Politics

[royal white]

Anyway who would even compare leaders after their first year….like it’s some kind of political league. 
 

Meanwhile on you gov 

 

https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/35068-one-year-keir-how-has-starmer-done-leading-labour

[kent_white]

32 minutes ago, royal white said:

Anyway who would even compare leaders after their first year….like it’s some kind of political league. 
 

Meanwhile on you gov 

 

https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/35068-one-year-keir-how-has-starmer-done-leading-labour

That's actually much more favourable than I thought it might be! 

[Sweep]

2 minutes ago, kent_white said:

That's actually much more favourable than I thought it might be! 

it's also from 4 years ago, when he wasn't in the firing line

[kent_white]

3 minutes ago, Sweep said:

it's also from 4 years ago, when he wasn't in the firing line

Oh - I didn't read that bit! 🤣

[deeane Koontz]

1 hour ago, Cheese said:

Donald Trump is a paedophile. There is no other explanation for him threatening Republican Representatives who continue to push for the Epstein files to be released - especially when one of his campaign promises was to release them. Knowing that, I can only conclude that those who support him are either paedophile apologists, or paedos themselves.

 

Birds of a feather.

[DirtySanchez]

12 hours ago, bolty58 said:

You know full well it isn't 'knickers in a twist' but simply political expediency.

You can't expect any opposition to miss an opportunity to bale in on something like this - especially those your delightful potty mouth has labelled 'Tory scum'.

I'll just be pleased to see the repulsive specimen crash and burn and retire to live in undeserved comfort near Volks' railway.

Volk's

[Cheese]

The real issue in the UK. We are fucking ourselves. Immigrants are a fart in a hurricane.

[Dimron]

3 hours ago, Not in Crawley said:

Downing street hasn't become like the white house and we dont have a president.

What 'hefty cut back' and dont start bleating on about civil servants please.

To name a few extra departments and staff brought in by Blair, Nos 10-12 had to be substantially rebuilt to accommodate all the new people (who are additional to the Civil Servants in Whitehall):

1. Prime Minister's Delivery Unit

2. Chief of Staff

3. Social Unit

4. Special Advisers

5. Strategic Communications

It was all about centralistion of power by New Labour and has resulted in a big pumped up Westminster bubble with the associated disconnection with the hoi polloi we see now

 

Edited September 4, 2025 by Dimron

[gonzo]

A lot of talk about November amongst my client base today.

Presume the headless horsemen are gearing up...

[Cheese]

22 minutes ago, gonzo said:

A lot of talk about November amongst my client base today.

Presume the headless horsemen are gearing up...

Why, what's happening in November?

[BobyBrno]

On 03/09/2025 at 11:43, BobyBrno said:

PMQ’s should be interesting. I’m going for a walk.😳

Well I said interesting.🤔

 

[little whitt]

2 minutes ago, Cheese said:

Why, what's happening in November?

26 Budget

[Cheese]

6 minutes ago, little whitt said:

26 Budget

Ah. I thought Gonzo was alluding to some type of uprising of thick racists.

[Sweep]

8 minutes ago, Cheese said:

Ah. I thought Gonzo was alluding to some type of uprising of thick racists.

They're too thick to think that far ahead, they'll rise up when Nigel or Tommy (or possibly even Musk) tell them to

[kent_white]

29 minutes ago, BobyBrno said:

Well I said interesting.🤔

 

See I love stuff like this! 🤣

[Winchester White]

1 hour ago, Dimron said:

To name a few extra departments and staff brought in by Blair, Nos 10-12 had to be substantially rebuilt to accommodate all the new people (who are additional to the Civil Servants in Whitehall):

1. Prime Minister's Delivery Unit

2. Chief of Staff

3. Social Unit

4. Special Advisers

5. Strategic Communications

It was all about centralistion of power by New Labour and has resulted in a big pumped up Westminster bubble with the associated disconnection with the hoi polloi we see now

 

I can't find anything about any Downing St building being extended be it substantial or not?

Also, with media moving incredibly quickly away from traditional TV, Radio and the print press you would expect the Government Comms team to keep up with modern communications.

But no, it's Blair's fault. Fucking hell I can put a lot at his doorstep (I include Iraq despite parliament because the tit pushed for it) but this is ridiculous.

[Not in Crawley]

1 hour ago, Dimron said:

To name a few extra departments and staff brought in by Blair, Nos 10-12 had to be substantially rebuilt to accommodate all the new people (who are additional to the Civil Servants in Whitehall):

1. Prime Minister's Delivery Unit

2. Chief of Staff

3. Social Unit

4. Special Advisers

5. Strategic Communications

It was all about centralistion of power by New Labour and has resulted in a big pumped up Westminster bubble with the associated disconnection with the hoi polloi we see now

 

Sorry, not really true.

New Labour did professionalise communication in the civil service (law was previously the only only CS role you needed a specific qualification for) and that was to meet the needs of a rapidly changing world whereby people dont just buy a paper and sit down to the 6 o'clock news - a decision that has been proven to be absolutely correct for strategic communications hence why it still.operates the way it does. You simply couldn't operate a 21st century government without it. I dont see how that makes the PM presidential.

SPADS came in the 60s under Wilson as a way to provide independent political advice away from just the CS. Yes, Minister does some excellent sketches about this (Dear Lady...) the CoS is there to do the same thing and does not have any executive authority. The first chief of staff was under Thatcher - not Blair. He resurrected it, and given they are two of most successful PMs in British history, it would seem there is logic behind the continuation of the role.

The 'couch cabinet' or sofa government was initially run by Blair was a way of cutting through some red tape before taking it to a wider audience - subsequently used as well by Cameron and to a lesser extent Johnson (mainly because Cummings was running most things)

PMDU is again something that has been proven necessary (rather than the tin foil keeping the population out of politics as you suggest) it provides a robust way to ensure departments hit their targets and makes them accountable. It actually opens up government rather than close it down.

So what you seem to be against is actually the development of politics to meet the changing needs of the world and the country's population. Perhaps you'd rather we went back to rotten boroughs? Or perhaps even further back to perhaps the divine right of kings to govern us? 

Anyway, thought it needed a little perspective.

[Dimron]

31 minutes ago, Winchester White said:

I can't find anything about any Downing St building being extended be it substantial or not?

Also, with media moving incredibly quickly away from traditional TV, Radio and the print press you would expect the Government Comms team to keep up with modern communications.

But no, it's Blair's fault. Fucking hell I can put a lot at his doorstep (I include Iraq despite parliament because the tit pushed for it) but this is ridiculous.

Done a quick AI search, there is more

During his premiership, Tony Blair significantly expanded the staff at Downing Street, particularly increasing the number of special advisers to support New Labour's strategy of using the media to shape policy and exert influence, a shift from previous governments' approach. This expansion included increasing the number of both civil servants and political appointees, leading to a larger and more politically-focused staff within the Prime Minister's Office at Number 10

[Not in Crawley]

Just now, Dimron said:

Done a quick AI search, there is more

During his premiership, Tony Blair significantly expanded the staff at Downing Street, particularly increasing the number of special advisers to support New Labour's strategy of using the media to shape policy and exert influence, a shift from previous governments' approach. This expansion included increasing the number of both civil servants and political appointees, leading to a larger and more politically-focused staff within the Prime Minister's Office at Number 10

I think it might be a good idea to read my post first before you Google?

[Dimron]

8 minutes ago, Not in Crawley said:

Sorry, not really true.

New Labour did professionalise communication in the civil service (law was previously the only only CS role you needed a specific qualification for) and that was to meet the needs of a rapidly changing world whereby people dont just buy a paper and sit down to the 6 o'clock news - a decision that has been proven to be absolutely correct for strategic communications hence why it still.operates the way it does. You simply couldn't operate a 21st century government without it. I dont see how that makes the PM presidential.

SPADS came in the 60s under Wilson as a way to provide independent political advice away from just the CS. Yes, Minister does some excellent sketches about this (Dear Lady...) the CoS is there to do the same thing and does not have any executive authority. The first chief of staff was under Thatcher - not Blair. He resurrected it, and given they are two of most successful PMs in British history, it would seem there is logic behind the continuation of the role.

The 'couch cabinet' or sofa government was initially run by Blair was a way of cutting through some red tape before taking it to a wider audience - subsequently used as well by Cameron and to a lesser extent Johnson (mainly because Cummings was running most things)

PMDU is again something that has been proven necessary (rather than the tin foil keeping the population out of politics as you suggest) it provides a robust way to ensure departments hit their targets and makes them accountable. It actually opens up government rather than close it down.

So what you seem to be against is actually the development of politics to meet the changing needs of the world and the country's population. Perhaps you'd rather we went back to rotten boroughs? Or perhaps even further back to perhaps the divine right of kings to govern us? 

Anyway, thought it needed a little perspective.

I believe the country needs more devolved governance so people can feel involved rather than have a big top heavy centralised set-up that struggles with connection.

Love to debate more but need to bugger off and sort out a worky thing 🙂

[Winchester White]

4 minutes ago, Dimron said:

I believe the country needs more devolved governance so people can feel involved rather than have a big top heavy centralised set-up that struggles with connection.

Love to debate more but need to bugger off and sort out a worky thing 🙂

I agree on devolution, if it is done properly, but your previous post was pretty out there tbh with zero substance backing it up.

[gonzo]

1 hour ago, Cheese said:

Ah. I thought Gonzo was alluding to some type of uprising of thick racists.

Too cold to be out in the streets in November mate

Not sure Dave down the reform inn is aware of the impending clusterfuck.

[Cheese]

1 minute ago, gonzo said:

Too cold to be out in the streets in November mate

Not sure Dave down the reform inn is aware of the impending clusterfuck.

What are your client base predicting?

[Not in Crawley]

23 minutes ago, Dimron said:

I believe the country needs more devolved governance so people can feel involved rather than have a big top heavy centralised set-up that struggles with connection.

Love to debate more but need to bugger off and sort out a worky thing 🙂

I agree totally in devolution - as I say Brown's white paper i believe is something the gvt is keen to act upon, I just think that is very different to adaptation of a government to meet the challenges of the time (and devolution would help this) 

Interestingly it was really unpopular when Prescott was pushing for regional assemblies - the North East rejected it if you recall (he was really active in pushing for loosening of economic ties from white hall) and helped launch regional development agencies all the while being deputy PM under....Blair 😉

[Cheese]