Rawnsley's book. The furious phone thrower appears to have escaped the fury of his staff. Pre Twitter I suppose. Churchill , on the other hand, seems to have secured his place in the civil service Hall of Shame. Didn't a bunch of Treasury staff say they were "uncomfortable"with a Treasury room named after Winston Churchill a couple of years ago ? Perhaps there is organisational memory of The Great Man saying "âAfter a time, civil servants tend to become no longer servants and no longer civil.â  |
|
|
|
Post by jib on Apr 22, 2023 10:37:21 GMT
But Cable went along with the Coalition . He was not forced to serve in it - but he did and bears some of the responsibility for the disastrous consequences. It is a pity he did not join Charles Kennedy in opposing it.  At the back, 4th from left by the way. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,573
|
Post by pjw1961 on Apr 22, 2023 10:56:49 GMT
Trevor: "For NHS then, a bit radical (and hence only a LAB govt could probably pull it off) but HMG (for England) sets the targets, set the budget (% of GDP or inflation linked) and delivery shifts outside of politicians control. That stops allowing 'the precious' NHS to be made a political football and 'money pit'." That is the situation now. The Government slightly rowed back on this when they got rid of Sir Simon Stevens as Chief Exec and the Department of Health took on some extra power, but it remains the case that Ministers are not responsible for operational delivery - there is no way they could be, the NHS is too large and diverse for that. P.s. The NHS is not a money pit. It is relatively cheap and efficient, while also being underfunded since 2010. www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/healthcaresystem/articles/howdoesukhealthcarespendingcomparewithothercountries/2019-08-291.Main points In 2017, the UK spent ÂŁ2,989 per person on healthcare, which was around the median for members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development: OECD (ÂŁ2,913 per person). However, of the G7 group of large, developed economies, UK healthcare spending per person was the second-lowest, with the highest spenders being France (ÂŁ3,737), Germany (ÂŁ4,432) and the United States (ÂŁ7,736). As a percentage of GDP, UK healthcare spending fell from 9.8% in 2013 to 9.6% in 2017, while healthcare spending as a percentage of GDP rose for four of the remaining six G7 countries. The UKâs publicly funded NHS-based health system contributes to the UK having one of the highest shares of publicly funded healthcare (79%) in the OECD. In 2017, the UK spent the equivalent of ÂŁ560 per person on health-related long-term care, which was less than most other northern or western European countries, but a similar amount to France (ÂŁ569) and Canada (ÂŁ556)." |
|
|
|
Post by barbara on Apr 22, 2023 11:33:27 GMT
It's funny how there are loads of instances where politicians speak in a derogatory manner about civil servants and the Civil Service but relatively fewer the other way round. That is partly because of the rule of impartiality set on civil servants and partly because any public criticism of politicians is likely to affect their future careers.
It's interesting and a good counterpoint to Raab's verbal incontinence yesterday that a number of retired civil servants have been on the airways today to speak on behalf of the CS in a way that serving civil servants are unable to do. There is of course no such constraint on the behaviour of serving politicians since they are not expected to be impartial or in lots of ways even behave in a professional way.
|
|
|
|
Post by alec on Apr 22, 2023 13:00:31 GMT
pjw1961 - no idea why Trevor seems to think that some mechanism for funding the NHS will stop it being a political football. All over the world, under all different funding and delivery models, health is a political football. But that's the real world, not TrevWorld TM.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimjam on Apr 22, 2023 13:21:58 GMT
Colin,
I have come to the view that a few open political appointments by Governments so ministers can have someone they trust politically as progress chasers, policy drivers and priority setters at the heart of their activity would be beneficial to the body politic of the country.
The current system of Spads with no formal authority but who civil servants may feel obliged to take instructions from is unsatisfactory as it gives no proper accountability channels.
It would no way need as extensive as in the US and I would exclude law officers but don't think the current balance is right.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,641
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Apr 22, 2023 13:58:10 GMT
On the subject of bullying bosses we had some classics in the Met, there are several incidents which show the combination of both delusions of adequacy and the failure to understand that despite being in large part a uniformed and disciplined organisation civilian police officers don't respond like military personnel and won't just obey orders however ludicrous they might be
It's also strongly advised that senior officers listen when they are being given advice/ instructions about appropriate behaviour,many of course don't but think bluster and intimidation will cajole obedience and sometimes it did normally with detrimental consequences.
There are incidences when operational officers have come to blows with senior commanders because of their crass stupidity , especially when it can endanger the officers or public.
There are a number of occasions when this managerial ineptitude extends to the public one comes to mind when called by a divisional commander to deal with a violent and potentially armed mentally unstable individual.
When seeing a team of public order armed officers turn up the on scene senior officer first demanded that we take off our protective equipment as it was a " nice neighbourhood " and secondly that we follow his detailed instructions, having politely ascertained that he didn't know what he was doing we equally politely told him to fuck off as he would be endangering everyone.
But guided by his own innate feelings that senior meant superior he insisted on taking control
While explaining this to locals gathered to watch one of the " nice " neighbours clearly objected as he hit him over the head with a table leg.
His second in command was far more receptive to our help and no further injuries were sustained.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,641
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Apr 22, 2023 14:05:24 GMT
"The Daily Express is reporting that Dominic Rabb could be offered a spot as a television presenter on GB News.
A senior source at the right-wing news channel, told the newspaper:
He would do very well for us and it is rare that somebody of his calibre comes along."
it's undeniably true that few people of Raab's calibre exist outside of the Tory regime, for which we can be eternally grateful I am sure both of GB news viewers will love him.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2023 14:08:21 GMT
Colin, I have come to the view that a few open political appointments by Governments so ministers can have someone they trust politically as progress chasers, policy drivers and priority setters at the heart of their activity would be beneficial to the body politic of the country. The current system of Spads with no formal authority but who civil servants may feel obliged to take instructions from is unsatisfactory as it gives no proper accountability channels. It would be no way need as extensive as in the US and I would exclude law officers but don't think the current balance is right. I agree jimjam that the current "balance " is not working. As I said , I think the theory that an immaculately impartial Civil Service will pursue , with vigour, the policy objectives of any and every government is flawed . I have a feeling it is from a bygone , more deferential era. And the apparent inability of the elected Minister to demand job performance criteria , without going through a third party disciplinary process makes me think it isnt fit for purpose today. Imagine a Private Sector company in a market demanding rapid responses from high level decision makers , in which the CEO could not make direct performance demands of his/her staff. The Ministerial Code and the Civil Service Code seem to function as though they related to two different entities. I like the idea of your half way house to a politically appointed civil service, ( I dont entirely like the US system) . But how would the seniority be structured between those accountable under a Civil Service Code -and those under the Ministerial Code ? Its a difficult one. Clearly it doesn't help staff morale when ministers throw phones, verbally abuse their staff , or, as in Raab's case act in an "intimidating manner". But neither does it help government efficiency , one must presume if/when civil servants provide inadequate / incomplete briefings, or fail to pursue policy objectives with vigour. I think you are spot on with the word "trust". When that breaks down for both minister and staff , I imagine the Department can no longer operate purposefully. |
|
|
|
Post by pete on Apr 22, 2023 14:08:51 GMT
Barry Humphries RIP
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,573
|
Post by pjw1961 on Apr 22, 2023 14:33:09 GMT
"The Daily Express is reporting that Dominic Rabb could be offered a spot as a television presenter on GB News. A senior source at the right-wing news channel, told the newspaper: He would do very well for us and it is rare that somebody of his calibre comes along." it's undeniably true that few people of Raab's calibre exist outside of the Tory regime, for which we can be eternally for I am sure both of GB news viewers will love him. GB News presenters include Nigel Farage, Jacob Rees-Mogg, Dan 'conspiracy theory' Wootton, Laurence 'gays are paedophiles' Fox, Neil 'silent war' Oliver, anti-lockdown MP Ester McVey and Arlene Foster among many others. Which prompts the question - what's the collective noun for a group of right-wing nut-jobs? |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,641
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Apr 22, 2023 14:41:27 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by barbara on Apr 22, 2023 14:59:21 GMT
Colin, I have come to the view that a few open political appointments by Governments so ministers can have someone they trust politically as progress chasers, policy drivers and priority setters at the heart of their activity would be beneficial to the body politic of the country. The current system of Spads with no formal authority but who civil servants may feel obliged to take instructions from is unsatisfactory as it gives no proper accountability channels. It would no way need as extensive as in the US and I would exclude law officers but don't think the current balance is right. That might be an option and as long as it was clear I think would clarify lines of accountability. I get so fed up with people comparing the private sector to the public sector. Private sector companies don't spend public money. (except when Conservative governments hand them lucrative contracts on the side) and are accountable only to their shareholders who care for very little except profit. The public sector operates by different, supposedly non profit making rules with different outcomes relating to wellbeing not profit and are accountable to the public at the ballot box. |
|
|
|
Post by moby on Apr 22, 2023 15:32:30 GMT
Colin, I have come to the view that a few open political appointments by Governments so ministers can have someone they trust politically as progress chasers, policy drivers and priority setters at the heart of their activity would be beneficial to the body politic of the country. The current system of Spads with no formal authority but who civil servants may feel obliged to take instructions from is unsatisfactory as it gives no proper accountability channels. It would no way need as extensive as in the US and I would exclude law officers but don't think the current balance is right. There's nothing wrong with the Permanent Secretary system we have now imo. We shouldn't blur the lines between expected standards of performance and aberrant behaviour. Raab simply wasn't prepared to go through the normal channels and chose to personally interfere in normal processes of staff appraisal/accountability etc. He was a particularly headstrong, loose cannon e.g he also failed to take legal advice within the MOJ and found himself in contempt of Court for interfering with the parole process. No system can cater for people who are unreasonable in their own behaviours. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,641
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Apr 22, 2023 15:41:18 GMT
jibI presume that's from your personal scrap book. It does however remind people that the Tory party just a decade ago had people like Dominic Grieve , Ken Clarke and Sayeeda Warsi in government I didn't vote for them but they were an order of magnitude better than the current shower of lying far right incompetents
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,573
|
Post by pjw1961 on Apr 22, 2023 15:48:24 GMT
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,641
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Apr 22, 2023 15:56:08 GMT
pjw1961 100% endorse their efforts.
|
|
|
|
Post by hireton on Apr 22, 2023 15:56:55 GMT
Ministers are not, nor should they be, departmental CEOs
There is no evidence other than Raab's attempt at victim naming that any of the inadequacies he alleges actually happened.
This "deep state opposition " conspiracy theory of why 13 years of Tory government has so utterly failed is straight out of the GOP playbook in the USA and simply deflects from the utter inadequacies of people like Johnson, Truss and Raab.
The "deep state opposition" delivered Brexit (which according to the same politicians is a great success), Truss's kamikaze economics and Raab's Human Rights Bill which is completely failed to gain political support for.
|
|
|
|
Post by catfuzz on Apr 22, 2023 16:16:31 GMT
Yes, âdeep stateâ mentality is baffling. If youâre a person in the highest office, with power to change things and the attitude of someone who can âmake things happenâ, then why is the very system you work for impossible to change?
One of three reasons:
1. Because there are systems and checks in place to prevent one individual from having too much power above their station or outside of their remit?
2. Because said âhigh and mightyâ individual is not as talented or powerful as they claim, and / or there are others who have a different point of view?
3. A cabal of shadowy puppeteers are REALLY in control of government, with more power and sway than the PM, that ignore accountability and just do whatever they want and nothing can stop them.
I wonder which one is closer to the truth?
|
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,392
|
Post by neilj on Apr 22, 2023 16:32:22 GMT
Is anyone surprised at this www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/apr/22/i-am-the-fuhrer-im-the-king-new-book-lifts-lid-on-life-inside-boris-johnsons-chaotic-no-10 It argues that Johnson blamed Cummings and his wife, Carrie Johnson, to disguise his own reluctance to take difficult decisions in Downing Street. Seldonâs book states that Johnson described his then fiancee Carrie as âmad and crazyâ as he used her as an excuse to avoid confrontations. Cummings would tell officials and ministers: âDonât tell the PMâ or âOh, donât bother him with thisâ. The book claims it eventually led to the extraordinary outburst from Johnson: âI am meant to be in control. I am the fĂźhrer. Iâm the king who takes the decisions.â |
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Apr 22, 2023 16:42:13 GMT
It's certainly upset the Party HQs, I know we were told that local parties were expected to fight all seats on local councils and any agreements with other parties had to be approved no lower than Regional Party level. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,641
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Apr 22, 2023 16:56:33 GMT
leftieliberalIndeed but it's still my personal opinion that it makes sense.
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,573
|
Post by pjw1961 on Apr 22, 2023 17:00:20 GMT
For the record the wards break down as follows (in each case the number of Con = the number of Councillors for that ward) 3 Con v 3 Lab - 4 instances 3 Con v 3 Lab, 1 RefUK, 1 Heritage - 1 instance 3 Con v 3 Lab, 1 Green - 1 instance 3 Con v 3 Lib Dem - 3 instances 3 Con v 2 Green, 1 Lib Dem - 1 instance 3 Con v 2 Green - 1 instance (therefore one guaranteed Tory) 2 Con v 2 Lab - 1 instance 2 Con v 2 Lab, 1 Independent - 1 instance 2 Con v 2 Lib Dem - 1 instance 2 Con v 2 Lab, 2 Green, 1 Independent - 1 instance So the Greens not completely on board, but it is only really in that final ward where there is significant competition. It will be interesting to see the results. |
|
