OV9

Too little too late, frankly.

The cognitive dissonance from people who're still blaming saturdays events on the Gaza ceasefire march will be delightful

James Cleverly new home sec. We can hope he'll be less bad, but probably not one to hold your breath over.

David Cameron may return

David Cameron back as foreign sec? Is it April fools?

So apparently you don't have to be a sitting MP to be a cabinet minister. Aren't we glad that we got rid of all the supposedly unelected EU bureaucrats so we can elevate a disgraced former PM/MP to be our foreign secretary without having to bother with an election?

Desperately scrabbling for any recognisable name that isn't completely toxic.

Jobbo wrote: Wed Oct 11, 2023 1:57 pm I was intrigued to find that the place we're moving to isn't in greenbelt because it's in the middle of the countryside, unlike where we currently live which is just outside Cheltenham.

You appear to have missed the reason that the Cheltenham/Gloucester green belt exists. Think of it more as a restraining order preventing Gloucester from coming within 5 miles of Cheltenham.

What do the Tories even stand for these days - they're more wishy washy then ever.

Can we just have the bloody election now please to put an end to this "policy and decision to protect votes" merry-go-round. We need a Party... any Party at this stage... to have 5 years to start making worthwhile change.

DeskJockey wrote: Mon Nov 13, 2023 10:08 am So apparently you don't have to be a sitting MP to be a cabinet minister. Aren't we glad that we got rid of all the supposedly unelected EU bureaucrats so we can elevate a disgraced former PM/MP to be our foreign secretary without having to bother with an election?

Technically, The PM doesn't even need to be an MP. We've had plenty of members of the House of Lords in the Cabinet before.

Yes, lets have the man who made the UK a laughing stock on the international stage be foreign secretary.

Imagine the sort of list you'd have to go through, striking through peoples names going "nah, bit rapey, nah, incompetent, nah, no competence, no competence, no competence, no competence...." before you get to David fucking Cameron for that role.

What an absolute clown show.

DeskJockey wrote: Mon Nov 13, 2023 10:08 am So apparently you don't have to be a sitting MP to be a cabinet minister. Aren't we glad that we got rid of all the supposedly unelected EU bureaucrats so we can elevate a disgraced former PM/MP to be our foreign secretary without having to bother with an election?

That was quite apparent when David Frost was negotiating the Brexit treaty. I really don't think it is a good idea to appoint someone unaccountable to the Government but it is certainly possible.

Jimmy Choo wrote: Mon Nov 13, 2023 10:27 am

DeskJockey wrote: Mon Nov 13, 2023 10:08 am So apparently you don't have to be a sitting MP to be a cabinet minister. Aren't we glad that we got rid of all the supposedly unelected EU bureaucrats so we can elevate a disgraced former PM/MP to be our foreign secretary without having to bother with an election?

Technically, The PM doesn't even need to be an MP. We've had plenty of members of the House of Lords in the Cabinet before.

But I don't think David Cameron is a Lord either?

He's technically a 'nobody' like any other civilian (in terms of being appointed to the cabinet)?

Yes, but they'll rush through a lifetime appointment because it's politically expedient for them in the moment.

Beany wrote: Mon Nov 13, 2023 10:29 am Yes, lets have the man who made the UK a laughing stock on the international stage be foreign secretary.

To be fair, he was very much a Remainer, campaigned to remain and the international community knew him to be and remember his as, someone who wanted to stay in the EU.

Enabling the vote was a democratic decision which, based on the result, was, very very marginally correct. You can't just involve the people in things you want. You have to involve them in things you don't too.

That aside, still absolute shit show that he's being dusted off and give a department.

dinny_g wrote: Mon Nov 13, 2023 11:12 am
Enabling the vote was a democratic decision which, based on the result, was, very very marginally correct. You can't just involve the people in things you want. You have to involve them in things you don't too.

Part of the point of a government is to stop a country making it's life harder. The government comprehensively failed on Brexit.

Beany wrote: Mon Nov 13, 2023 11:03 am Yes, but they'll rush through a lifetime appointment because it's politically expedient for them in the moment.

No 10 announced that King Charles has already conferred the dignity of a Barony of the United Kingdom for life upon David Cameron.

ZedLeg wrote: Mon Nov 13, 2023 11:26 am

dinny_g wrote: Mon Nov 13, 2023 11:12 am
Enabling the vote was a democratic decision which, based on the result, was, very very marginally correct. You can't just involve the people in things you want. You have to involve them in things you don't too.

Part of the point of a government is to stop a country making it's life harder. The government comprehensively failed on Brexit.

Is it?

Anyway, Dinny's right. The EU issue had been divisive in British politics for decades (and probably will be for decades to come), and successive Governments had promised a referendum but not delivered. It's not a failing that he did deliver on that.

For me, his failing was not sticking around to at least preside over what should have been an initial process to determine what the vote actually meant. I wouldn't have expected him to see us through whatever Brexit would have become, but his departure at the time just led to everyone running around like headless chickens.

Swervin_Mervin wrote: Mon Nov 13, 2023 11:35 am

ZedLeg wrote: Mon Nov 13, 2023 11:26 am

dinny_g wrote: Mon Nov 13, 2023 11:12 am
Enabling the vote was a democratic decision which, based on the result, was, very very marginally correct. You can't just involve the people in things you want. You have to involve them in things you don't too.

Part of the point of a government is to stop a country making it's life harder. The government comprehensively failed on Brexit.

Is it?

I would say so, not suggesting that they shouldn't have allowed the ref. My problem with how Cameron handled it is that he didn't. He called the ref and let the nutters run the show.

The point of government in a democracy is to act on the will of the people. (Whether you agree with the will or not)

The government can try to educate the population as to the consequences of their will but at no point should they ever think they know better and stop it.