The impact it will have on Labour canvassing in the future is exercising moderate Labourites on Twitter too
Good point.
I have canvassed, leafleted and helped the local labour party for the last decade or two.
Last night I emailed to say I was no longer willing to support them next May in a marginal council seat unless Kendall or Cooper wins.
The response was what you would expect from labour Councillors in a middle class ward aware what is about to happen to the party.
Given Labour membership is now up to 600,000, higher even than the early Blair years, I don't expect they will be too concerned. Labour may not pick an electable leader but they will have a leader with a far larger activist base
Agreed, I think I said that in my first post.
Be interesting how effective that is in areas like where I live which are very middle class and have historically always voted labour.
Well whether those activists are able to turn increased membership into increased votes is another matter
Donald Trump - he's holding a rally in Mobile AL this evening, at Ladd Peebles Stadium. They are expecting 35,000 people. It's a very small stadium (40,000).
Compared to Jeb being here this week, when you looked round The Varsity you knew that everyone there was a voter.
The Trump rally looks more like an Elton John concert than a collection of voters. How many are there because it's the Trump Show?
55-60% still vote in US presidential elections, a majority of the US population unlike the midterms, so if Trump is packing out stadiums that is no bad thing and in the primaries you need to build some excitement to get supporters out. Say what you like about Trump but he is the only one of the candidates on the GOP side who is filling halls and hotel conference rooms and is really generating interest, and he does give a genuine performance, while a Jeb Bush or a Walker or Kasich rally are cures for insomnia. On the Democratic side to be fair too it is Sanders who is getting people along to hear him speak to a greater extent than Hillary.
That's not really a fair comparison - Sanders holds mass rallies, but Hillary rarely does. Most of her events are round tables. Her whole campaign is based on keeping her from the public and the press - she's a terrible candidate and her campaign knows it. She's been around for over 20 years. People have an opinion of her.
Old Corbyn's flag is brightest white, It screams surrender as of right - Not to you or me be aware, But to commies everywhere. Don't let the coward's banner float; Go and grab the middle class vote. Make the numpty comrades sneer, And stay in power for many a year.
Most people won't have even heard of the Privy Council but what will matter will be the headlines:
"Corbyn snubs Queen" etc etc
As I've said all along Corbyn's economic policies won't even get heard by the public - the press will mount a 100% full scale assault on Corbyn on the following subjects:
Monarchy NATO Trident Speaking to IRA straight after Brighton bomb Hamas Hezbollah
Can any of our in-house historians tell me when the power of the Privy Council passed to the Cabinet?
From memory, I don't think it has per se! The Cabinet is at heart nothing more than a subset of the Privy Council. A Cabinet member is a Privy Councillor with a department and thousands of civil servants attached. The Cabinet member has power because the Prime Minister has given him the authority to order those civil servants around. Take away the civil servants and Orders in Council are just pieces of paper
So in that sense, the answer to your question is "never"
If we reword your question to "when did departments begin to become permanent institutions", then the answer is "well, they've just sort of grown". Look at the first Walpole Cabinet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walpole–Townshend_Ministry ) - about twelve people and I bet you the number of servants was small. Then new ones start cropping up: Colonies, India, Board of Trade, Agriculture, Ireland... By the 20th Century you've got Education, Health, Labour, Air (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Baldwin_ministry ), and by 2015 it's frankly Malcolm Tucker (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Cameron_ministry ) with things like "Culture, Media and Sport".
So in that sense, the answer is "difficult to say"
But if we cut to the chase and say "which was the first Prime Minister", well let's cross our fingers and say 1821 and Robert Walpole: at that point we have somebody who fulfils the function of Prime Minister and something that fulfils the function of a Cabinet.
So in summary: the Cabinet is just a subset of the Privy Council, albeit a well funded and staffed subset. If you want a date at which Cabinet began to overshadow the Privy Council then let's say 1821.
I now look forward to somebody telling you that what I've just said is bullshit...:-)
Donald Trump - he's holding a rally in Mobile AL this evening, at Ladd Peebles Stadium. They are expecting 35,000 people. It's a very small stadium (40,000).
Compared to Jeb being here this week, when you looked round The Varsity you knew that everyone there was a voter.
The Trump rally looks more like an Elton John concert than a collection of voters. How many are there because it's the Trump Show?
55-60% still vote in US presidential elections, a majority of the US population unlike the midterms, so if Trump is packing out stadiums that is no bad thing and in the primaries you need to build some excitement to get supporters out. Say what you like about Trump but he is the only one of the candidates on the GOP side who is filling halls and hotel conference rooms and is really generating interest, and he does give a genuine performance, while a Jeb Bush or a Walker or Kasich rally are cures for insomnia. On the Democratic side to be fair too it is Sanders who is getting people along to hear him speak to a greater extent than Hillary.
That's not really a fair comparison - Sanders holds mass rallies, but Hillary rarely does. Most of her events are round tables. Her whole campaign is based on keeping her from the public and the press - she's a terrible candidate and her campaign knows it. She's been around for over 20 years. People have an opinion of her.
Mind you Hillary won the 2008 New Hampshire primary from behind through round table events
Can any of our in-house historians tell me when the power of the Privy Council passed to the Cabinet?
From memory, I don't think it has per se! The Cabinet is at heart nothing more than a subset of the Privy Council. A Cabinet member is a Privy Councillor with a department and thousands of civil servants attached. The Cabinet member has power because the Prime Minister has given him the authority to order those civil servants around. Take away the civil servants and Orders in Council are just pieces of paper
So in that sense, the answer to your question is "never"
If we reword your question to "when did departments begin to become permanent institutions", then the answer is "well, they've just sort of grown". Look at the first Walpole Cabinet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walpole–Townshend_Ministry ) - about twelve people and I bet you the number of servants was small. Then new ones start cropping up: Colonies, India, Board of Trade, Agriculture, Ireland... By the 20th Century you've got Education, Health, Labour, Air (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Baldwin_ministry ), and by 2015 it's frankly Malcolm Tucker (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Cameron_ministry ) with things like "Culture, Media and Sport".
So in that sense, the answer is "difficult to say"
But if we cut to the chase and say "which was the first Prime Minister", well let's cross our fingers and say 1721 and Robert Walpole: at that point we have somebody who fulfils the function of Prime Minister and something that fulfils the function of a Cabinet.
So in summary: the Cabinet is just a subset of the Privy Council, albeit a well funded and staffed subset. If you want a date at which Cabinet began to overshadow the Privy Council then let's say 1721.
I now look forward to somebody telling you that what I've just said is bullshit...:-)
[edit: this post was edited to fix the typo "1821" to "1721". My bad]
Comments
It screams surrender as of right -
Not to you or me be aware,
But to commies everywhere.
Don't let the coward's banner float;
Go and grab the middle class vote.
Make the numpty comrades sneer,
And stay in power for many a year.
(hat tip Leon Rosselson)
"Corbyn snubs Queen" etc etc
As I've said all along Corbyn's economic policies won't even get heard by the public - the press will mount a 100% full scale assault on Corbyn on the following subjects:
Monarchy
NATO
Trident
Speaking to IRA straight after Brighton bomb
Hamas
Hezbollah
So in that sense, the answer to your question is "never"
If we reword your question to "when did departments begin to become permanent institutions", then the answer is "well, they've just sort of grown". Look at the first Walpole Cabinet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walpole–Townshend_Ministry ) - about twelve people and I bet you the number of servants was small. Then new ones start cropping up: Colonies, India, Board of Trade, Agriculture, Ireland... By the 20th Century you've got Education, Health, Labour, Air (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Baldwin_ministry ), and by 2015 it's frankly Malcolm Tucker (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Cameron_ministry ) with things like "Culture, Media and Sport".
So in that sense, the answer is "difficult to say"
But if we cut to the chase and say "which was the first Prime Minister", well let's cross our fingers and say 1821 and Robert Walpole: at that point we have somebody who fulfils the function of Prime Minister and something that fulfils the function of a Cabinet.
So in summary: the Cabinet is just a subset of the Privy Council, albeit a well funded and staffed subset. If you want a date at which Cabinet began to overshadow the Privy Council then let's say 1821.
I now look forward to somebody telling you that what I've just said is bullshit...:-)
So in that sense, the answer to your question is "never"
If we reword your question to "when did departments begin to become permanent institutions", then the answer is "well, they've just sort of grown". Look at the first Walpole Cabinet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walpole–Townshend_Ministry ) - about twelve people and I bet you the number of servants was small. Then new ones start cropping up: Colonies, India, Board of Trade, Agriculture, Ireland... By the 20th Century you've got Education, Health, Labour, Air (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Baldwin_ministry ), and by 2015 it's frankly Malcolm Tucker (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Cameron_ministry ) with things like "Culture, Media and Sport".
So in that sense, the answer is "difficult to say"
But if we cut to the chase and say "which was the first Prime Minister", well let's cross our fingers and say 1721 and Robert Walpole: at that point we have somebody who fulfils the function of Prime Minister and something that fulfils the function of a Cabinet.
So in summary: the Cabinet is just a subset of the Privy Council, albeit a well funded and staffed subset. If you want a date at which Cabinet began to overshadow the Privy Council then let's say 1721.
I now look forward to somebody telling you that what I've just said is bullshit...:-)
[edit: this post was edited to fix the typo "1821" to "1721". My bad]