[Politics] Cabinet ministers changing roles…

[jcdenton08]

Here’s something I’ve never understood. Or liked.

In this hypothetical (but very real in general terms, for a recent example look up Grant Shapps) how is it that one minute an MP is Environment Minister, an implied expert on the subject, then is “promoted” to a completely unrelated office like Home Secretary. How can one person be expected to be competent and knowledgeable about two completely areas?

I realise that the team of advisors and civil servants actually make the bulk of policy, but isn’t that itself a farce? That would (and does) make the cabinet minister in question basically just a box ticker.

People bang on about electoral reform, PR, FPTP, HTTP, KFC, MFI, DFS, etc - but my electoral reform would be a minimum of a working background in the area they are running on behalf of the whole country.

It’s something I’ve never understood and seems incredibly archaic.

 

[Bodian]

I agree.

We had Therese Coffey as Environment Secretary of State for a while - she knew next to nothing about matters she was pronouncing upon and making decisions about. After she left, Barclay had to reverse some of her more illogical decisions in my area of work. I was more than pleased to see her lose her seat. And even more pleased by the poetic justice of it all when I found out she had lost to the Green Party!

 

[A1X]

I would also add that they should keep the roles for a good length of time. At one point I think we had something like 8 Housing ministers in 10 years, so is it any wonder that’s in such a state?

 

[KZNSeagull]

Rory Stewart, an expert in Afghanistan and Iraq, was assigned to Africa when he was a minister in the Foreign Office.

The problem is that there are a lot of MPs who are actually professional politicians rather than experts in anything other than politics. Hence why the civil service are there - but there is a problem with that too in that civil servants are moved around very quickly to get an overall experience of everything.

The real subject experts are actually in the House of Lords.

It is all rather bonkers frankly.

 

[jcdenton08]

Rory Stewart, an expert in Afghanistan and Iraq, was assigned to Africa when he was a minister in the Foreign Office.

The problem is that there are a lot of MPs who are actually professional politicians rather than experts in anything other than politics. Hence why the civil service are there - but there is a problem with that too in that civil servants are moved around very quickly to get an overall experience of everything.

The real subject experts are actually in the House of Lords.

It is all rather bonkers frankly.

So essentially you agree

 

[KZNSeagull]

So essentially you agree

Not really as you are then severely limiting who can do each job. Ministers should come up with policy, not solutions. The solutions come from the civil service.

 

[jcdenton08]

Not really as you are then severely limiting who can do each job. Ministers should come up with policy, not solutions. The solutions come from the civil service.

How are ministers meant to come up with policy for defence on Monday, when on Friday they were making policy on fracking?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Michael Gove declared they’d had enough of experts!

 

[KZNSeagull]

How are ministers meant to come up with policy for defence on Monday, when on Friday they were making policy on fracking?

Because the overall policy will come from the party manifesto and/or the PM. Plus they will use special advisors who may be subject experts.

 

[Blue3]

Here’s something I’ve never understood. Or liked.

In this hypothetical (but very real in general terms, for a recent example look up Grant Shapps) how is it that one minute an MP is Environment Minister, an implied expert on the subject, then is “promoted” to a completely unrelated office like Home Secretary. How can one person be expected to be competent and knowledgeable about two completely areas?

I realise that the team of advisors and civil servants actually make the bulk of policy, but isn’t that itself a farce? That would (and does) make the cabinet minister in question basically just a box ticker.

People bang on about electoral reform, PR, FPTP, HTTP, KFC, MFI, DFS, etc - but my electoral reform would be a minimum of a working background in the area they are running on behalf of the whole country.

It’s something I’ve never understood and seems incredibly archaic.

In answer the minister is not an expert the experts are the civil servants who remain post irrespective of the minister or political party, unless Dominic Cummings is sacking them so he becomes the sole person with the knowledge and power

 

[dazzer6666]

Here’s something I’ve never understood. Or liked.

In this hypothetical (but very real in general terms, for a recent example look up Grant Shapps) how is it that one minute an MP is Environment Minister, an implied expert on the subject, then is “promoted” to a completely unrelated office like Home Secretary. How can one person be expected to be competent and knowledgeable about two completely areas?

I realise that the team of advisors and civil servants actually make the bulk of policy, but isn’t that itself a farce? That would (and does) make the cabinet minister in question basically just a box ticker.

People bang on about electoral reform, PR, FPTP, HTTP, KFC, MFI, DFS, etc - but my electoral reform would be a minimum of a working background in the area they are running on behalf of the whole country.

It’s something I’ve never understood and seems incredibly archaic.

Agree 100%.
‘Well you’ve had a go at health for a couple of years, fvcked that up but you’re one of my favourites so have a bash at Education for a bit’

 

[hart's shirt]

I would also add that they should keep the roles for a good length of time. At one point I think we had something like 8 Housing ministers in 10 years, so is it any wonder that’s in such a state?

Quite so.

During 2022, there were 5 Secretaries of State for Education - Zahawi, Donelan (2 days tenure), Cleverley, Malthouse and Keegan.

Other than their own schooling, I don't believe that any of them had a background in education.

Having been an educationalist since the mid 90s, I could've done a better job than all of them despite knowing nothing about politics.

 

[drew]

Here’s something I’ve never understood. Or liked.

In this hypothetical (but very real in general terms, for a recent example look up Grant Shapps) how is it that one minute an MP is Environment Minister, an implied expert on the subject, then is “promoted” to a completely unrelated office like Home Secretary. How can one person be expected to be competent and knowledgeable about two completely areas?

I realise that the team of advisors and civil servants actually make the bulk of policy, but isn’t that itself a farce? That would (and does) make the cabinet minister in question basically just a box ticker.

People bang on about electoral reform, PR, FPTP, HTTP, KFC, MFI, DFS, etc - but my electoral reform would be a minimum of a working background in the area they are running on behalf of the whole country.

It’s something I’ve never understood and seems incredibly archaic.

In theory, isn't it about the person at the top being of the type that, when presented with the case for policy, makes the decision. There are probably plenty of CEOs in the private sector that might not be experts in the particular industry but are capable of making strategic decisions.

 

[jcdenton08]

In theory, isn't it about the person at the top being of the type that, when presented with the case for policy, makes the decision. There are probably plenty of CEOs in the private sector that might not be experts in the particular industry but are capable of making strategic decisions.

I’d argue a CEO’s responsibility is to the shareholders. In the UK, an MP’s responsibility is supposed to be to their government. It’s a question of competence.

 

[South Stand Bonfire]

I would also add that they should keep the roles for a good length of time. At one point I think we had something like 8 Housing ministers in 10 years, so is it any wonder that’s in such a state?

We did. It seemed like it was a “stepping stone” appointment until something more sexy came along irrespective of planning and housing being a key issue in this country.

 

[drew]

I’d argue a CEO’s responsibility is to the shareholders. In the UK, an MP’s responsibility is supposed to be to their government. It’s a question of competence.

I'd argue that an MPs responsibility is to their constituents!

 

[jcdenton08]

I'd argue that an MPs responsibility is to their constituents!

You’re absolutely right. I think I was referring to cabinet MPs. Surely there has to be a base knowledge beyond legal accountability. CEO’s at least undertake themselves to learn their industry.

 

[KZNSeagull]

You’re absolutely right. I think I was referring to cabinet MPs. Surely there has to be a base knowledge beyond legal accountability. CEO’s at least undertake themselves to learn their industry.

And a good minister will too, but their main objective is to ensure that their (the party's) policy is implemented. Good ones will detail what they want to achieve and others will go away and give solutions and the pros and cons thereof for the minister to approve. The problem comes when ministers give solutions and stick to them even when the solution is shit and there are better ways to achieve something (please see the Rwanda policy as a good example).

 

[South Stand Bonfire]

James Timpson has been appointed as Prisons minister (sits in H of L). Now that is a sensible and practical appointment imo. Someone who has a history of employing ex offenders in his business and has clear views on those who should or shouldn’t be in prison, regardless of what the hang ‘em all brigade think and shout.

 

[dazzer6666]

James Timpson has been appointed as Prisons minister (sits in H of L). Now that is a sensible and practical appointment imo. Someone who has a history of employing ex offenders in his business and has clear views on those who should or shouldn’t be in prison, regardless of what the hang ‘em all brigade think and shout.

Should be an ex-con…….ah wait, the Tories have been booted out.