what is happening to our political class - and why?

Civil servants used to be made of sterner stuff. This lot have been badly recruited and mentored in recent years. No backbone to roll with a bit of bullying nor steer the weaker politicians.
 
basilrobbie3 said:
I've just been watching Braverman getting skewered at Select Committee yesterday ; and then moved on to read about Raab's latest travails.

Is the current crop the worst we have ever had? And if so, why? Over to you.
Click to expand...
Yep. The current crop is about as bad as I can ever remember in my lifetime.
On both sides of the Commons. As to why, I really don't know.
Maybe our politicians reflect on the country and even the world as a whole. The poor behaviour, service, attitude,
and lack of empathy we seem to witness and suffer in our everyday lives.
 
It has been terrible for the longest time.
Most of the problems in today's society stem from the decisions made by the Thatcher government.
 
In the past, those who transgressed the rules resigned. Since Cameron, it has no longer been an absolute, and so they are pushing it further and further, to see what they can get away with. Any Senior Civil servant raising issues is sacked or moved, the Cabinet Secretary used to have huge influence, no longer.

Home Secretary does not know her brief, Raab is a bully many times over and used his personal email (which is why HS resigned), Michelle Moon got £25M from referring her husband to be for PPE, some of which was unusable, Boris is being paid as an MP to travel the world, Hancock's half hour seems to be going on and on.

What appals so many of the electorate, of all political hews, is that, despite 3 changes of PM since the last GE, we have no way of getting rid of the incompetent, lying, corrupt Public School dross.
 
Tangerinemoss said:
In the past, those who transgressed the rules resigned. Since Cameron, it has no longer been an absolute, and so they are pushing it further and further, to see what they can get away with. Any Senior Civil servant raising issues is sacked or moved, the Cabinet Secretary used to have huge influence, no longer.

Home Secretary does not know her brief, Raab is a bully many times over and used his personal email (which is why HS resigned), Michelle Moon got £25M from referring her husband to be for PPE, some of which was unusable, Boris is being paid as an MP to travel the world, Hancock's half hour seems to be going on and on.

What appals so many of the electorate, of all political hews, is that, despite 3 changes of PM since the last GE, we have no way of getting rid of the incompetent, lying, corrupt Public School dross.
Click to expand...
Predates Cameron.

My one time MP Peter Mandelson had to leave the cabinet twice.

That would be more before him too.

I think there's an issue about being unable to either compromise or cooperate which makes things far more difficult.

I think during Covid and the catastrophic issues arising as a result of the war in Ukraine, we could have potentially created something akin to a War Cabinet - at least invite more of the opposition in to more decision making positions. (TBF to Starmer he was supportive of HMG during Covid)

We need something which can unite the country in a way we've not had for a very long time.

I like Sunak working with Scotland, we need more of that, lots more of that.
 
Dark_Side_of_the_Lune said:
Civil servants used to be made of sterner stuff. This lot have been badly recruited and mentored in recent years. No backbone to roll with a bit of bullying nor steer the weaker politicians.
Click to expand...
Don't tell him that FFS, he'll be coming out of retirement 🤣

What hits me is how thick they are. Either stupid, completely lacking in any grasp of practicality, or both. Are the great British public schools losing their touch?
 
Matesrates said:
It’s probably always been thus, the difference today is social media, 24 hour news channels and open scrutiny. They’re interviewed and scrutinised every day by journalists who have research departments delving into every aspect of government.
Click to expand...

Partly that, but I think there's something else as well.

The BBC and Civil Service seems to have given up all pretence of impartiality, Civil Servants seem to have taken to briefing and leaking against ministers they don't like, bullying being the go-to charge for anyone who wants them to do their job and implement government policy within the required timeframe, the BBC is of course happy to report this and appears to view it as its job to bring down ministers, and if possible the government.

Effectively, a coup d'etat has taken place in the UK, minsters no longer set policy or run the country, that's now done by an unelected cabal of Civil Servants and journalists.
 
Matesrates said:
It’s probably always been thus, the difference today is social media, 24 hour news channels and open scrutiny. They’re interviewed and scrutinised every day by journalists who have research departments delving into every aspect of government.
Click to expand...
Listen to this debate in 1975 between Foot and Heath it's far more honest and advanced than anything in 2022. Today politicians tell outright lies, social media doesn't stop that. In fact social media has distorted politics to the extent that showmanship, pathetic slogans and tapping into prejudices has become the norm. The video will play if you click on the link

 
Lost Seasider said:
Partly that, but I think there's something else as well.

The BBC and Civil Service seems to have given up all pretence of impartiality, Civil Servants seem to have taken to briefing and leaking against ministers they don't like, bullying being the go-to charge for anyone who wants them to do their job and implement government policy within the required timeframe, the BBC is of course happy to report this and appears to view it as its job to bring down ministers, and if possible the government.

Effectively, a coup d'etat has taken place in the UK, minsters no longer set policy or run the country, that's now done by an unelected cabal of Civil Servants and journalists.
Click to expand...
Wrong wrong, wrong.
 
Lost Seasider said:
Partly that, but I think there's something else as well.

The BBC and Civil Service seems to have given up all pretence of impartiality, Civil Servants seem to have taken to briefing and leaking against ministers they don't like, bullying being the go-to charge for anyone who wants them to do their job and implement government policy within the required timeframe, the BBC is of course happy to report this and appears to view it as its job to bring down ministers, and if poss

Effectively, a coup d'etat has taken place in the UK, minsters no longer set policy or run the country, that's now done by an unelected cabal of Civil Servants and journalists.
Click to expand...
That is quite possible the worst horse shit I have ever read on this site, and it is a pretty low bar.
 
Lost Seasider said:
Partly that, but I think there's something else as well.

The BBC and Civil Service seems to have given up all pretence of impartiality, Civil Servants seem to have taken to briefing and leaking against ministers they don't like, bullying being the go-to charge for anyone who wants them to do their job and implement government policy within the required timeframe, the BBC is of course happy to report this and appears to view it as its job to bring down ministers, and if possible the government.

Effectively, a coup d'etat has taken place in the UK, minsters no longer set policy or run the country, that's now done by an unelected cabal of Civil Servants and journalists.
Click to expand...
Source please
 
Mark_GT said:
Don't tell him that FFS, he'll be coming out of retirement 🤣

What hits me is how thick they are. Either stupid, completely lacking in any grasp of practicality, or both. Are the great British public schools losing their touch?
Click to expand...
I suspect the public school crowd were always mostly thick. It’s just that the British used to be impressed by posh accents and too polite/reverential to call it out.

Plus Civil Servants were too civil and too servile so had to suck up all the abuse.
 
Mexboroseasider said:
I suspect the public school crowd were always mostly thick. It’s just that the British used to be impressed by posh accents and too polite/reverential to call it out.

Plus Civil Servants were too civil and too servile so had to suck up all the abuse.
Click to expand...
I'll buy that 👍
 
Mexboroseasider said:
I suspect the public school crowd were always mostly thick. It’s just that the British used to be impressed by posh accents and too polite/reverential to call it out.

Plus Civil Servants were too civil and too servile so had to suck up all the abuse.
Click to expand...
Used to be!! I think they still are to some degree.

If Eton is the top private school in the country and produces so many of our Prime Minister's and high ranking politicians, a lot of famous actors aswell, why has it produced so few world renowned scientists and engineers?
 
basilrobbie3 said:
I've just been watching Braverman getting skewered at Select Committee yesterday ; and then moved on to read about Raab's latest travails.

Is the current crop the worst we have ever had? And if so, why? Over to you.
Click to expand...
To directly answer your questions; Yes and because they are Tories!
 
basilrobbie3 said:
I've just been watching Braverman getting skewered at Select Committee yesterday ; and then moved on to read about Raab's latest travails.

Is the current crop the worst we have ever had? And if so, why? Over to you.
Click to expand...

I'd say the current crop is the worst right across the board.

Not got the time to go into any great detail but in my opinion standards have lowered, it's now all about "playing the game", people are willing to abandon their values/beliefs for personal advancement, style over substance.
 
The OP picks out a matter of increasing concern. The first point to note is that the deterioration in the standard of our politicians is true for all to see. However, it does not mean that all of our senior politicians are poor. We still have some good ones.

But why are so many proving to be lightweight - both intellectually and morally? For me it boils down to a deterioration in public life across our whole country. Modern technologies increase channels of communication but privatise the modes of interaction. We tweet rather than meet. Societal interaction is increasingly technologically realised rather than physically performed. One of the facets of our societal interaction that has declined markedly because of these trends has been the mass participation in politics. The political parties have ceased to be mass participation vehicles for social change. Consequently, politics is increasingly being regarded as something that is done to us rather than done by us.

The same is true of mass participation in workplace based societies. The deindustrialisation of Britain has seen a great reduction in active trades union membership. Likewise, interaction through sporting societies, church-based societies and social clubs.

There are still good people doing politics but they succeed nowadays through professionalised routes into office; the PR companies, charities, pressure groups and lobbyists rather than by putting in the hard yards in constituency parties. That makes our politicians more professional and less personable; more likely to have an eye on the main chance than to behave morally.
 
Threepeaksphil said:
To attract the better quality we need to pay them say £150K and could afford this is we dramatically reduced their numbers
Click to expand...

Not for me.

I think for just about all the high profile politicians who we'd be criticising the salary would not be relevant and their performance wouldn't change if you doubled your figure.

Saying that I am of the opinion that MP's should receive more competitive salaries and that there expenses should not necessarily be reduced but should certainly be scrutinised more thoroughly.
 
ste said:
It has been terrible for the longest time.
Most of the problems in today's society stem from the decisions made by the Thatcher government.
Click to expand...

Probably the last PM who didn't play the game or perhaps didn't play the game anywhere near as much as her predecessors.

Love her or loathe her and I appreciate many will completely disagree with her politically but I don't think anybody could say that she didn't have balls.

Give me Thatcher over every PM we've had since every day of the week and three times on a Sunday.
 
Mark_GT said:
Don't tell him that FFS, he'll be coming out of retirement 🤣

What hits me is how thick they are. Either stupid, completely lacking in any grasp of practicality, or both. Are the great British public schools losing their touch?
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more.

Priti Patel, Liz Truss (made a scapegoat recently and feel sorry for her but thick) and Angela Rayner are all as thick as mince and should have nowhere near the responsibility that they have now or have had.

***AVFTT Caveat for the usual suspects before you jump in with your accusations of sexism, I have no doubt that there are some males that are not the sharpest knives in the Westminster cupboards and I have just stated that I thought we have not had a better PM since Thatcher***
 
MP's can be as thick as a submarine door (Francois and Jenkyns spring to mind) but what differs is the cabinet being packed with them as well. Incompetent fools, if it wasn't so tragic it would be funny. Now ask yourself, what common bond do these people have and what event propelled them into these lofty positions?
How did we get to this position? Right of centre press seeping an agenda for the last 40 years coupled with a poor education system that doesn't teach but trains children to pass an exam.
 
Shandypants said:
Listen to this debate in 1975 between Foot and Heath it's far more honest and advanced than anything in 2022. Today politicians tell outright lies, social media doesn't stop that. In fact social media has distorted politics to the extent that showmanship, pathetic slogans and tapping into prejudices has become the norm. The video will play if you click on the link

Click to expand...
Excellent find Shandy. If only there had been that sort of televised discussion ahead of the referendum this time around people would have had a much clearer understanding of the nature of the EU institutions and their relationship with the UK Parliament.

It was also I teresri g to see how the moderator stayed out of the discussion as much as he could. These days they interject before a guest has got a full sentence out.
 
SEASIDE2020 said:
I couldn't agree more.

Priti Patel, Liz Truss (made a scapegoat recently and feel sorry for her but thick) and Angela Rayner are all as thick as mince and should have nowhere near the responsibility that they have now or have had.

***AVFTT Caveat for the usual suspects before you jump in with your accusations of sexism, I have no doubt that there are some males that are not the sharpest knives in the Westminster cupboards and I have just stated that I thought we have not had a better PM since Thatcher***
Click to expand...
I give you Dominic Raab.

Thickest of the lot.

For balance.
 
Wizaard said:
I give you Dominic Raab.

Thickest of the lot.

For balance.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't know about him Wiz but I'm not doubting you.

I have evidence of a lack of intelligence for the three that I referred to and to be honest I did provide balance, they just happened to be female and although I don't vote, I'd imagine I'm classed as an AVFTT Tory and the majority of my examples were Conservatives.

I didn't select Angela Rayner because she is in the Labour Party or because she is a ging, I chose her because she is as thick as feck.
 
SEASIDE2020 said:
I wouldn't know about him Wiz but I'm not doubting you.

I have evidence of a lack of intelligence for the three that I referred to and to be honest I did provide balance, they just happened to be female and although I don't vote, I'd imagine I'm classed as an AVFTT Tory and the majority of my examples were Conservatives.

I didn't select Angela Rayner because she is in the Labour Party or because she is a ging, I chose her because she is as thick as feck.
Click to expand...
How have you reached the conclusion that Angela Rayner is as "thick as feck"?
 
It always amazes me how nomarks on obscure forums can just casually dismiss people who have made it to the Shadow Cabinet as being "thick" without offering a shred of evidence (or showing even a hint of irony). It might not be misogyny in the case of Rayner, but it does smack of snobbery. I watched her speech at the Labour Party Conference this year and thought it was a very good effort that shows her in a fight that the public rarely sees. Looking at the Labour Front Bench as a whole, they have done a reasonably good job of getting serious and seemingly competent people in there who have been allowed time to master their brief. It will never catch on though.

Going back to my OP, as I implied, the whole edifice smacks of whited sepulchres and does our country no credit whatsoever. The main aspects of the problem seem to be :

1) we are as a nation neither economically or politically literate ; it is no surprise therefore that the people who emerge from our system lack the ability to do the job

2) we set ourselves up to fail, by maintaining a system whereby MP's can go from 6th form debating society to University to Party research job to candidate long list and then constituency short list without ever doing a "real" job in retail or industry

3) we don't pay people enough to do the job. In the current, information-rich global economy, running a major economy is a major managerial and strategic challenge that needs real skill, nerve and judgement. If we want the best people to get involved - we need to pay a market rate for what they have to offer

4) we don't encourage people with niche skills to get involved on a flexible basis. What would be wrong with engineering and science graduates rotating into MP jobs on a short-term, project based basis? We might have to elect people from Party lists, or on a conditional basis - but surely we could show a bit of imagination in that regard ?

5) we don't regulate MPs behaviour properly. It is too easy for them to create conflicts of interest for themselves, especially when they know that the chances of anyone other than Private Eye knowing or caring are remote. The whole system of regulation needs to be taken out of the hands of the House authorities and vested in an independent third party body (fancy that for an idea.....)

6) we don't value the Civil Service as much as we should. They offer what continuity and quality we have ; they do a very good job for the most part in maintaining political neutrality. Their ability to do that free of undue political influence is waning, but I don't think that is their fault

People tend to focus on the HoL as a big part of the structural problem, but while it does need modernisation, I'm not sure it is where the real issues lie. At least their Lorships can be relied upon to subject legislation to proper scrutiny (for example). That is not always the case in the HoC, where political knockabout seems to be valued over intellect.

We are certainly blighted by a fourth rate political class these days, this Government demonstrating it vividly every day. Don't be surprised if they relegate us to second rate world status or worse in relatively short order. In the light of Brexit, I'd say that the process for doing that is already well under way.
 
basilrobbie3 said:
It always amazes me how nomarks on obscure forums can just casually dismiss people who have made it to the Shadow Cabinet as being "thick" without offering a shred of evidence (or showing even a hint of irony). It might not be misogyny in the case of Rayner, but it does smack of snobbery. I watched her speech at the Labour Party Conference this year and thought it was a very good effort that shows her in a fight that the public rarely sees. Looking at the Labour Front Bench as a whole, they have done a reasonably good job of getting serious and seemingly competent people in there who have been allowed time to master their brief. It will never catch on though.

Going back to my OP, as I implied, the whole edifice smacks of whited sepulchres and does our country no credit whatsoever. The main aspects of the problem seem to be :

1) we are as a nation neither economically or politically literate ; it is no surprise therefore that the people who emerge from our system lack the ability to do the job

2) we set ourselves up to fail, by maintaining a system whereby MP's can go from 6th form debating society to University to Party research job to candidate long list and then constituency short list without ever doing a "real" job in retail or industry

3) we don't pay people enough to do the job. In the current, information-rich global economy, running a major economy is a major managerial and strategic challenge that needs real skill, nerve and judgement. If we want the best people to get involved - we need to pay a market rate for what they have to offer

4) we don't encourage people with niche skills to get involved on a flexible basis. What would be wrong with engineering and science graduates rotating into MP jobs on a short-term, project based basis? We might have to elect people from Party lists, or on a conditional basis - but surely we could show a bit of imagination in that regard ?

5) we don't regulate MPs behaviour properly. It is too easy for them to create conflicts of interest for themselves, especially when they know that the chances of anyone other than Private Eye knowing or caring are remote. The whole system of regulation needs to be taken out of the hands of the House authorities and vested in an independent third party body (fancy that for an idea.....)

6) we don't value the Civil Service as much as we should. They offer what continuity and quality we have ; they do a very good job for the most part in maintaining political neutrality. Their ability to do that free of undue political influence is waning, but I don't think that is their fault

People tend to focus on the HoL as a big part of the structural problem, but while it does need modernisation, I'm not sure it is where the real issues lie. At least their Lorships can be relied upon to subject legislation to proper scrutiny (for example). That is not always the case in the HoC, where political knockabout seems to be valued over intellect.

We are certainly blighted by a fourth rate political class these days, this Government demonstrating it vividly every day. Don't be surprised if they relegate us to second rate world status or worse in relatively short order. In the light of Brexit, I'd say that the process for doing that is already well under way.
Click to expand...
You hypocrite.No marks for your pompous drivel of a post.I remember on the old board you slagging off clerical assistants in the Civil Service as not being intelligent enough for your standards. Did you voluntarily retire at 50 or were you pushed out as you must have been horrible to have as a work colleague? Glad to see Brexit referendum result has worked itself into your brain to the extent that it appears to be on your mind 24/7.😜Did you have mushroom soup for lunch again today?
 
basilrobbie3 said:
It always amazes me how nomarks on obscure forums can just casually dismiss people who have made it to the Shadow Cabinet as being "thick" without offering a shred of evidence (or showing even a hint of irony). It might not be misogyny in the case of Rayner, but it does smack of snobbery. I watched her speech at the Labour Party Conference this year and thought it was a very good effort that shows her in a fight that the public rarely sees. Looking at the Labour Front Bench as a whole, they have done a reasonably good job of getting serious and seemingly competent people in there who have been allowed time to master their brief. It will never catch on though.

Going back to my OP, as I implied, the whole edifice smacks of whited sepulchres and does our country no credit whatsoever. The main aspects of the problem seem to be :

1) we are as a nation neither economically or politically literate ; it is no surprise therefore that the people who emerge from our system lack the ability to do the job

2) we set ourselves up to fail, by maintaining a system whereby MP's can go from 6th form debating society to University to Party research job to candidate long list and then constituency short list without ever doing a "real" job in retail or industry

3) we don't pay people enough to do the job. In the current, information-rich global economy, running a major economy is a major managerial and strategic challenge that needs real skill, nerve and judgement. If we want the best people to get involved - we need to pay a market rate for what they have to offer

4) we don't encourage people with niche skills to get involved on a flexible basis. What would be wrong with engineering and science graduates rotating into MP jobs on a short-term, project based basis? We might have to elect people from Party lists, or on a conditional basis - but surely we could show a bit of imagination in that regard ?

5) we don't regulate MPs behaviour properly. It is too easy for them to create conflicts of interest for themselves, especially when they know that the chances of anyone other than Private Eye knowing or caring are remote. The whole system of regulation needs to be taken out of the hands of the House authorities and vested in an independent third party body (fancy that for an idea.....)

6) we don't value the Civil Service as much as we should. They offer what continuity and quality we have ; they do a very good job for the most part in maintaining political neutrality. Their ability to do that free of undue political influence is waning, but I don't think that is their fault

People tend to focus on the HoL as a big part of the structural problem, but while it does need modernisation, I'm not sure it is where the real issues lie. At least their Lorships can be relied upon to subject legislation to proper scrutiny (for example). That is not always the case in the HoC, where political knockabout seems to be valued over intellect.

We are certainly blighted by a fourth rate political class these days, this Government demonstrating it vividly every day. Don't be surprised if they relegate us to second rate world status or worse in relatively short order. In the light of Brexit, I'd say that the process for doing that is already well under way.
Click to expand...


Robbie

It's a forum where we express our opinions on matters and on certain people.

I would never refer to you as a "nomark on an obscure forum" but I think it's fair to say that you have consistently criticised, mocked and ridiculed Boris Johnson on this forum, a man who reached the highest position in British politics.

Please don't get me wrong, I have no problem with you expressing your opinions on Boris Johnson or other politicians on this forum but I think it might be an idea for you heed the advice that you have offered to others in the past and play the ball and not the man.

Nobody offering their opinions on this thread is going to achieve anywhere near as much politically as those that they are criticising, I'm sure that you are aware of that.
 
Trammo said:
You hypocrite.No marks for your pompous drivel of a post.I remember on the old board you slagging off clerical assistants in the Civil Service as not being intelligent enough for your standards. Did you voluntarily retire at 50 or were you pushed out as you must have been horrible to have as a work colleague? Glad to see Brexit referendum result has worked itself into your brain to the extent that it appears to be on your mind 24/7.😜Did you have mushroom soup for lunch again today?
Click to expand...

Trammo

I wouldn't go in to the personal detail that you have done but Robbie is certainly a hypocrite and his latest post perfectly demonstrates that.

He criticises me for being critical of Angela Rayner because she is in the Shadow Cabinet despite criticising folk who have done more in their lunch hour than he has ever done or ever will do.
 
Walthamstow_Seasider said:
How have you reached the conclusion that Angela Rayner is as "thick as feck"?
Click to expand...

Stow

Sorry I didn't see your post before now.

Firstly I will apologise for using the phrase "thick as feck", it's the sort of phrase I'd use when discussing the intellect of politicians in the pub but perhaps I shouldn't use such a term on here.

I am not going to pretend that I rate Angela Rayner though.

I don't know if you have read Robbie's (basilrobbie3) long post but he lists reasons why he himself believes that current day politicians are not up to scratch and I don't consider Angela Rayner to be up to scratch.

I have watched interviews in which she questions tax policies, something which she should be doing as the Deputy Leader of the opposition but it is clear that she does not have a clue about the subject matter and if the interview questions her on the subject matter, they expose not just her lack of knowledge of the subject matter but also a lack of preparation.

This is not a Labour thing, as I've already said, I'm also of the opinion that Priti Patel and Liz Truss are - I won't say thick as f**k - less than capable.

Another poster on here has put up a clip of Priti Patel in a debate on capital punishment, I have no problem with her personal views on capital punishment no matter what they may be but she was using examples against capital punishment to demonstrate why it should be reintroduced.

Frightening to think that she was - or eventually became - the Home Secretary.

Sorry to go on Stow and apologies again for using a very lazy term.
 
Last edited:
As has been mentioned already, we are not well served by the slew of MPs who exit university with a PPE degree and embark immediately on a political career, having no (adult) experience of the real world.

I think another factor is simply due to the passage of time and reflective of societal change generally.
For c.40 years after 1945, many MPs had personal experience of wartime and were aware of the need to put differences aside wherever possible and to cooperate for the greater good. Consequently, they were imbued with a highly developed sense of service. They largely respected their political opponents.

Today that sense of service is far less apparent. It's all about self and climbing the greasy pole.
And far too many MPs hold their opponents in contempt, sometimes openly (when they do that, is it any surprise that ordinary folk are prompted to aim poisonous barbs at MPs?)
 
SEASIDE2020 said:
Stow

Sorry I didn't see your post before now.

Firstly I will apologise for using the phrase "thick as feck", it's the sort of phrase I'd use when discussing the intellect of politicians in the pub but perhaps I shouldn't use such a term on here.

I am not going to pretend that I rate Angela Rayner though.

I don't know if you have read Robbie's (basilrobbie3) long post but he lists reasons why he himself believes that current day politicians are not up to scratch and I don't consider Angela Rayner to be up to scratch.

I have watched interviews in which she questions tax policies, something which she should be doing as the Deputy Leader of the opposition but it is clear that she does not have a clue about the subject matter and if the interview questions her on the subject matter, they expose not just her lack of knowledge of the subject matter but also a lack of preparation.

This is not a Labour thing, as I've already said, I'm also of the opinion that Priti Patel and Liz Truss are - I won't say thick as f**k - less than capable.

Another poster on here has put up a clip of Priti Patel in a debate on capital punishment, I have no problem with her personal views on capital punishment no matter what they may be but she was using examples against capital punishment to demonstrate why it should be reintroduced.

Frightening to think that she was - or eventually became - the Home Secretary.

Sorry to go on Stow and apologies again for using a very lazy term.
Click to expand...
I also cannot fathom why you consider Ms Rayner to be thick. The Tories are frightened of her because she generally perfoms well at PMQs when she deputises for KS and is consistently the main player in holding the government to account, witness her bringing the Michelle Mone scandal to the fore. I'm not accusing you of this but I think a lot of her detractors cannot cope with an assertive, working class woman with a Nirthern accent.
 
kerrytangerine said:
I also cannot fathom why you consider Ms Rayner to be thick. The Tories are frightened of her because she generally perfoms well at PMQs when she deputises for KS and is consistently the main player in holding the government to account, witness her bringing the Michelle Mone scandal to the fore. I'm not accusing you of this but I think a lot of her detractors cannot cope with an assertive, working class woman with a Nirthern accent.
Click to expand...

Kerry

The Tories can do what they want and she can hold whoever she wants to account.

I'm not sure that she is always classy when she is communicating with the Tories but that's by the by, I am not changing my opinion that she is not particularly intelligent.

I know I originally used another term but I have since apologised for doing so and that's why I have slightly shifted my stance.
 
kerrytangerine said:
I also cannot fathom why you consider Ms Rayner to be thick. The Tories are frightened of her because she generally perfoms well at PMQs when she deputises for KS and is consistently the main player in holding the government to account, witness her bringing the Michelle Mone scandal to the fore. I'm not accusing you of this but I think a lot of her detractors cannot cope with an assertive, working class woman with a Nirthern accent.
Click to expand...

Kerry

Can I be clear that I have no problem with you holding Ms Rayner in such high regard even though I don't happen to agree with you.

I don't know how high you actually rate her but maybe an idea to respond to the opening post/poster who suggests the current crop of politicians are not up to scratch and give Ms Rayner a positive mention ?

Personally I actually agree with the opening post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top