How is the Tory government doing?

Looks like someone with plenty of experience in his field, think we can all now agree on that and move on.

Would I prefer someone with experience in the role? Yes. 

So is it a valid question to ask? Again, yes.

Sluffy wrote:
I've headed public sector departments but I've certainly not been an expert/specialist of those departments and my role was to see that they worked effectively, efficiently and economically and not to be an expert there.

The Foreign Office is somewhat different from the local council. Their diplomatic role is also an intelligence gathering role - they have spies and everything. Given that he was liasing directly with the US army generals I suspect it would have been a failure of duty not to know what was going on.
See your general point re helicopter view but the roles are not comparable.

it won't go down well Wander, but two things, firstly were keeping our promise, and secondly the Chinese are openly bullying other countries that disagree with them, e.g. Australia, and we mustn't just roll over to whatever they want.

gloswhite wrote:it won't go down well Wander, but two things, firstly were keeping our promise, and secondly the Chinese are openly bullying other countries that disagree with them, e.g. Australia, and we mustn't just roll over to whatever they want.

...as are the Yanks and the Russkis - can't trust any of them but we have to trade with someone to survive. We probably need to get in bed with a massive procurer that can compete with those nutters in this crazy world. Might make sense to sort out a partnership with a procurer geographically closer too, in order to minimise logistical problems......the EU perhaps?

wanderlust wrote:

Sluffy wrote:
I've headed public sector departments but I've certainly not been an expert/specialist of those departments and my role was to see that they worked effectively, efficiently and economically and not to be an expert there.

The Foreign Office is somewhat different from the local council. Their diplomatic role is also an intelligence gathering role - they have spies and everything. Given that he was liasing directly with the US army generals I suspect it would have been a failure of duty not to know what was going on.
See your general point re helicopter view but the roles are not comparable.

At the end of the day the 'experts' or 'administrators' (like myself) are reporting to elected 'politicians' who certainly are not experts in the various disciplines but who make their decisions based on their mandate they've been elected on and/or the basis that their manifesto was the one that won them the election and thus their mandate to govern.

This certainly doesn't mean that we have the cleverest or smartest people making the decisions that may well effect everyone, or even that the independent and expertise information given to them - whether by an expert or administrator of that department (both at a local or national level) will be accepted or even acted upon.

That's the system we have.

The politicians who have climbed their way to the top by whatever means they have are quite entitled to administer the country and reform it's institutions in anyway it sees fit until they lose office, usually by an election or in more extreme instances by being overthrown.

Johnson as the legitimate authority and power (both within his party and from the country) to do what he wishes - even if that means doing things in a way that have never been done before such as having a personal advisor having more influence than a Head of the CS and dismantling/restructuring or whatever his plans are for Whitehall and putting a non CS as his National Security Advisor.

You may not like it, I may not like it but that's allowed within the rules of the game that is being played.

Take politics (and religion) away from the world and I think it will be a much better place to live in. Until that happens and of course it never will, we have to all play the game the best we can.

It's as simple as that to me and a failed former PM criticising the appointment isn't going to cut much ice with anyone who can do anything about it much really.

I truly doubt the country as become less secure with Frost in post rather than Sedwill - it's all about internal reform of the CS than anything else.

I don't think anyone has questioned the legitimacy of the appointment. People have merely alluded to the motivation to do it.

wanderlust wrote:I don't think anyone has questioned the legitimacy of the appointment. People have merely alluded to the motivation to do it.

Exactly.

T.R.O.Y. wrote:

wanderlust wrote:I don't think anyone has questioned the legitimacy of the appointment. People have merely alluded to the motivation to do it.

Exactly.

I though we all knew that already???

If we know that and you accept the legitimacy to do so then why worry/fret/complain/throw your toys out the pram/whatever, about it as neither you, I, nor anyone else can do anything about it until the next elections come around.

Fight the battles you can win.

Ian Evatt type thinking!




(Although I think Sun Tzu wrote about it in his book The Art of War a bit before him).

Schopenhauer and Sun Tzu! What's happening on Nuts?

Sluffy wrote:

I though we all knew that already???

If we know that and you accept the legitimacy to do so then why worry/fret/complain/throw your toys out the pram/whatever, about it as neither you, I, nor anyone else can do anything about it until the next elections come around.

Fight the battles you can win.

Ian Evatt type thinking!




(Although I think Sun Tzu wrote about it in his book The Art of War a bit before him).

I have a vote, I can directly effect the next election. Not sure what your point is.

T.R.O.Y. wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

I though we all knew that already???

If we know that and you accept the legitimacy to do so then why worry/fret/complain/throw your toys out the pram/whatever, about it as neither you, I, nor anyone else can do anything about it until the next elections come around.

Fight the battles you can win.

Ian Evatt type thinking!




(Although I think Sun Tzu wrote about it in his book The Art of War a bit before him).

I have a vote, I can directly effect the next election. Not sure what your point is.

Are you being serious?

I've just said you can't do anything about that UNTIL THE NEXT ELECTIONS - I can't be any clearer than that.

Until then 'fight whatever battles you can win' until they come around.

I'm sure you never read half of what I write?

boltonbonce wrote:Schopenhauer and Sun Tzu! What's happening on Nuts?

I think it shows that some of us on here are well read.

Although if you are only up to Schopenhauer I think you've got an awful lot of reading to catch up on.

Sluffy wrote:

I though we all knew that already???

If we know that and you accept the legitimacy to do so then why worry/fret/complain/throw your toys out the pram

You can add "express an opinion or comment on a discussion forum" to that list....

Sluffy wrote:

I think it shows that some of us on here are well read.

Although if you are only up to Schopenhauer I think you've got an awful lot of reading to catch up on.

Give me a break. The Beano takes up most of my time.

Sluffy wrote:

Are you being serious?

I've just said you can't do anything about that UNTIL THE NEXT ELECTIONS - I can't be any clearer than that.

Until then 'fight whatever battles you can win' until they come around.

I'm sure you never read half of what I write?

All I’m saying is I don’t understand what your point is.

T.R.O.Y. wrote:

All I’m saying is I don’t understand what your point is.

You should know by now that it is always the same point.

wanderlust wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

I though we all knew that already???

If we know that and you accept the legitimacy to do so then why worry/fret/complain/throw your toys out the pram

You can add "express an opinion or comment on a discussion forum" to that list....

Your 'opinion' was that he was appointed as Cummings mouth piece on National Security -

wanderlust wrote:He doesn't really need to know anything about national security seeing as Cummings will be telling him what to do and say...

Clearly based on the social media 'hysteria' you say you don't read and that isn't the case and more likely to be part of the long touted view to change the CS.

As a former high ranking Civil Servant himself he probably knows how best to do so than Cummings I would suggest - he may even be the one who originated the idea that Cummings bought into for all we know, after all Frost must have had his reasons for leaving it in the first place - and returning to it in the form of his advisors roles in the last few years.

So we know why he's been appointed and we know the legitimacy of the appointment so hopefully now we can exclude the 'conspiracy' theory behind it that you and social media seem so fond of.

T.R.O.Y. wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

Are you being serious?

I've just said you can't do anything about that UNTIL THE NEXT ELECTIONS - I can't be any clearer than that.

Until then 'fight whatever battles you can win' until they come around.

I'm sure you never read half of what I write?

All I’m saying is I don’t understand what your point is.

You've lost me I'm afraid.

I simply said nothing can be done about this until the next elections and so concentrate on the things you might be able to change until then.

I don't believe that is in anyway difficult to grasp.

Nor do I believe anybody else does either.

So we don’t comment on politics until it’s closer to the election?

T.R.O.Y. wrote:So we don’t comment on politics until it’s closer to the election?

That's not what you were saying in reply to me earlier -

T.R.O.Y. wrote:I have a vote, I can directly effect the next election. Not sure what your point is.

You can comment on whatever you like but it won't change a thing until the elections come around no matter if you post the same thing everyday for the next four years until they do.

More to the point everybody would have left here by then anyway because it is no interest to the vast majority of us on here even if it is dear to your heart.