Cabinet Reshuffle Time!

[psydii]

I'll call it. Better the devil we knew. I doubt this new one will be able to stand up to Gideon.

 

That said she does have treasury related experience outside of her headline job...

Edited July 15, 2014 by psydii

[jinnantonnixx]

What I don't understand about cabinet ministers is that very few of them have ever had any experience in the area of which they have responsibility. They have romantic ideals about what they would like to see happening, but absolutely no understanding of what actually happens in real life.

 

Quite. I find it odd how a Minister of Banana Skins one day is Defence Secretary the next day. I suppose they are talking heads, advised by people under them who know what they're talking about. Patterson was an oddball, as pointed out earlier he rejected the science on climate change - it may be apocryphal, but he refused to read any report that contained the phrase 'climate change'. I notice though, that he totally embraced medical science when he went for his eye operation. He didn't consult his postman or a florist for advice about his eye problem.

[sonofsanta]

What I don't understand about cabinet ministers is that very few of them have ever had any experience in the area of which they have responsibility. They have romantic ideals about what they would like to see happening, but absolutely no understanding of what actually happens in real life.

 

Perhaps the next Speaker of the House, should be someone who has never worked in politics.

 

I frequently (and loudly) proclaim this to anyone who'll listen - the education minister (for example) should be someone with trenches experience of the sector, who wants to do the job to improve that area of the public sector. Instead it's used as a post on a CV as every MP competes to become PM. No-one goes into politics to become the Health Minister anymore, they all want the top job, and every cabinet post is a step on that ladder.

 

The problem with insisting that cabinet members have experience of their sector is that politicians now don't have experience of anything. They're all career politicians now, instead of people who have retired and gone into politics to give something back. It's a shift that's been buoyed by the false assertion that young voters want young politicians, which (speaking for my own part, as a twenty-something voter) couldn't be further from the truth.

[hardtailstar]

Happy Teachers here!

[zag]

I don't think the unions are happy whoever is in charge of education. Anyone remember them slow clapping the former labour education minister year after year during their speeches?

 

Don't forget the overriding target for an education minister is to improve education for kids. Gove thought that was to introduce more academies and free schools (as in the Scandinavian states who have some of the best education systems in the world).

 

I think you will find Tony Blair and whoever will follow Gove thought the same thing.

 

Not saying its right, but thats what they are aiming for.

Edited July 15, 2014 by zag

[mthomas08]

Happy Teachers here!

 

To be honest I would hold Ya horses.

 

One of the reasons I am not quick to react with what the Government does is because a day later it could change. They can change their mind or like this get a new person in who can not only reverse the decisions but make things worse with different ideas.

 

If I threw a tantrum each time something occurred I would probably have extremely high blood pressure and no hair.

[sted]

What a complete useless bunch they are.

The people who voted them in must be proud.

 

its a coalition govenment in a very real sense nobody voted for them imo

[StevieM]

It's a shift that's been buoyed by the false assertion that young voters want young politicians, which (speaking for my own part, as a twenty-something voter) couldn't be further from the truth.

 

Really!!?? You are wise beyond your years, young man. I'd always assumed you were probably mid-30s...ish (that's meant to be a compliment, by the way!).

 

As a forty-something non-voter (well, spoiler of ballot paper) I just want someone I can actually vote FOR!

 

I used to have a badge that I wore regularly around election time that read, 'Don't vote. It only encourages them!'. Now THERE'S an idea for a new t-shirt!

[localzuk]

As a forty-something non-voter (well, spoiler of ballot paper) I just want someone I can actually vote FOR!

 

Absolutely. All the parties are merging into one giant mush of gibberish and weakness. We've got no decent left wing party any more, for example. People are too entrenched with the "2 party" system. Its basically choosing which way to be stabbed - in the neck or the face...

[jinnantonnixx]

Absolutely. All the parties are merging into one giant mush of gibberish and weakness. We've got no decent left wing party any more, for example. People are too entrenched with the "2 party" system. Its basically choosing which way to be stabbed - in the neck or the face...

 

Nonsense. There's a huge gulf between them. Ignoring fringe parties, you can vote for:

 

1. The millionaire with the red tie

2. The millionaire with the blue tie

3. The millionaire with the yellow tie

Edited July 15, 2014 by jinnantonnixx

[CAM]

But whats the alternative? BNP are extreme right wing, UKIP smeared itself into the floor, Green is viewed as environmental hippies pouring out the loony bin and Lib Dems are toothless dogs that follow the same lines anyway. And anyone else is considered so small or unknown that voting for them will be wasteful with negligible impact.

[sted]

Absolutely. All the parties are merging into one giant mush of gibberish and weakness. We've got no decent left wing party any more, for example. People are too entrenched with the "2 party" system. Its basically choosing which way to be stabbed - in the neck or the face...

 

the problem is as voters there is no real other option you vote for red blue or yellow voting for smaller parties just makes it more likely that there will be a coalition and the smaller parties wont get enough seats to do anything with so what options do you have other than picking the one you think is likely to screw you over the least

[Gibbo]

I frequently (and loudly) proclaim this to anyone who'll listen - the education minister (for example) should be someone with trenches experience of the sector, who wants to do the job to improve that area of the public sector.

 

Estelle Morris was a teacher from 1974-1992, but only lasted under a year in the post.

[localzuk]

the problem is as voters there is no real other option you vote for red blue or yellow voting for smaller parties just makes it more likely that there will be a coalition and the smaller parties wont get enough seats to do anything with so what options do you have other than picking the one you think is likely to screw you over the least

 

Its that thinking that messes everything up. If everyone voted how that actually felt, and we ended up stuck with coalition governments then maybe there'd be more political will to change the unbalanced voting system we have in this country...

 

Also, I believe that the best thing the Greens could do is change their name and logo. People do see them as hippies, but their policies are very left leaning, so it may work better for them to focus on their left-ness than their green-ness.

[sonofsanta]

Really!!?? You are wise beyond your years, young man. I'd always assumed you were probably mid-30s...ish (that's meant to be a compliment, by the way!).

 

As a forty-something non-voter (well, spoiler of ballot paper) I just want someone I can actually vote FOR!

 

I used to have a badge that I wore regularly around election time that read, 'Don't vote. It only encourages them!'. Now THERE'S an idea for a new t-shirt!

 

My thirtieth orbit of the local star shall be completed in three months time - three months today, in fact. Argh!

 

Ideally I'd like a PM who wasn't afraid to stick to his guns (rules this lot out, then) and had the honesty and guts to stand back and consider an answer rather than wade in all guns blazing and paint themselves into a corner. Someone with some experience of life, then. But what have we got at the moment? Not a man over fifty, all overly concerned with their media image, all representing a very small, very similar subsect of a privileged existence most of us can't comprehend. As y'all say, there's nothing to distinguish them. Sometimes I even forget Ed Miliband exists, he's such a non-entity.

 

My usual approach to voting would be "who is the least bad right now?" but as it stands, my system will fail me in 2015, and I'll be spoiling my ballot with a long string of expletives instead.

[sted]

Its that thinking that messes everything up. If everyone voted how that actually felt, and we ended up stuck with coalition governments then maybe there'd be more political will to change the unbalanced voting system we have in this country...

 

Also, I believe that the best thing the Greens could do is change their name and logo. People do see them as hippies, but their policies are very left leaning, so it may work better for them to focus on their left-ness than their green-ness.

 

so lets say i vote green for ecample and even if my entire constituenc also does thats one seat with which they can do what. Not enough people will do the same the lions share of the votes will always go to the 2 mian parties with lib dems picking up the most crumbs and small / independants getting in in odd places at best. Until one of the parties does something so foul nobody votes for them i dont see that changing and if this lots policy of lets close everything down or sell it off to our cronies so they can make even more cash isnt enough to get voters upet what is?

[localzuk]

so lets say i vote green for ecample and even if my entire constituenc also does thats one seat with which they can do what. Not enough people will do the same the lions share of the votes will always go to the 2 mian parties with lib dems picking up the most crumbs and small / independants getting in in odd places at best. Until one of the parties does something so foul nobody votes for them i dont see that changing and if this lots policy of lets close everything down or sell it off to our cronies so they can make even more cash isnt enough to get voters upet what is?

 

But if everyone votes how they truly feel, the makeup of parliament would be more balanced. The government in power would have to be a coalition, sure, but I don't see a problem with that - I'm a fan of proportional representation. Not to mention, loads of countries have coalition governments every election anyway, and they don't implode. Germany's government is a coalition of multiple parties, for example.

 

If people spent time and actually looked at policies before every election and chose according to those policies, they might make things different.

[sonofsanta]

Estelle Morris was a teacher from 1974-1992, but only lasted under a year in the post.

 

Cribbing from Wikipedia, "She suddenly resigned her post in October 2002, explaining that she did not feel up to the job." - perhaps, as someone with experience of the job, she put herself under too much pressure to perform, knew what a gargantuan task it was, and cried nuncle. Contrast to Michael Gove, who has had so little idea of what he was doing, he couldn't even comprehend how little he knew. The Dunning-Kruger effect, in other words - too stupid to know how stupid he was.

[mthomas08]

Nonsense. There's a huge gulf between them. Ignoring fringe parties, you can vote for:

 

1. The millionaire with the blood stained tie

2. The millionaire with the blueberry pie stained tie

3. The millionaire with the yellow brown nose stained tie

 

I thought I would correct you.

[sted]

But if everyone votes how they truly feel, the makeup of parliament would be more balanced. The government in power would have to be a coalition, sure, but I don't see a problem with that - I'm a fan of proportional representation. Not to mention, loads of countries have coalition governments every election anyway, and they don't implode. Germany's government is a coalition of multiple parties, for example.

 

If people spent time and actually looked at policies before every election and chose according to those policies, they might make things different.

 

but the literature dosent give you policies its all spin and hard to drill down to the meat of them through the miles of waffle and not to mention since when does a parties manifesto actually mean antything they just say the situation is worse than they thought blame the last guy and then do whatever they want anyeay. until they are properly accountable so they set out measurable promises and can be recalled if the dont make good they can promise you the world and give you the silly isles

[localzuk]

but the literature dosent give you policies its all spin and hard to drill down to the meat of them through the miles of waffle and not to mention since when does a parties manifesto actually mean antything they just say the situation is worse than they thought blame the last guy and then do whatever they want anyeay. until they are properly accountable so they set out measurable promises and can be recalled if the dont make good they can promise you the world and give you the silly isles

 

Depends on the party. Some parties give very clear policies... Monster Raving Loonies are very clear with their policies, for example. As are the Greens.

[X-13]

Depends on the party. Some parties give very clear policies... Monster Raving Loonies are very clear with their policies, for example. As are the Greens.

 

If I remember correctly, Pirate Party are pretty clear as well.

 

But they're a single-focus party...

[sted]

If I remember correctly, Pirate Party are pretty clear as well.

 

But they're a single-focus party...

 

and as a reult a wasted vote other than to say to the other parties "you suck"

[X-13]

and as a reult a wasted vote other than to say to the other parties "you suck"

 

So everyone should vote for Con/Lab/Lib because everyone votes for Con/Lab/Lib?

[sonofsanta]

If only there were some way to vote for alternatives, allowing votes for smaller parties to be made without them feeling like a wasted vote. I'm sure you could come up with some kind of mathematically superior system that we could have a referendum on. I suppose if did, though, we'd need the Yes campaign to actually turn up and do some bloody campaigning.

 

/not bitter

Edited July 15, 2014 by sonofsanta
*wasted vote, not waster vote, which is when you democracy under the influence