Now that 'election fever' has calmed slightly (and I do mean slightly see: Labour Victory thread for further details) and the reshuffled Cabinet has been announced I wonder what people's views of David Blunkett's return to the Cabinet are?

Having had to resign last time because of discrepancies over a former lover's nanny's work permit and a few free first class rail ticket has he now been punished enough? Or should he never have been allowed to return after clearly abusing his position as Home Secretary? Should we view his return to Cabinet as "all part of the plan" (ie. Tony to David: "Now keep your head down for a few months and we'll sneek you back in later")?

Interested in all your views. And should we do a Poll? Go on then!

I'm not at all surprised he is back. I think it was very much a 'keep your head down, rest for a month or two' deal.

From what I have heard, he's always been an advocate for Sheffield and I reckon he'll make sure any Civil Service/DWP job losses are kept to a minimum in Sheffield, so that's got to be good.

As for the other stuff with his 'girlfriends' nanny - if that's all he's done well good on him - i'm sure others have done a lot worse.

he should have been sacked and prosecuted, that's what would happen to me for expenses fraud.

That and the fact that he managed to screw up the education sector and then supported (or introduced?) the crackpot idea of ID cards. The mans a menace.

explain, please, how the education sector has been screwed up.

I have only seen improvements in education in the last few years.

Your sweeping statements may make you feel like you're talking sense, but you're not convincing me

and, as for ID cards, although they will never be a useful aid against terrorism, they will almost completely stop underage drinking, which is a major problem here. It will also mean we will no longer have any need for passports when travelling around the EU.

I believe as the plan goes we still have a right to anonymity - to be stopped and searched the police will still have to suspect you and prove that they have reasonable grounds for it.

He's a 'Tony crony' just like Mandleson, so he can go and return willy nilly.

I work in education and believe me, it is getting worse.

Not surprised hes back. Hes a dangerous man, seems to be more interested in leaving a 'legacy' than anything else.

He does try and get the best possible deal for Sheffield, in terms of local issues, as a prominent Cabinet member. However, it dosent undo the damage that he did (along with the likes of Betts and Caborn) to Sheffield in the 1980's.

Originally posted by Carl_Malibu
explain, please, how the education sector has been screwed up.

I have only seen improvements in education in the last few years.

Your sweeping statements may make you feel like you're talking sense, but you're not convincing me

and, as for ID cards, although they will never be a useful aid against terrorism, they will almost completely stop underage drinking, which is a major problem here. It will also mean we will no longer have any need for passports when travelling around the EU.

I believe as the plan goes we still have a right to anonymity - to be stopped and searched the police will still have to suspect you and prove that they have reasonable grounds for it.

I'm basing it on the opinions of teachers and support workers who've posted on here and what I see in the news.
I was taking the mick out of an advert for teachers just the other day. It goes on about how children challenge your perception, "work with people who've yet to make their mind up, who are full of energy without having a coffee, who see the world in a different way", etc...
I added "who ignore you, abuse you, accuse you of assault, assault you, fight, shout and spit and don't want to be there". Given the choice i think my workmates are preferable to working with people like that even if they have made there minds up and need a coffee to get going in the morning.

nice to know you have such a positive outlook on the nations youth.

I see you're really doing your part for the country by moaning and whining on a bulletin board about something that you're not proposing a solution for.

How, exactly, do you propose that any party would handle the situation any better? Should they bring back corporate punishment? - The nation is getting more intelligent, there has,in the past 8 years, been more done to cater for the brightest 10%, and likewise, much much more has been done to cater for the botom 10% of achievers.

I cant say I know what it used to be like, as I wasn't in a state to be aware, but for the moment I'm entirely happy with the education system as it stands.

Originally posted by Monroe
From what I have heard, he's always been an advocate for Sheffield and I reckon he'll make sure any Civil Service/DWP job losses are kept to a minimum in Sheffield, so that's got to be good.


IMO all the unnnecessary jobs created in the civil service whilst Labour have been in government should go :mad: A waste of money.

Originally posted by Carl_Malibu
I see you're really doing your part for the country by moaning and whining on a bulletin board about something that you're not proposing a solution for.

If Cyclone works in education like I do, you'll probably find that he does propose solutions through his senior management and unions.

The trouble is you have incompetent fools, such as Ruth Kelly, who have had very short and / or very cushy teaching careers.

Originally posted by Carl_Malibu
nice to know you have such a positive outlook on the nations youth.

I see you're really doing your part for the country by moaning and whining on a bulletin board about something that you're not proposing a solution for.

How, exactly, do you propose that any party would handle the situation any better? Should they bring back corporate punishment? - The nation is getting more intelligent, there has,in the past 8 years, been more done to cater for the brightest 10%, and likewise, much much more has been done to cater for the botom 10% of achievers.

I cant say I know what it used to be like, as I wasn't in a state to be aware, but for the moment I'm entirely happy with the education system as it stands.

i think you might be loosing the plot slightly. The thread was about whether we think it's good or bad that blunkett is back in the cabinet. I think it's bad for the reasons stated. If you want to argue about the state of education go and start a thread. You'll most likely be arguing with the teachers and people with more recent experience than me though as my opinion is formed by conversations with them and through the media.
If it helps 3 family members are teachers and a friend is a school governor, so I do have some direct contact with the people at the sharp end.

Originally posted by Carl_Malibu
and likewise, much much more has been done to cater for the botom 10% of achievers.


*cough* maybe I am missing something here? This Government does nothing for kids who aren't cut out for education. It wants over 50% of people to go to University which will water down any value of a degree.

There is no longer a push on apprenticeships or vocational jobs for those are aren't academically able, schools no longer have facilities like car mechanics courses or helping out on the school farm. If these facilities were in place perhaps less kids would cause trouble in class and actually acheive something from their secondary education.

Re expenses fraud and (allegedly) using his 'power' (job) to expedite the nanny's documentation..................don't all (most) MPs seem to do that? (ie, using their position to make things happen, and I've no doubt that there is scarce a politician in the land who hasn't occasionally claimed for a personal call on their mobi lol.) Doesn't make it right, but I suspect it doesn't make him uncommon. And if we the voting population have a problem with that, then we should have a problem (which I do, tho I also live in the real world and accepts it goes on) with everyone else in government who does it too.

So on that basis.........he's no worse than most and yup has had his punishment (if being banished to a cottage in Derbyshire can be called punishment lol) so from now on my only question is whether he is the best man for the job.

And as to that, I have no idea! Which is presumably why I'm here and not running the country :heyhey:

And as to ID cards. If the local publicans were serious about stamping out under-age drinking, there are plenty of ID cards already available (Student cards, those RU18 cards, bus passes lol) which could be asked for but are not.

you seem to be stuck 5 years in the past

at gcse level there are many vocational choices


NVQs in a large variety of subjects, lots of information about routes into apprenticeships, nvqs, etc. - and this is coming from a school that prides itself on acedemic results (KES) -

There is no longer a push purely for acedemia, and that change has come in the past couple of years.

Originally posted by SHsheff


And as to ID cards. If the local publicans were serious about stamping out under-age drinking, there are plenty of ID cards already available (Student cards, those RU18 cards, bus passes lol) which could be asked for but are not.


the reason these cards for the most part fail is no one can really be bothered forking out for them - as they are not compulsory.

The idea is that if you have one standardised, universal ID card it gets rid of all the ID issues, because everyone carries one.

Would make a bouncers job a whole lot easier.

id cards are nothing to do with underage drinking, and it's politicians not publicans who want to introduce a id card for every adult in the country.

he didn't claim for a few phone calls, he claimed for a few first class tickets which he gave to someone else.

I'd get sacked for claiming for a 1st class ticket for myself, never mind for someone else.

The difference between him and all the rest is that he was caught. Any of them that are caught acting in what is essentially a criminal manner should be banned from holding public office and prosecuted.

Originally posted by Carl_Malibu
the reason these cards for the most part fail is no one can really be bothered forking out for them - as they are not compulsory.

The idea is that if you have one standardised, universal ID card it gets rid of all the ID issues, because everyone carries one.

Would make a bouncers job a whole lot easier.

Sure. But if the bouncers asked for ID every time, then people who look of uncertain age would have to get something (eg an RU18 card).....or not be admitted. Still no argument for a national ID card! Personally, in common with a lot of people of my age (ie, unlikely to be mistaken for under eighteen!) have driving licences, passports etc which give our age and have a pic.

what is the beef with ID cards?

Originally posted by Cyclone
id cards are nothing to do with underage drinking, and it's politicians not publicans who want to introduce a id card for every adult in the country.

he didn't claim for a few phone calls, he claimed for a few first class tickets which he gave to someone else.

I'd get sacked for claiming for a 1st class ticket for myself, never mind for someone else.

The difference between him and all the rest is that he was caught. Any of them that are caught acting in what is essentially a criminal manner should be banned from holding public office and prosecuted.

Quite. And how about erm 'lying' about the reasons for going to war? And it being an illegal action? And the scandal of fraudulent postal voting? We'd have no cabinet! Let alone no PM lol.

And yes, I voted against Tony for those very reasons (amongst others)

Cyclone - you being sacked for claiming first class tickets is beside the point! - MPs are allowed to. That's just the way it is. The only fraudulent bit is that he claimed them for someone else.

you think any UK prime minister could have withstood pressure from the US to go to war?

The Tories were all for distancing us from the EU (and therefore bringing us closer to america) - we have so many trade agreements with the US that were we to "fall out" with them (so to speak) our countries economy would most likely have been knocked pretty badly, in which case you'd have all had something else to bítch about, eh..

Yes, actually I do think that a UK PM should have had the capacity to withstand pressure from the US. At the very least, he had a duty to not make personal promises months before the issue was set before the cabinet.

Originally posted by SHsheff
Cyclone - you being sacked for claiming first class tickets is beside the point! - MPs are allowed to. That's just the way it is. The only fraudulent bit is that he claimed them for someone else.

oh well if that's the only fraudulent bit then I guess that's okay.... Not. (You are right, it's neither here nor there whether I can or can't use 1st class).

Carl_Malibu - I don't particularly wish to defend my reasoning behind my dislike of Blunkett. Just accept that I am opposed to a national id card scheme. If you are not, then good for you, vote in the poll and let everyone else vote as they wish.

notice the subtle change in words there

I used "could"

you used "should"


I think, that might prove my point?

Originally posted by Cyclone


Carl_Malibu - I don't particularly wish to defend my reasoning behind my dislike of Blunkett. Just accept that I am opposed to a national id card scheme. If you are not, then good for you, vote in the poll and let everyone else vote as they wish.

I'm very interested in hearing your reasoning, and I am now curious as to why you aren't putting your reasons forward.

I'm as of yet undecided on where I stand about ID cards. But there seems to be a lot of steadfast reasons advocating their use, and vague murmerings of "freedom" and "rights" when arguing against them.

Originally posted by Carl_Malibu
notice the subtle change in words there

I used "could"

you used "should"


I think, that might prove my point?

Ok then, "could"!

I stand by the gist....including "could".

He has a duty as our elected PM (PR notwithstanding) to speak on behalf of the country - and certainly on behalf of the cabinet and his own legal advisers.....

I voted the man in! (Originally) and therefore feel I have an absolute right for him to comply with the laws that stand in our country. Having said that, even those who didn't vote him in have a right to care too, and to expect him to comply. And not be a poodle....

If there is an overwhelming decision to support the US come what may, then at least that decision should be made in public (or as close as possible) and be subject to scrutiny before the event, not after when it is too late to undo.

"Ok then, "could"!

I stand by the gist....including "could".

He has a duty as our elected PM (PR notwithstanding) to speak on behalf of the country - and certainly on behalf of the cabinet and his own legal advisers....."

but he also has a duty (as unfortunate as it is) to keep us in the world superpowers good books, otherwise the whole country suffers.

Its an unfortunate decision to have to make - but its much much more complex than whether its illegal or not.

Of course. But you're saying that whether it is illegal or not doesn't matter?

NB....I think we've lost the thread here!! :hihi:

the fact that it was illegal remains to be seen, - whatever happened to innocence until proven guilty?

and indeed we have lost the thread -

Originally posted by Carl_Malibu
the fact that it was illegal remains to be seen, - whatever happened to innocence until proven guilty?

and indeed we have lost the thread -

HAHAH so we're onto the Anti-Terrorism legislation now?

Sorry...............back to Mr Blunkett methinks............back to the thread................ (tempting tho it is to follow this one thru)..

indeed, if you want to see my reasoning, start an appropriate thread.

An hours break in Starbucks with a friend (no I don't wish to debate how fair trade their coffee is) and I come back to a hijacked thread. If you want to talk about ID cards / Education start another thread.

For now, I'll reiterate the question posed by the poll:

Should Blunkett have been asked to rejoin the Cabinet?

Originally posted by JonJParr
An hours break in Starbucks with a friend (no I don't wish to debate how fair trade their coffee is) and I come back to a hijacked thread. If you want to talk about ID cards / Education start another thread.

For now, I'll reiterate the question posed by the poll:

Should Blunkett have been asked to rejoin the Cabinet?

lol we've done that Jon! :clap:

Originally posted by JonJParr
An hours break in Starbucks with a friend (no I don't wish to debate how fair trade their coffee is) and I come back to a hijacked thread. If you want to talk about ID cards / Education start another thread.

For now, I'll reiterate the question posed by the poll:

Should Blunkett have been asked to rejoin the Cabinet?

dont get me started on starbucks ;)

As for blunkett, no I dont think he should be in the cabinet, purely on the scandal he caused.

He should have bowed out and laid low for the rest of his career - it is the proper thing to do in such a situation.

I suppose it is Tony Blair trying to keep people in the cabinet who favour him, but is another case of foot shooting.

no he is not trustworthy,as has been shown,fraud,adultery,usurping his position, it cant be whitewashed over and come back as if it never happened

I don't really have a problem with Blunkett being back in the Cabinet :|

The few times i've met him he's always come across as really friendly, open and not scared to speak his mind (though sometimes a bit blunt) but I'd rather have him than some smoothtalking minister who'd stab you in the back as soon as look at you.

He made a mistake, the thing with the 1st class tickets was a really bad call, but I hope he's learned from that. I don't know enough about exactly what happened so can't comment any more.

But, if he was in the Civil Service (and his face fitted) he'd have been promoted anyway. Seen far too many Civil Servants make very costly mistakes and errors of judgement as well as deliberately defrauding the system - all got promoted :suspect:

Hooray, back on thread at last!

David Blunkett made a couple of minor errors, and did the honourable thing and resigned his position as Home Secretary.

But we should welcome him back into the Cabinet. He is an intelligent man, and by no means a lightweight. He has a canny perception of the views of the man and woman in the street (witness the fact that he obtained an incredible 68.52% of the votes cast in his Brightside constituency). His talents are needed at the top table, and I for one am delighted at his appointment to the Cabinet.

I find his style of politics arrogant, autocratic and excessively authoritarian so I'm not happy he is back in the cabinet (time to worry about a police state again!) Though having said that he does fit with the political style of the current junta...

Originally posted by evildrneil
I find his style of politics arrogant, autocratic and excessively authoritarian

Any examples you care to quote evildrneil?

hes a **** plain and simple, he was a **** in the early 90s etc in sheffield council and is one now

Originally posted by melthebell
hes a **** plain and simple, he was a **** in the early 90s etc in sheffield council and is one now

Well this post by melthebell certainly brought a lot of brilliant insight into the discussion. :huh:

Originally posted by redrobbo
Well this post by melthebell certainly brought a lot of brilliant insight into the discussion. :huh:

:)

*bows*

then *runs off before david blunkett notices what hes written*

:P

Having broken a law shouldn't he be staring out from behind bars?



:cool: perhaps not :o :hihi: