Should DB resign in light of the current events with the Beverley Hughes debacle. He stood up in the commons and said that she hadn't done anything wrong and wouldn't be going. Next day it is announced that she has resigned.

Surely as the man in charge, he has to take ultimate responsibilty. With immigration policies appearing to be in total dis-array is it time he jumped before the big push comes?

Like all polititions, he will fight tooth and nail to remain, and if he does go, what then? is anyone in this current government likely to be any better? or for that matter, would the tory's do any better, perhaps, better the devil you know.

I agree, If he goes then who do you replace him with?

I can assure you that there's no end to the line of political yes-men waiting to fill the post and follow the PM's every whim while those under them continue to act in a corrupt and grossly incompetant manner.

Politicians are generally stupid and duplicitous and the civil servants who work under them are ineffective, having attained their positions through cronyism.

Originally posted by Carmine
Politicians are generally stupid and duplicitous and the civil servants who work under them are ineffective, having attained their positions through cronyism.

Wow, what a marvellous example of sweeping generalisation. Perhaps you could name a few who you know personally and outline their duplicity or ineffectiveness. I take it you have studied politicians and civil servants in great detail and have a complete record of all their misdemeanours?

I think he'd have preferred Hughes to not have fallen on her sword so quickly because her resignation puts him in the firing-line if anything else comes out... he's no sheep left to throw to the wolves!

That said, it will take a very BIG revelation to force him to resign.

I've spent time in the civil service and seen incompetance and cronyism before my very eyes, and all one needs do is follow the ups and downs of Westminster to find evidence that most politicians are a bunch of sound-bite dropping liars.

Naming names makes little difference and leads to nasty legal matters...whistle-blowers in the civil service tend to get the sack, as will probably happen in the case of the guy who brought this whole debacle to the attention of the nation.

Note that I used the word "generally", of course there are exceptions, but they are few and far between as the political system weeds them out and marks them as pariahs. Ken Livingston would be an example of a politician who stuck to his guns and tried not to sell out and the aforementioned whistle-blower would be a good example of a conscientious civil servant.

There's no need for me to keep a complete record of the actions of politicians as they are constantly under the scrutiny of the media and hopefully the public as well.

Just read your sig "There is no truth, only human opinion." so perhaps in future you could preface your generalisations with something like 'in my opinion'?

In my opinion, the overwhelming majority of politicans I have met have been self sacrificing, committed, public serving people who have entered politics in an attempt to improve the lot of their constituents.

As to whether DB should resign over one of his junior ministers having forgotten about a letter someone in her department wrote over her signature 12 months ago? No.

Point accepted..."in my experience" is the preface to that particular comment, but I don't think it's a generalisation to say that policitians are duplicitous when the evidence is there for all to see.

I agree that most politicians start out with the best of intentions, but once they assume a role in the cabinet they seem to loose sight of that and begin to feel the influence of other interested parties. I sincerely hope that the politicians you have met live up to your impressions of them and serve the needs of those that elected them.

Maybe DB shouldn't resign over this matter, but perhaps there is an argument that say ministers should be more aware of what's going on in their departments and just what they are putting their names to?

I've always thought DB is an idiot, he's disabled himself yet he did all of buggery about disability discrimination in the employment service back when he was employment secretary.

A bit bitter and cynical maybe but I partially blame him for me being unemployed.

Pretty much like Margaret Thatcher, first female PM in history and spent her time in office doing bugger all for the cause of the woman in the workplace. Wanted to be an honourary man, if you ask me.

BTW: What did part did he play in your unemployment?...Just curious.

For a start he made disabled people have to go through exactly the same farcical system on the dole as for want of a better word, normal people.

Sending you for inappropriate jobs, jobs that had already been taken, and denying everything when you challenge the retards at the job centre about their mistakes.

Sorry, late 1997 was a particularly bad time for me when I was on the dole.

Don't apologise on my account.

I know someone who worked in a job centre and to be honest there were some stories that made my blood boil.

It all seemed to revolve around dressing up the statistics rather than actually finding appropriate work for the unemployed and assessing the needs of those unable to work.

A favourite was to take the cases of people who were classified as unable to work either through illness or disability and after six months, send them for an evaluation with a doctor chosen by the department. The doctor had been told to find that the person should be declared fit to work regardless of the actual physical reality of the situation. While this meant that the person would almost inevitably be unable to find a job for the simple reason that whatever made them unable to work in the first place was still present, the fact that their case was under review meant they disappeared from the statistics until they were once more acknowledged as unable to work.

There are many other tales like this one, believe me.

Originally posted by Rich
I've always thought DB is an idiot, he's disabled himself yet he did all of buggery about disability discrimination in the employment service back when he was employment secretary.

A bit bitter and cynical maybe but I partially blame him for me being unemployed.
I've never been that fond of you either rich :) and all that you are accusing me of is false and liable I might add!

Originally posted by DaBouncer
I've never been that fond of you either rich :) and all that you are accusing me of is false and liable I might add!

Dozy muppet :lol:

I wasn't talking about YOU, I meant David Blunkett! It's just a coincidence you share the same initials.

Originally posted by Mo
Should DB resign in light of the current events with the Beverley Hughes debacle. He stood up in the commons and said that she hadn't done anything wrong and wouldn't be going. Next day it is announced that she has resigned.

Surely as the man in charge, he has to take ultimate responsibilty. With immigration policies appearing to be in total dis-array is it time he jumped before the big push comes?


No!!! David Blunkett should not resign, he is the best man for the job, he is honourable and competent, if left alone he will sort things out.

I would like to see Blunkett go - but more on the general principle that he is to all appearances trying to turn the UK into a police state - which doesnt sit very well with my bleeding heart liberalism!

Originally posted by halevan
No!!! David Blunkett should not resign, he is the best man for the job, he is honourable and competent, if left alone he will sort things out.

You a Labour supporter then? :lol:

Personally I'm of the opinion that all Politicians regardless what party they're in can go shag a sheep.

I fear the worst. I think that Blunkett and Blair are up to their neck in this little scam and that this women took the fall for them.

Whether DB comes or goes is none of the public's concern.

Uh..... I'm thinking of a word...... democracy.

Originally posted by JonJParr
Uh..... I'm thinking of a word...... democracy.


Sorry JP,
my post was not to be taken literally.
it was a sort of play on words and 2 DB threads...
Never mind, I thought it amusing.

Originally posted by davyboy
Whether DB comes or goes is none of the public's concern.

I think you'll find it's very much the public's concern actually, especially given that he's in a very high profile job in the Government, that of Home Secretary.

He might be important, and in a high profile job in the Home office but IMO he's still a Muppet.

I've just seen a clip of him on TV, groping away again. I mean, god, keep it in your trousers mate.

Originally posted by Rich
I think you'll find it's very much the public's concern actually, especially given that he's in a very high profile job in the Government, that of Home Secretary.

He might be important, and in a high profile job in the Home office but IMO he's still a Muppet.


Blimey news travels fast in Sheffield I didn't realize he'd got his old job back.
Did he make a pigs ear of the pensions job.

See my my reply to JP Rich






:heyhey:

You have to say that maybe Plunketts judgment is dodgy like his personal life:heyhey: He is just like the rest of the main stream they are all in it for what they can get out of it .
I wonder what other little suprises he has up his sleeve,maybe he is a honest man sic.

his latest girlfriend has got her norks out today in the sunday papers....

very tasteful...

Originally posted by Internetowl
his latest girlfriend has got her norks out today in the sunday papers....

very tasteful...

Norks? This is a new one on me.

Do you mean she has put her her best china out for visitors?

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b331/OdReWIN/Political%20Images/9.jpg


Lol our david gets about dont he.;)