The weak Prime Minister

Raab has resigned.

So looking back at Raabs career as minister there is nothing that he can point to with pride. Most were a series of relatively low lights, particularly his behaviour over Ukraine. Not someone who will be remembered with admiration.

It's tempting to label Prime Ministers as strong or weak but looking back at PMs since 1945 suggests even the most able are often rendered helpless by circumstances - Macmillan (Profumo affair), Heath (industrial unrest), Wilson (a divided Party), Callaghan (economic woes), Major (a divided Party, 'sleeze') - in which they are pushed off a strategic course into day to day problems which consume time and energy. Of course personality plays a part - Eden (short fuse, medical problems), Churchill (old age), Wilson (incipient dementia in his 2nd period) and some found television interviews unrewarding (Wilson walked out of one, Douglas-Home came over badly in his half-eyes despite his intelligence). Conversely, Thatcher and Blair were seen as strong but were helped by very large majorities in the Commons to ride out problems (far larger than the much-trumpeted 80 of BoJo).

Raab resigns

What a sense of relief those folk at his department must be feeling.

And let this be a warning to other bullies sitting in government.

ronib whoops… that’ll teach me to read (or fail to) before I’ve had a cup of tea!

Well that's damning with faint praise.

Sunak weak?.

He does a lot that I disapprove of but he’s not weak he know what he wants and sticks to his guns, the had no hesitation sacking Zahawi the party leader and if he thinks Rabb is beyond the pale he will go as well.

That’s politics, whatever you do there are going to be many that disapprove, so far I think he is “less bad” than May, Johnson or Truss

Siope

I’m not quite sure why many posters are asking WWM2 where she got the Raab report from, when her OP was referring to the Immigration Bill.

Freya, I don’t approve of indiscriminate cutting and pasting. And, in fact, despite the theoretical process, there are numerous examples of the Commons being sidelined during this government, with power increasingly shifting to the executive.

Siope read comments 6:45 from ww2.

volver3

^For Winston Churchill we can claim upper class privilege and where did that get the Uk?^

errrmmm - not invaded by the Nazis?

👏👏👏👏

For Winston Churchill we can claim upper class privilege and where did that get the Uk?

errrmmm - not invaded by the Nazis?

Daisy Anne I am not worried. Just wondering why you have such entrenched bias?

ronib

DaisyAnne I don’t follow the argument too well about class and breeding. Rishi Sunak’s mother was a local pharmacist and his father a gp. This is hardly top drawer by any stretch of the imagination in British society. For Winston Churchill we can claim upper class privilege and where did that get the Uk?
Apart from that, if I had a personal fortune of £750 million I don’t think running the Uk would be my favourite pastime. Or perhaps £750 million is an urban myth too?

I wouldn't worry about it ronib. It's my point of view. It doesn't have to be yours.

I’m not quite sure why many posters are asking WWM2 where she got the Raab report from, when her OP was referring to the Immigration Bill.

Freya, I don’t approve of indiscriminate cutting and pasting. And, in fact, despite the theoretical process, there are numerous examples of the Commons being sidelined during this government, with power increasingly shifting to the executive.

DaisyAnne I don’t follow the argument too well about class and breeding. Rishi Sunak’s mother was a local pharmacist and his father a gp. This is hardly top drawer by any stretch of the imagination in British society. For Winston Churchill we can claim upper class privilege and where did that get the Uk?
Apart from that, if I had a personal fortune of £750 million I don’t think running the Uk would be my favourite pastime. Or perhaps £750 million is an urban myth too?

GrannyGravy13

I am not concerned that the PM has had the report for 21 hours (approximately) and has yet to publish either the report or his decision.

Many years ago I was involved in a bullying in the workplace incident, establishing bullying is not always clear cut.

Good to see I'm not the only one who isn't determined to see fault where no fault lies.

Let's face it, there is enough to worry about in this country and the world without making the fact that the PM is taking a few hours to ensure he knows what has been found into the standard mountain out of a molehill by the far left.

I am not concerned that the PM has had the report for 21 hours (approximately) and has yet to publish either the report or his decision.

Many years ago I was involved in a bullying in the workplace incident, establishing bullying is not always clear cut.

So you post things without making sure they are accurate?

Well that's worth me remembering in the future...

Siope

Freya5

Your take on it.
This is the reality
Laws are made by a group of people called Parliament. The House of Commons The House of Lords The Queen. All parts of Parliament must agree to a law before it can start to happen. An idea for a new law is called a Bill.
www.parliament.uk › ...PDF
How laws are made - UK Parliament
Judges do not make the Law.

It’s a bloody odd reality if a dead woman has some say in British legislative and government processes.

Oh for goodness sakes, pedantry at its worst. This was written before she died. Get it.

it if

MaizieD

DaisyAnne

Ilovecheese

Dithering about Raab as well isn't he.

Why would you not want him to take reasonable time to read the very lengthy document?

I will judge him on a) whether he publishes the report and b) what he does about it. Reasonable reading time is not "dithering" unless you are a newspaper reporter.

All he has to do is read the report's conclusions. PMs don't have time to spend 24 hours to digest the report prepared by, presumably, a team of people he trusted to reach an objective judgement.

Had the report cleared Raab we'd have known about it right away. You don't take 24 hours to declare that a person has been found 'innocent'.

That is your opinion Maizie. It is not mine. I would agree it this was the report produced by an Ethics Advisor with something like an Executive Summary he could refer to. It isn't. The Judge has only been asked to "establish the specific facts", not write a conclusion.

Curtaintwitcher

Anarchy, chaos, strikes, protests, a useless corrupt police force, out of control crime.....all bringing the country to its knees. This is what happens when people have too much freedom. It brings out the worst in human nature. We need to get back to discipline and common decency. Sadly, there is little of that about.
The truth is, that the uncouth are in the majority and by sheer force of numbers are able to over-throw any suggestion of doing what is right for this country.
Anyone who is familiar with the prophecies of Nostradamus know what is happening. We are sowing the seeds of the next major conflict across Europe.

This is what happens when people have too much freedom...

Who has too much freedom? Which of those freedoms would you like to see removed?

Are you arguing for more government control?

At the moment it seems that "doing what is right for the country" per this current government is at odds with what actually might be "good" for it. Primarily looking after its own interests and those of its backers and donors at the expense of a huge swathe of the population doesn't convince me that this is the best way to do right by the country.

However, you might be in luck because there are moves afoot to curtail many rights and freedoms of the individual. However you could end up, on a personal level, having some of the protections that you currently enjoy, being removed along with those that you probably think should be removed from others.

Well, clearly Patel "got off" after being a bully.

They don't have to implement anything once the conclusions are given.

I suspect Sunak is weighing up which is worst for him - getting rid - or not getting rid.

Whitewavemark2

It is being suggested by Caroline Lucas that Sunak is in fact very right wing, he simply tries to hide it.

I didn't think there was any doubt he is not only very right-wing but a man of what he perceives to be his class and breeding i.e., the only group capable of running the country - however badly they do it.

It's just that he has learned to be polite. To give him his due, he does seem to find it difficult to insult people Starmer, based on what he must know is false logic.

Sadly, he believes he must make these comments and ends up sounding like a squeaky schoolboy. Otherwise, he is what he was brought up to be, a wealthy, entitled man who has no idea how others live and someone who believes only those like him can save the country.

DaisyAnne

Ilovecheese

Dithering about Raab as well isn't he.

Why would you not want him to take reasonable time to read the very lengthy document?

I will judge him on a) whether he publishes the report and b) what he does about it. Reasonable reading time is not "dithering" unless you are a newspaper reporter.

All he has to do is read the report's conclusions. PMs don't have time to spend 24 hours to digest the report prepared by, presumably, a team of people he trusted to reach an objective judgement.

Had the report cleared Raab we'd have known about it right away. You don't take 24 hours to declare that a person has been found 'innocent'.

Ilovecheese

Dithering about Raab as well isn't he.

Why would you not want him to take reasonable time to read the very lengthy document?

I will judge him on a) whether he publishes the report and b) what he does about it. Reasonable reading time is not "dithering" unless you are a newspaper reporter.