It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
Brexit means remuneration! Brexit Ltd could become the world leader in managing exits from from the EU.
Yep, the metropolitan elite is going to do pretty well out of it. See lawyers, also.
... and the working poor if it is managed properly
That remains to be seen. The right-wing, willy-waving fantasy of a fit, lean economy competing on the basis of low regulation and low costs is not one that will shower the working poor with financial rewards or job security.
But there is nothing wrong in debating his role and it is not an attack on civil service impartiality to do so, which was the claim made.
No
The original claim was that Brexiteers were attacking the impartiality of the civil service. They are, by advancing the idea that our impartial ambassador be replaced by a Brexiteer
There is simply nothing in the civil service's rules on impartiality that conflicts with replacing Sir Ivan with someone who is pro-the-government. The obligation is on civil servants to "serve the government". Appointing someone who has a similar personal outlook, if anything, helps (in the short/medium term) ensure that civil service impartiality is maintained.
First Brexiteers assault parliamentary sovereignty, then judicial independence, now civil service impartiality. The tenets of our democracy.
Lammy could not be more wrong.
Civil service impartiality means implementing government policy regardless of whether it is Labour policy or Tory policy.
Sir Ivan is allowed to raise his concerns, but asking his replacement to get on with it is not questioning any of the Civil Service's many vaulted values.
Brexiteers have explicitly called for Sir Ivan's replacement to not be an impartial civil servant, but an avowed Brexiteer
And if the Government had a policy Sir Ivan would have implemented it. His complaint is that they have no policy, and no hope of finding one.
And that final comment is the problem. To say that the govt has no policy is at least arguable - certainly that it has no published or developed policy - but to say that it has no hope of finding one is straying into realms which are not his business.
I keep coming back to the conclusion that the assumptions that Sir Ivan was working from are not the same as those of the government.
Unfortunately for Sir Ivan - despite how clever he is supposed to be - has totally shafted himself by making clear in the leaked e-mail an agenda which is at odds with the settled will of the people. His duty as a civil servant was to keep those views private and retire from the field beaten but still honourable.
Actually, his duty as a civil servant was to communicate his opinion to the govt and to implement the government's policy, irrespective of whether it took his advice or not. I dislike the notion, which seems to be forming on both government and CS sides, that civil servants ought to agree with policies if they are to implement them. That completely cuts across good administration and, potentially, across democracy itself if it means that, for example, there were no capable civil servants who would be prepared to implement a Corbyn government's platform.
It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
Brexit means remuneration! Brexit Ltd could become the world leader in managing exits from from the EU.
Yep, the metropolitan elite is going to do pretty well out of it. See lawyers, also.
... and the working poor if it is managed properly
LOL, some hope any thought will be given to the working poor in it all other than lip service.
A case could be made for putting Osborne on the negotiating team. Teamwork rather than leadership might suit him.
Never mind the negotiating team. Make him Sir Ivan's replacement.
Cameron as NATO SecGen and Osborne as our man in Bruxelles negotiating Brexit, that's something I could live with, but Osborne sees his future at Westminster.
There's always 2020. Brexit should be complete by then and he ought to be able to find a seat - there are usually late retirements from long-serving members in safe seats. Beefing up the foreign affairs aspect of his CV won't do him any harm and if he does see himself as a future leader, then he'd be better off doing something useful for his country than picking up hundreds of thousands for speaking to Goldman Sachs and the like.
My view is that Mrs May might be forced hold to an early election whether she wants to or not.
I'll explain this weekend why, but I'll give a slight spoiler, it is based on Brexit being the People's Budget de nos jours with a recalcitrant House of Lords
She might well: it's a scenario I've sketched out a few times but look forward to seeing your take on it. It's why I said that the Copeland by-election might not take place.
It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
Brexit means remuneration! Brexit Ltd could become the world leader in managing exits from from the EU.
Yep, the metropolitan elite is going to do pretty well out of it. See lawyers, also.
... and the working poor if it is managed properly
That remains to be seen. The right-wing, willy-waving fantasy of a fit, lean economy competing on the basis of low regulation and low costs is not one that will shower the working poor with financial rewards or job security.
They will be financially better off with greater job security if there is less competition for their jobs from people with a head start
You're right to say the proper debate is whether Sir Ivan was able to provide his opinion within the proper framework of serving the government. That is a reflection on his record, his role, and his skills. (The relevant Civil Service value is Objectivity).
A case could be made for putting Osborne on the negotiating team. Teamwork rather than leadership might suit him.
Never mind the negotiating team. Make him Sir Ivan's replacement.
Cameron as NATO SecGen and Osborne as our man in Bruxelles negotiating Brexit, that's something I could live with, but Osborne sees his future at Westminster.
There's always 2020. Brexit should be complete by then and he ought to be able to find a seat - there are usually late retirements from long-serving members in safe seats. Beefing up the foreign affairs aspect of his CV won't do him any harm and if he does see himself as a future leader, then he'd be better off doing something useful for his country than picking up hundreds of thousands for speaking to Goldman Sachs and the like.
My view is that Mrs May might be forced hold to an early election whether she wants to or not.
I'll explain this weekend why, but I'll give a slight spoiler, it is based on Brexit being the People's Budget de nos jours with a recalcitrant House of Lords
She might well: it's a scenario I've sketched out a few times but look forward to seeing your take on it. It's why I said that the Copeland by-election might not take place.
Getting a hundred quid back off Hills will be fun as I try and explain to the shop why the betslip is void !
It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
Brexit means remuneration! Brexit Ltd could become the world leader in managing exits from from the EU.
Yep, the metropolitan elite is going to do pretty well out of it. See lawyers, also.
... and the working poor if it is managed properly
That remains to be seen. The right-wing, willy-waving fantasy of a fit, lean economy competing on the basis of low regulation and low costs is not one that will shower the working poor with financial rewards or job security.
Yes. James Delingpole was saying he wanted post-Brexit Britain to be like Hong Kong, with very elderly people having to do hard manual labour on the streets.
A case could be made for putting Osborne on the negotiating team. Teamwork rather than leadership might suit him.
Never mind the negotiating team. Make him Sir Ivan's replacement.
Cameron as NATO SecGen and Osborne as our man in Bruxelles negotiating Brexit, that's something I could live with, but Osborne sees his future at Westminster.
There's always 2020. Brexit should be complete by then and he ought to be able to find a seat - there are usually late retirements from long-serving members in safe seats. Beefing up the foreign affairs aspect of his CV won't do him any harm and if he does see himself as a future leader, then he'd be better off doing something useful for his country than picking up hundreds of thousands for speaking to Goldman Sachs and the like.
My view is that Mrs May might be forced hold to an early election whether she wants to or not.
I'll explain this weekend why, but I'll give a slight spoiler, it is based on Brexit being the People's Budget de nos jours with a recalcitrant House of Lords
Looking forward to that thread!
May will just threaten to create 100, or whatever, new peers, which was the threat that finally persuaded the HoL in 1911 to back down. In those days the King had to be involved, I suspect that's less of an issue now.
She has already threatened them with major reform aka elected senate if they piss about on Brexit.
I think they will consider their lovely £300 a day expenses and decide to keep quiet, except for a few.
It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
Brexit means remuneration! Brexit Ltd could become the world leader in managing exits from from the EU.
Yep, the metropolitan elite is going to do pretty well out of it. See lawyers, also.
... and the working poor if it is managed properly
That remains to be seen. The right-wing, willy-waving fantasy of a fit, lean economy competing on the basis of low regulation and low costs is not one that will shower the working poor with financial rewards or job security.
They will be financially better off with greater job security if there is less competition for their jobs from people with a head start
How does demand for labour factor into your thinking?
It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
Brexit means remuneration! Brexit Ltd could become the world leader in managing exits from from the EU.
Yep, the metropolitan elite is going to do pretty well out of it. See lawyers, also.
... and the working poor if it is managed properly
LOL, some hope any thought will be given to the working poor in it all other than lip service.
Well it hasn't for 20 odd years, in fact they have been exploited, diminished and insulted, so worth a try
First Brexiteers assault parliamentary sovereignty, then judicial independence, now civil service impartiality. The tenets of our democracy.
Lammy could not be more wrong.
Civil service impartiality means implementing government policy regardless of whether it is Labour policy or Tory policy.
Sir Ivan is allowed to raise his concerns, but asking his replacement to get on with it is not questioning any of the Civil Service's many vaulted values.
Brexiteers have explicitly called for Sir Ivan's replacement to not be an impartial civil servant, but an avowed Brexiteer
And if the Government had a policy Sir Ivan would have implemented it. His complaint is that they have no policy, and no hope of finding one.
And that final comment is the problem. To say that the govt has no policy is at least arguable - certainly that it has no published or developed policy - but to say that it has no hope of finding one is straying into realms which are not his business.
I keep coming back to the conclusion that the assumptions that Sir Ivan was working from are not the same as those of the government.
Unfortunately for Sir Ivan - despite how clever he is supposed to be - has totally shafted himself by making clear in the leaked e-mail an agenda which is at odds with the settled will of the people. His duty as a civil servant was to keep those views private and retire from the field beaten but still honourable.
Actually, his duty as a civil servant was to communicate his opinion to the govt and to implement the government's policy, irrespective of whether it took his advice or not. I dislike the notion, which seems to be forming on both government and CS sides, that civil servants ought to agree with policies if they are to implement them. That completely cuts across good administration and, potentially, across democracy itself if it means that, for example, there were no capable civil servants who would be prepared to implement a Corbyn government's platform.
Agreed. But it is not appropriate for a civil servant when resigning to announce his anti-government views to the world at large. That makes him sound like an arrogant twerp and demeans him and the service generally. The people voted, I disagreed with the result, but it's the responsibility of everyone to make the best of it. That's democracy.
Farmers did, and do, back Brexit. Which is natural, given that they tend to be very sceptical of government, particularly governments far away.
Dunt overplays the report. The committee quite rightly highlighted the challenges for the government in this area, but having discuss Sir Ivan the author then just assumes the worse case scenario and runs with it.
First Brexiteers assault parliamentary sovereignty, then judicial independence, now civil service impartiality. The tenets of our democracy.
Lammy could not be more wrong.
Civil service impartiality means implementing government policy regardless of whether it is Labour policy or Tory policy.
Sir Ivan is allowed to raise his concerns, but asking his replacement to get on with it is not questioning any of the Civil Service's many vaulted values.
Brexiteers have explicitly called for Sir Ivan's replacement to not be an impartial civil servant, but an avowed Brexiteer
And if the Government had a policy Sir Ivan would have implemented it. His complaint is that they have no policy, and no hope of finding one.
And that final comment is the problem. To say that the govt has no policy is at least arguable - certainly that it has no published or developed policy - but to say that it has no hope of finding one is straying into realms which are not his business.
I keep coming back to the conclusion that the assumptions that Sir Ivan was working from are not the same as those of the government.
Unfortunately for Sir Ivan - despite how clever he is supposed to be - has totally shafted himself by making clear in the leaked e-mail an agenda which is at odds with the settled will of the people. His duty as a civil servant was to keep those views private and retire from the field beaten but still honourable.
Actually, his duty as a civil servant was to communicate his opinion to the govt and to implement the government's policy, irrespective of whether it took his advice or not. I dislike the notion, which seems to be forming on both government and CS sides, that civil servants ought to agree with policies if they are to implement them. That completely cuts across good administration and, potentially, across democracy itself if it means that, for example, there were no capable civil servants who would be prepared to implement a Corbyn government's platform.
Agreed. But it is not appropriate for a civil servant when resigning to announce his anti-government views to the world at large. That makes him sound like an arrogant twerp and demeans him and the service generally. The people voted, I disagreed with the result, but it's the responsibility of everyone to make the best of it. That's democracy.
He didn't announce his views to the world at large!
A case could be made for putting Osborne on the negotiating team. Teamwork rather than leadership might suit him.
Never mind the negotiating team. Make him Sir Ivan's replacement.
Cameron as NATO SecGen and Osborne as our man in Bruxelles negotiating Brexit, that's something I could live with, but Osborne sees his future at Westminster.
There's always 2020. Brexit should be complete by then and he ought to be able to find a seat - there are usually late retirements from long-serving members in safe seats. Beefing up the foreign affairs aspect of his CV won't do him any harm and if he does see himself as a future leader, then he'd be better off doing something useful for his country than picking up hundreds of thousands for speaking to Goldman Sachs and the like.
My view is that Mrs May might be forced hold to an early election whether she wants to or not.
I'll explain this weekend why, but I'll give a slight spoiler, it is based on Brexit being the People's Budget de nos jours with a recalcitrant House of Lords
She might well: it's a scenario I've sketched out a few times but look forward to seeing your take on it. It's why I said that the Copeland by-election might not take place.
I'm trying to work out who the terrible twins are.
farming will simply reform - this week TV was plastered with th expansion of the english vineyards - that's grape farming for you townies.
if some farms decide to sell up and turn their land to housing who would blame them - bar the next batch of moaners saying Brexit is destroying the countryside - shriek, wail armageddon etc.
It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
Brexit means remuneration! Brexit Ltd could become the world leader in managing exits from from the EU.
Yep, the metropolitan elite is going to do pretty well out of it. See lawyers, also.
... and the working poor if it is managed properly
That remains to be seen. The right-wing, willy-waving fantasy of a fit, lean economy competing on the basis of low regulation and low costs is not one that will shower the working poor with financial rewards or job security.
It has nothing to do with willy waving; it's called survival. You don't seem to get the fact that we can't carry on enjoying generous social benefits ad infinitum with no MONEY to pay for them. I find it quite baffling that the self-professed 'more intelligent' part of the electorate can't grasp this extremely simple concept.
It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
Brexit means remuneration! Brexit Ltd could become the world leader in managing exits from from the EU.
Yep, the metropolitan elite is going to do pretty well out of it. See lawyers, also.
... and the working poor if it is managed properly
That remains to be seen. The right-wing, willy-waving fantasy of a fit, lean economy competing on the basis of low regulation and low costs is not one that will shower the working poor with financial rewards or job security.
They will be financially better off with greater job security if there is less competition for their jobs from people with a head start
Which jobs done by the working poor do you expect to become better paid and more secure as a result of Brexit?
First Brexiteers assault parliamentary sovereignty, then judicial independence, now civil service impartiality. The tenets of our democracy.
Lammy could not be more wrong.
Civil service impartiality means implementing government policy regardless of whether it is Labour policy or Tory policy.
Sir Ivan is allowed to raise his concerns, but asking his replacement to get on with it is not questioning any of the Civil Service's many vaulted values.
Brexiteers have explicitly called for Sir Ivan's replacement to not be an impartial civil servant, but an avowed Brexiteer
And if the Government had a policy Sir Ivan would have implemented it. His complaint is that they have no policy, and no hope of finding one.
And that final comment is the problem. To say that the govt has no policy is at least arguable - certainly that it has no published or developed policy - but to say that it has no hope of finding one is straying into realms which are not his business.
I keep coming back to the conclusion that the assumptions that Sir Ivan was working from are not the same as those of the government.
Unfortunately for Sir Ivan - despite how clever he is supposed to be - has totally shafted himself by making clear in the leaked e-mail an agenda which is at odds with the settled will of the people. His duty as a civil servant was to keep those views private and retire from the field beaten but still honourable.
Actually, his duty as a civil servant was to communicate his opinion to the govt and to implement the government's policy, irrespective of whether it took his advice or not. I dislike the notion, which seems to be forming on both government and CS sides, that civil servants ought to agree with policies if they are to implement them. That completely cuts across good administration and, potentially, across democracy itself if it means that, for example, there were no capable civil servants who would be prepared to implement a Corbyn government's platform.
Agreed. But it is not appropriate for a civil servant when resigning to announce his anti-government views to the world at large. That makes him sound like an arrogant twerp and demeans him and the service generally. The people voted, I disagreed with the result, but it's the responsibility of everyone to make the best of it. That's democracy.
Can you point to the bit in his email where he says he opposes Brexit and disagrees with the referendum result?
It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
Brexit means remuneration! Brexit Ltd could become the world leader in managing exits from from the EU.
Yep, the metropolitan elite is going to do pretty well out of it. See lawyers, also.
... and the working poor if it is managed properly
That remains to be seen. The right-wing, willy-waving fantasy of a fit, lean economy competing on the basis of low regulation and low costs is not one that will shower the working poor with financial rewards or job security.
They will be financially better off with greater job security if there is less competition for their jobs from people with a head start
Which jobs done by the working poor do you expect to become better paid and more secure as a result of Brexit?
I'd guess at the ones that have become worse paid and less secure due to mass importation of cheap Labour. Maybe the pay just wont get any worse, rather than better
It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
Brexit means remuneration! Brexit Ltd could become the world leader in managing exits from from the EU.
Yep, the metropolitan elite is going to do pretty well out of it. See lawyers, also.
... and the working poor if it is managed properly
That remains to be seen. The right-wing, willy-waving fantasy of a fit, lean economy competing on the basis of low regulation and low costs is not one that will shower the working poor with financial rewards or job security.
It has nothing to do with willy waving; it's called survival. You don't seem to get the fact that we can't carry on enjoying generous social benefits ad infinitum with no MONEY to pay for them. I find it quite baffling that the self-professed 'more intelligent' part of the electorate can't grasp this extremely simple concept.
I totally get the concept - which is why I am highly sceptical that the working poor are going to see any significant financial benefits or greater job security from a willy-waving Brexit.
farming will simply reform - this week TV was plastered with th expansion of the english vineyards - that's grape farming for you townies.
if some farms decide to sell up and turn their land to housing who would blame them - bar the next batch of moaners saying Brexit is destroying the countryside - shriek, wail armageddon etc.
Townie? Me?
I live in the Peak District, you can't get less townie than that.
It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
Brexit means remuneration! Brexit Ltd could become the world leader in managing exits from from the EU.
Yep, the metropolitan elite is going to do pretty well out of it. See lawyers, also.
... and the working poor if it is managed properly
LOL, some hope any thought will be given to the working poor in it all other than lip service.
Well it hasn't for 20 odd years, in fact they have been exploited, diminished and insulted, so worth a try
Banging the TV when it didn't work was always worth a try. Not necessarily the sensible option.
Can you point to the bit in his email where he says he opposes Brexit and disagrees with the referendum result?
He worked on and approved of Dave's deal. He is a remainer. It may not be obviously written down anywhere if you want it easily and explicitly said, but Sir Ivan has gone native after so many years in Brussels. That I probably the reason why No. 10 got rid. Just like I think Mandy would, I believe Sir Ivan, if presented with a future in which the UK gets a strong Brexit deal that eventually leads to the break up of the EU, would do anything in his power to sabotage such a deal. Some remainers are not to be trusted, ones who have spent the last 4 years going native in Brussels especially so.
farming will simply reform - this week TV was plastered with th expansion of the english vineyards - that's grape farming for you townies.
if some farms decide to sell up and turn their land to housing who would blame them - bar the next batch of moaners saying Brexit is destroying the countryside - shriek, wail armageddon etc.
Townie? Me?
I live in the Peak District, you can't get less townie than that.
It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
Brexit means remuneration! Brexit Ltd could become the world leader in managing exits from from the EU.
Yep, the metropolitan elite is going to do pretty well out of it. See lawyers, also.
... and the working poor if it is managed properly
That remains to be seen. The right-wing, willy-waving fantasy of a fit, lean economy competing on the basis of low regulation and low costs is not one that will shower the working poor with financial rewards or job security.
They will be financially better off with greater job security if there is less competition for their jobs from people with a head start
Which jobs done by the working poor do you expect to become better paid and more secure as a result of Brexit?
I'd guess at the ones that have become worse paid and less secure due to mass importation of cheap Labour. Maybe the pay just wont get any worse, rather than better
It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
Brexit means remuneration! Brexit Ltd could become the world leader in managing exits from from the EU.
Yep, the metropolitan elite is going to do pretty well out of it. See lawyers, also.
... and the working poor if it is managed properly
That remains to be seen. The right-wing, willy-waving fantasy of a fit, lean economy competing on the basis of low regulation and low costs is not one that will shower the working poor with financial rewards or job security.
It has nothing to do with willy waving; it's called survival. You don't seem to get the fact that we can't carry on enjoying generous social benefits ad infinitum with no MONEY to pay for them. I find it quite baffling that the self-professed 'more intelligent' part of the electorate can't grasp this extremely simple concept.
I totally get the concept - which is why I am highly sceptical that the working poor are going to see any significant financial benefits or greater job security from a willy-waving Brexit.
The benefit will be not starving on the streets when the whole thing comes to a grinding halt as it inevitably must. It is an existential threat that some of the more aware of us want to stop whilst we still have some comparative advantages in the world.
LONDON, Jan 4 - Adding to the unprecedented turmoil in the British administration, the chief of Britain's foreign intelligence agency resigned this morning, citing what he called the "wholesale penetration" of the state by "foreign oligarchic cliques and agencies answering to Putin and Trump".
Alex Younger, 53, took the unprecedented step of publishing his 1000-word letter of resignation, declaring that "in view of the capture by foreign powers of significant levers of influence in Britain's cabinet and civil service, its four largest political parties, its senior judiciary and its major media, there is simply no appropriate official left to whom I may reasonably report in private".
Taking a swipe at Boris Johnson, Britain's foreign secretary and former London mayor, who is a US citizen, Mr Younger referred to "the New Yorker in the cabinet who would be better employed directly by the Trump machine in his native country or by President Putin's FSB in the eastern Ukraine".
"Those of us who are loyal to our own country cannot compete with the corrupt structure of influence that has been created", said Mr Younger.
He also stated that the reason for the nine-month delay in Britain's filing of the "Article 50 letter" which would trigger the start of formal Brexit negotiations was "not at all what has been stated by the prime minister", Theresa May. The actual reason, claims Mr Younger, is "a commitment to ensuring maximum impact in March and April, thereby helping to ensure the election of National Front candidate Marine Le Pen to the French presidency, followed by Frexit and the inevitable end of the European Union".
At that point, he said, "rejoicing will be loud in Trump Tower, in the Lubyanka, and in the GRU, as they proceed to impose their new arrangements for our continent".
The Lubyanka is the colloquial name for the headquarters of the Russian security service in Lubyanka Square, Moscow. The GRU is the Russian military intelligence service, employer of several of the officials who were expelled and placed under financial sanctions by President Obama after they allegedly used methods of cyberwarfare to influence last year's US presidential election.
It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
Brexit means remuneration! Brexit Ltd could become the world leader in managing exits from from the EU.
Yep, the metropolitan elite is going to do pretty well out of it. See lawyers, also.
... and the working poor if it is managed properly
LOL, some hope any thought will be given to the working poor in it all other than lip service.
Well it hasn't for 20 odd years, in fact they have been exploited, diminished and insulted, so worth a try
Banging the TV when it didn't work was always worth a try. Not necessarily the sensible option.
Actually for CRT TVs it was worth it! Not for LCDs though.
It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
Brexit means remuneration! Brexit Ltd could become the world leader in managing exits from from the EU.
Yep, the metropolitan elite is going to do pretty well out of it. See lawyers, also.
... and the working poor if it is managed properly
That remains to be seen. The right-wing, willy-waving fantasy of a fit, lean economy competing on the basis of low regulation and low costs is not one that will shower the working poor with financial rewards or job security.
It has nothing to do with willy waving; it's called survival. You don't seem to get the fact that we can't carry on enjoying generous social benefits ad infinitum with no MONEY to pay for them. I find it quite baffling that the self-professed 'more intelligent' part of the electorate can't grasp this extremely simple concept.
I totally get the concept - which is why I am highly sceptical that the working poor are going to see any significant financial benefits or greater job security from a willy-waving Brexit.
The benefit will be not starving on the streets when the whole thing comes to a grinding halt as it inevitably must. It is an existential threat that some of the more aware of us want to stop whilst we still have some comparative advantages in the world.
Got it. If we do not leave the EU the British people will end up starving on the streets.
Can you point to the bit in his email where he says he opposes Brexit and disagrees with the referendum result?
He worked on and approved of Dave's deal. He is a remainer. It may not be obviously written down anywhere if you want it easily and explicitly said, but Sir Ivan has gone native after so many years in Brussels. That I probably the reason why No. 10 got rid. Just like I think Mandy would, I believe Sir Ivan, if presented with a future in which the UK gets a strong Brexit deal that eventually leads to the break up of the EU, would do anything in his power to sabotage such a deal. Some remainers are not to be trusted, ones who have spent the last 4 years going native in Brussels especially so.
It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
Brexit means remuneration! Brexit Ltd could become the world leader in managing exits from from the EU.
Yep, the metropolitan elite is going to do pretty well out of it. See lawyers, also.
... and the working poor if it is managed properly
That remains to be seen. The right-wing, willy-waving fantasy of a fit, lean economy competing on the basis of low regulation and low costs is not one that will shower the working poor with financial rewards or job security.
It has nothing to do with willy waving; it's called survival. You don't seem to get the fact that we can't carry on enjoying generous social benefits ad infinitum with no MONEY to pay for them. I find it quite baffling that the self-professed 'more intelligent' part of the electorate can't grasp this extremely simple concept.
I totally get the concept - which is why I am highly sceptical that the working poor are going to see any significant financial benefits or greater job security from a willy-waving Brexit.
The benefit will be not starving on the streets when the whole thing comes to a grinding halt as it inevitably must. It is an existential threat that some of the more aware of us want to stop whilst we still have some comparative advantages in the world.
Got it. If we do not leave the EU the British people will end up starving on the streets.
It will increase the chances of reversing decline, demoralisation and collapse, yes.
Civil service impartiality means implementing government policy regardless of whether it is Labour policy or Tory policy.
Sir Ivan is allowed to raise his concerns, but asking his replacement to get on with it is not questioning any of the Civil Service's many vaulted values.
Brexiteers have explicitly called for Sir Ivan's replacement to not be an impartial civil servant, but an avowed Brexiteer e.
And that final comment is the problem. To say that the govt has no policy is at least arguable - certainly that it has no published or developed policy - but to say that it has no hope of finding one is straying into realms which are not his business.
I keep coming back to the conclusion that the assumptions that Sir Ivan was working from are not the same as those of the government.
Unfortunately for Sir Ivan - despite how clever he is supposed to be - has totally shafted himself by making clear in the leaked e-mail an agenda which is at odds with the settled will of the people. His duty as a civil servant was to keep those views private and retire from the field beaten but still honourable.
Actually, his duty as a civil servant was to communicate his opinion to the govt and to implement the government's policy, irrespective of whether it took his advice or not. I dislike the notion, which seems to be forming on both government and CS sides, that civil servants ought to agree with policies if they are to implement them. That completely cuts across good administration and, potentially, across democracy itself if it means that, for example, there were no capable civil servants who would be prepared to implement a Corbyn government's platform.
Agreed. But it is not appropriate for a civil servant when resigning to announce his anti-government views to the world at large. That makes him sound like an arrogant twerp and demeans him and the service generally. The people voted, I disagreed with the result, but it's the responsibility of everyone to make the best of it. That's democracy.
Can you point to the bit in his email where he says he opposes Brexit and disagrees with the referendum result?
I suspect some on here simply haven't read the letter. This section in particular:
"As I have argued consistently at every level since June, many opportunities for the UK in the future will derive from the mere fact of having left and being free to take a different path."
It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
Brexit means remuneration! Brexit Ltd could become the world leader in managing exits from from the EU.
Yep, the metropolitan elite is going to do pretty well out of it. See lawyers, also.
... and the working poor if it is managed properly
That remains to be seen. The right-wing, willy-waving fantasy of a fit, lean economy competing on the basis of low regulation and low costs is not one that will shower the working poor with financial rewards or job security.
It has nothing to do with willy waving; it's called survival. You don't seem to get the fact that we can't carry on enjoying generous social benefits ad infinitum with no MONEY to pay for them. I find it quite baffling that the self-professed 'more intelligent' part of the electorate can't grasp this extremely simple concept.
I totally get the concept - which is why I am highly sceptical that the working poor are going to see any significant financial benefits or greater job security from a willy-waving Brexit.
The benefit will be not starving on the streets when the whole thing comes to a grinding halt as it inevitably must. It is an existential threat that some of the more aware of us want to stop whilst we still have some comparative advantages in the world.
Got it. If we do not leave the EU the British people will end up starving on the streets.
It will increase the chances of reversing decline, demoralisation and collapse, yes.
Mr. Eagles, I'm beginning to think you just make up where you live. First Manchester, then Sheffield, now the Peak District. Just how often do you move house?
Can you point to the bit in his email where he says he opposes Brexit and disagrees with the referendum result?
He worked on and approved of Dave's deal. He is a remainer. It may not be obviously written down anywhere if you want it easily and explicitly said, but Sir Ivan has gone native after so many years in Brussels. That I probably the reason why No. 10 got rid. Just like I think Mandy would, I believe Sir Ivan, if presented with a future in which the UK gets a strong Brexit deal that eventually leads to the break up of the EU, would do anything in his power to sabotage such a deal. Some remainers are not to be trusted, ones who have spent the last 4 years going native in Brussels especially so.
Got it - he didn't say it anywhere.
He didn't need to. If you weren't being so purposefully obtuse you'd admit it as well. I know how these arguments go, you dance on the head of a pin for a while, everyone else gives up and you declare victory. Well go for it.
It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
Brexit means remuneration! Brexit Ltd could become the world leader in managing exits from from the EU.
Yep, the metropolitan elite is going to do pretty well out of it. See lawyers, also.
... and the working poor if it is managed properly
LOL, some hope any thought will be given to the working poor in it all other than lip service.
Well it hasn't for 20 odd years, in fact they have been exploited, diminished and insulted, so worth a try
Banging the TV when it didn't work was always worth a try. Not necessarily the sensible option.
Actually for CRT TVs it was worth it! Not for LCDs though.
Civil service impartiality means implementing government policy regardless of whether it is Labour policy or Tory policy.
Sir Ivan is allowed to raise his concerns, but asking his replacement to get on with it is not questioning any of the Civil Service's many vaulted values.
Brexiteers have explicitly called for Sir Ivan's replacement to not be an impartial civil servant, but an avowed Brexiteer e.
And business.
I keep coming back to the conclusion that the assumptions that Sir Ivan was working from are not the same as those of the government.
Unfortunately honourable.
Actually, there were no capable civil servants who would be prepared to implement a Corbyn government's platform.
Agreed. But it is not appropriate for a civil servant when resigning to announce his anti-government views to the world at large. That makes him sound like an arrogant twerp and demeans him and the service generally. The people voted, I disagreed with the result, but it's the responsibility of everyone to make the best of it. That's democracy.
Can you point to the bit in his email where he says he opposes Brexit and disagrees with the referendum result?
I suspect some on here simply haven't read the letter. This section in particular:
"As I have argued consistently at every level since June, many opportunities for the UK in the future will derive from the mere fact of having left and being free to take a different path."
Indeed. It seems as if his crime is to point out the bleedin' obvious - the government does not have a co-ordinated, thought-through approach to the upcoming Brexit negotiations and some of its members are less than keen on being told that their assumptions are not necessarily grounded in reality.
Mr. Eagles, I'm beginning to think you just make up where you live. First Manchester, then Sheffield, now the Peak District. Just how often do you move house?
I'm a rootless metropolitan.
I live in Dore which is in Sheffield in the county of South Yorkshire* and on the edge of the Peak District, I work in Manchester, I used to live there between 2011 and 2013, I still own a flat there, which I rent out.
*Dore used to be in Derbyshire up until the 1930s, now that would have been in confusing.
Civil service impartiality means implementing government policy regardless of whether it is Labour policy or Tory policy.
Sir Ivan is allowed to raise his concerns, but asking his replacement to get on with it is not questioning any of the Civil Service's many vaulted values.
Brexiteers have explicitly called for Sir Ivan's replacement to not be an impartial civil servant, but an avowed Brexiteer e.
And that final comment is the problem. To say that the govt has no policy is at least arguable - certainly that it has no published or developed policy - but to say that it has no hope of finding one is straying into realms which are not his business.
I keep coming back to the conclusion that the assumptions that Sir Ivan was working from are not the same as those of the government.
Unfortunately for Sir Ivan - despite how clever he is supposed to be - has totally shafted himself by making clear in the leaked e-mail an agenda which is at odds with the settled will of the people. His duty as a civil servant was to keep those views private and retire from the field beaten but still honourable.
Actually, his duty as a civil servant was to communicate his opinion to the govt and to implement the government's policy, irrespective of whether it took his advice or not. I dislike the notion, which seems to be forming on both government and CS sides, that civil servants ought to agree with policies if they are to implement them. That completely cuts across good administration and, potentially, across democracy itself if it means that, for example, there were no capable civil servants who would be prepared to implement a Corbyn government's platform.
Agreed. But it is not appropriate for a civil servant when resigning to announce his anti-government views to the world at large. That makes him sound like an arrogant twerp and demeans him and the service generally. The people voted, I disagreed with the result, but it's the responsibility of everyone to make the best of it. That's democracy.
Can you point to the bit in his email where he says he opposes Brexit and disagrees with the referendum result?
I suspect some on here simply haven't read the letter. This section in particular:
"As I have argued consistently at every level since June, many opportunities for the UK in the future will derive from the mere fact of having left and being free to take a different path."
Can you point to the bit in his email where he says he opposes Brexit and disagrees with the referendum result?
He worked on and approved of Dave's deal. He is a remainer. It may not be obviously written down anywhere if you want it easily and explicitly said, but Sir Ivan has gone native after so many years in Brussels. That I probably the reason why No. 10 got rid. Just like I think Mandy would, I believe Sir Ivan, if presented with a future in which the UK gets a strong Brexit deal that eventually leads to the break up of the EU, would do anything in his power to sabotage such a deal. Some remainers are not to be trusted, ones who have spent the last 4 years going native in Brussels especially so.
Got it - he didn't say it anywhere.
He didn't need to. If you weren't being so purposefully obtuse you'd admit it as well. I know how these arguments go, you dance on the head of a pin for a while, everyone else gives up and you declare victory. Well go for it.
Nope - I am just disagreeing with your interpretation of the email that he sent. In my reading he gives no opinion on the merits or otherwise of Brexit, but he does strongly imply that government ministers are struggling to formulate a coherent approach to the upcoming negotiations and that they do not like to be told things they do not want to hear.
Some remainers are not to be trusted, ones who have spent the last 4 years going native in Brussels especially so.
It's the leavers you've got to watch. Some of them are fickle creatures who've gone from mocking Trump supporters, to becoming his cheerleader. They could perform an about-turn on Brexit just as easily.
He worked on and approved of Dave's deal. He is a remainer.
Is the first sentence supposed to justify the second? I see what you did there: you changed tenses. It was the job of the diplomats and civil servants who were working on those negotiations to be "remainers". Government policies change. Do you want a clearout, whereby all the diplomats and civil servants who worked on the February 2016 deal are made to take early retirement or transferred to duties which have no bearing on Brexit or British-EU relations? Whereby all who are to do such work are thoroughly vetted to establish that they are true Brexit believers rather than worms who are seeking to undermine or derail the process? If so, who should replace Theresa May?
It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
Brexit means remuneration! Brexit Ltd could become the world leader in managing exits from from the EU.
Yep, the metropolitan elite is going to do pretty well out of it. See lawyers, also.
... and the working poor if it is managed properly
That remains to be seen. The right-wing, willy-waving fantasy of a fit, lean economy competing on the basis of low regulation and low costs is not one that will shower the working poor with financial rewards or job security.
It has nothing to do with willy waving; it's called survival. You don't seem to get the fact that we can't carry on enjoying generous social benefits ad infinitum with no MONEY to pay for them. I find it quite baffling that the self-professed 'more intelligent' part of the electorate can't grasp this extremely simple concept.
I totally get the concept - which is why I am highly sceptical that the working poor are going to see any significant financial benefits or greater job security from a willy-waving Brexit.
The benefit will be not starving on the streets when the whole thing comes to a grinding halt as it inevitably must. It is an existential threat that some of the more aware of us want to stop whilst we still have some comparative advantages in the world.
Got it. If we do not leave the EU the British people will end up starving on the streets.
It will increase the chances of reversing decline, demoralisation and collapse, yes.
OK.
No, you're right, we should keep bunging our non-existent cash in the direction of every available supranational body shouldn't we? Put it on the plastic eh? Especially one whose express mission is to make us less competitive and wealthy in the long term. Thank God the more intelligent portion of the country is on the case.
Can you point to the bit in his email where he says he opposes Brexit and disagrees with the referendum result?
He worked on and approved of Dave's deal. He is a remainer. It may not be obviously written down anywhere if you want it easily and explicitly said, but Sir Ivan has gone native after so many years in Brussels. That I probably the reason why No. 10 got rid. Just like I think Mandy would, I believe Sir Ivan, if presented with a future in which the UK gets a strong Brexit deal that eventually leads to the break up of the EU, would do anything in his power to sabotage such a deal. Some remainers are not to be trusted, ones who have spent the last 4 years going native in Brussels especially so.
Got it - he didn't say it anywhere.
He didn't need to. If you weren't being so purposefully obtuse you'd admit it as well. I know how these arguments go, you dance on the head of a pin for a while, everyone else gives up and you declare victory. Well go for it.
Nope - I am just disagreeing with your interpretation of the email that he sent. In my reading he gives no opinion on the merits or otherwise of Brexit, but he does strongly imply that government ministers are struggling to formulate a coherent approach to the upcoming negotiations and that they do not like to be told things they do not want to hear.
That matches well what we hear from other sources and is entirely plausible. This resignation doesn't sound like the first or last. It sounds from the email as if his Deputy went first.
I used to live in a small village in south Wales where we had a resident sergeant of the police station. This person was switched out every 5 or so years as there were fears of him going 'native' and reducing the effectiveness of local policing.
I'm sure the same thing happens when sensible people are transferred to Brussels, after a few years, they go 'native'
What on earth was David Davis doing on Gobbler's gulch Clapham Common?
Making sure the badgers didn't move the goalposts.
Many years ago, when I had just moved to London to live and work, a few of my friends thought it would be funny if they told me to meet them on Clapham Common.
What I saw there, I could only tell you if I was in a therapist's office with dolls
No, you're right, we should keep bunging our non-existent cash in the direction of every available supranational body shouldn't we? Put it on the plastic eh? Especially one whose express mission is to make us less competitive and wealthy in the long term. Thank God the more intelligent portion of the country is on the case.
Especially Sun and Express readers and my neighbour who is hoping that Brexit will mean a return to pounds and ounces.
No, you're right, we should keep bunging our non-existent cash in the direction of every available supranational body shouldn't we? Put it on the plastic eh? Especially one whose express mission is to make us less competitive and wealthy in the long term. Thank God the more intelligent portion of the country is on the case.
Especially Sun and Express readers and my neighbour who is hoping that Brexit will mean a return to pounds and ounces.
I've heard very little about Brexit in conversation since June, here in the NW, or even in Boston where I've spent time visiting my relatives. There's a hiatus as everyone waits for serious negotiations to begin..
Apart from occasional hysteria on here and some low-level moaning from the BBC and other media/luvvie types, it's yesterday's news.
At the risk of coming over all Sean T-ish. "Man up, you bed-wetters, and get over yourselves."
Article 50 will be invoked, Mrs May and her team of negotiators will present the deal. The Labour party will hate it, the Libs will cry treason, and the Tories will be luke- warm. Ukip will almost certainly dwindle away if it's in any way reasonable.
First Brexiteers assault parliamentary sovereignty, then judicial independence, now civil service impartiality. The tenets of our democracy.
Lammy could not be more wrong.
Civil service impartiality means implementing government policy regardless of whether it is Labour policy or Tory policy.
Sir Ivan is allowed to raise his concerns, but asking his replacement to get on with it is not questioning any of the Civil Service's many vaulted values.
Brexiteers have explicitly called for Sir Ivan's replacement to not be an impartial civil servant, but an avowed Brexiteer
And if the Government had a policy Sir Ivan would have implemented it. His complaint is that they have no policy, and no hope of finding one.
And that final comment is the problem. To say that the govt has no policy is at least arguable - certainly that it has no published or developed policy - but to say that it has no hope of finding one is straying into realms which are not his business.
I keep coming back to the conclusion that the assumptions that Sir Ivan was working from are not the same as those of the government.
Unfortunately for Sir Ivan - despite how clever he is supposed to be - has totally shafted himself by making clear in the leaked e-mail an agenda which is at odds with the settled will of the people. His duty as a civil servant was to keep those views private and retire from the field beaten but still honourable.
Actually, his duty as a civil servant was to communicate his opinion to the govt and to implement the government's policy, irrespective of whether it took his advice or not. I dislike the notion, which seems to be forming on both government and CS sides, that civil servants ought to agree with policies if they are to implement them. That completely cuts across good administration and, potentially, across democracy itself if it means that, for example, there were no capable civil servants who would be prepared to implement a Corbyn government's platform.
Agreed. But it is not appropriate for a civil servant when resigning to announce his anti-government views to the world at large. That makes him sound like an arrogant twerp and demeans him and the service generally. The people voted, I disagreed with the result, but it's the responsibility of everyone to make the best of it. That's democracy.
He didn't announce his views to the world at large!
You are very naive if you think the e-mail was meant to remain purely a private affair.
First Brexiteers assault parliamentary sovereignty, then judicial independence, now civil service impartiality. The tenets of our democracy.
Lammy could not be more wrong.
Civil service impartiality means implementing government policy regardless of whether it is Labour policy or Tory policy.
Sir Ivan is allowed to raise his concerns, but asking his replacement to get on with it is not questioning any of the Civil Service's many vaulted values.
Brexiteers have explicitly called for Sir Ivan's replacement to not be an impartial civil servant, but an avowed Brexiteer
And if the Government had a policy Sir Ivan would have implemented it. His complaint is that they have no policy, and no hope of finding one.
I keep coming back to the conclusion that the assumptions that Sir Ivan was working from are not the same as those of the government.
Unfortunately for Sir Ivan - despite how clever he is supposed to be - has totally shafted himself by making clear in the leaked e-mail an agenda which is at odds with the settled will of the people. His duty as a civil servant was to keep those views private and retire from the field beaten but still honourable.
Actually, his duty as a civil servant was to communicate his opinion to the govt and to implement the government's policy, irrespective of whether it took his advice or not. I dislike the notion, which seems to be forming on both government and CS sides, that civil servants ought to agree with policies if they are to implement them. That completely cuts across good administration and, potentially, across democracy itself if it means that, for example, there were no capable civil servants who would be prepared to implement a Corbyn government's platform.
Agreed. But it is not appropriate for a civil servant when resigning to announce his anti-government views to the world at large. That makes him sound like an arrogant twerp and demeans him and the service generally. The people voted, I disagreed with the result, but it's the responsibility of everyone to make the best of it. That's democracy.
Can you point to the bit in his email where he says he opposes Brexit and disagrees with the referendum result?
Yawn - dancing on pinheads is really too boring - maybe you should have been a civil servant.
Comments
The original claim was that Brexiteers were attacking the impartiality of the civil service. They are, by advancing the idea that our impartial ambassador be replaced by a Brexiteer
There is simply nothing in the civil service's rules on impartiality that conflicts with replacing Sir Ivan with someone who is pro-the-government. The obligation is on civil servants to "serve the government". Appointing someone who has a similar personal outlook, if anything, helps (in the short/medium term) ensure that civil service impartiality is maintained.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/civil-service-code/the-civil-service-code.
You're right to say the proper debate is whether Sir Ivan was able to provide his opinion within the proper framework of serving the government. That is a reflection on his record, his role, and his skills. (The relevant Civil Service value is Objectivity).
https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/816606610860675073
http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/09/hong-kong-shows-what-post-brexit-britain-could-be/
Even Fraser Nelson sounded a bit queasy about that in the podcast, but I doubt Delingpole is alone.
May will just threaten to create 100, or whatever, new peers, which was the threat that finally persuaded the HoL in 1911 to back down. In those days the King had to be involved, I suspect that's less of an issue now.
She has already threatened them with major reform aka elected senate if they piss about on Brexit.
I think they will consider their lovely £300 a day expenses and decide to keep quiet, except for a few.
Farmers did, and do, back Brexit. Which is natural, given that they tend to be very sceptical of government, particularly governments far away.
Dunt overplays the report. The committee quite rightly highlighted the challenges for the government in this area, but having discuss Sir Ivan the author then just assumes the worse case scenario and runs with it.
just total bollocks as ever from "experts"
farming will simply reform - this week TV was plastered with th expansion of the english vineyards - that's grape farming for you townies.
if some farms decide to sell up and turn their land to housing who would blame them - bar the next batch of moaners saying Brexit is destroying the countryside - shriek, wail armageddon etc.
If my memory of posts doesn't betray me are you not in the civil service yourself ?
I think you should "go for the job" so to speak, you seem to have the correct balance with regards to advice and willingness to implement for Brexit
I imagine it helped that east germany was on brnk of collapse... And that they just accepted west german laws. Would like to read up on it though...
Seem to remember they agree to wave the 5% threshold for proporional representation to help out East German political parties.
I live in the Peak District, you can't get less townie than that.
I'm just a damned lawyer* although I do know some sources "close to" the civil service
* One group of people going to do well either way...
LONDON, Jan 4 - Adding to the unprecedented turmoil in the British administration, the chief of Britain's foreign intelligence agency resigned this morning, citing what he called the "wholesale penetration" of the state by "foreign oligarchic cliques and agencies answering to Putin and Trump".
Alex Younger, 53, took the unprecedented step of publishing his 1000-word letter of resignation, declaring that "in view of the capture by foreign powers of significant levers of influence in Britain's cabinet and civil service, its four largest political parties, its senior judiciary and its major media, there is simply no appropriate official left to whom I may reasonably report in private".
Taking a swipe at Boris Johnson, Britain's foreign secretary and former London mayor, who is a US citizen, Mr Younger referred to "the New Yorker in the cabinet who would be better employed directly by the Trump machine in his native country or by President Putin's FSB in the eastern Ukraine".
"Those of us who are loyal to our own country cannot compete with the corrupt structure of influence that has been created", said Mr Younger.
He also stated that the reason for the nine-month delay in Britain's filing of the "Article 50 letter" which would trigger the start of formal Brexit negotiations was "not at all what has been stated by the prime minister", Theresa May. The actual reason, claims Mr Younger, is "a commitment to ensuring maximum impact in March and April, thereby helping to ensure the election of National Front candidate Marine Le Pen to the French presidency, followed by Frexit and the inevitable end of the European Union".
At that point, he said, "rejoicing will be loud in Trump Tower, in the Lubyanka, and in the GRU, as they proceed to impose their new arrangements for our continent".
The Lubyanka is the colloquial name for the headquarters of the Russian security service in Lubyanka Square, Moscow. The GRU is the Russian military intelligence service, employer of several of the officials who were expelled and placed under financial sanctions by President Obama after they allegedly used methods of cyberwarfare to influence last year's US presidential election.
*
*
*
(Just kidding!)
"it is not appropriate for a civil servant when resigning to announce his anti-government views to the world at large."
In fairness, he didn't announce anything to the world - he wrote a message to his staff which was leaked.
"As I have argued consistently at every level since June, many opportunities for the UK in the future will derive from the mere fact of having left and being free to take a different path."
I live in Dore which is in Sheffield in the county of South Yorkshire* and on the edge of the Peak District, I work in Manchester, I used to live there between 2011 and 2013, I still own a flat there, which I rent out.
*Dore used to be in Derbyshire up until the 1930s, now that would have been in confusing.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-38506528
What on earth was David Davis doing on Gobbler's gulch Clapham Common?
https://twitter.com/asabenn/status/816615802946408448
https://twitter.com/robjeffecology/status/816569453282476037
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/816610818578141184
History
After 8 seasons, the final episode of Rawhide, starring Clint Eastwood & Eric Fleming, aired 4 January 1966. https://t.co/yV4jzZH75P
I used to live in a small village in south Wales where we had a resident sergeant of the police station. This person was switched out every 5 or so years as there were fears of him going 'native' and reducing the effectiveness of local policing.
I'm sure the same thing happens when sensible people are transferred to Brussels, after a few years, they go 'native'
Talking of Twitter criticism during my 15 minutes of fame I was told to get a haircut and some new glasses.
I got a haircut and some new glasses.
What I saw there, I could only tell you if I was in a therapist's office with dolls
NEW THREAD
Apart from occasional hysteria on here and some low-level moaning from the BBC and other media/luvvie types, it's yesterday's news.
At the risk of coming over all Sean T-ish. "Man up, you bed-wetters, and get over yourselves."
Article 50 will be invoked, Mrs May and her team of negotiators will present the deal. The Labour party will hate it, the Libs will cry treason, and the Tories will be luke- warm. Ukip will almost certainly dwindle away if it's in any way reasonable.
Only one member of US Congress, out of 535, had a child serving in the 2003 invasion of Iraq. https://t.co/THo3d59bol
Number of robots working in Amazon warehouses:
2016: 45,000
2015: 30K
2014: 15K
2013: 1K
—@JonErlichman #CES2017 https://t.co/TxZs3ybR4g