| Tony's cronies? 08:01 - Jul 1 with 1296 views | DJR |
I think it is wrong for politicians, former politicians or party supporters or doners to be appointed to public bodies. New Labour and the Tories have done it, but sadly it looks like Starmer will be following suit.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/jul/01/labour-plan-replace-nhs-
Quite apart from anything else, it seems to me to have all the hallmarks of the sort of thing that went on with PPE, so who knows if Labour wouldn't follow suit if something similar happened again. And it certainly goes against the following.
"Labour Leader Keir Starmer kicked off 2024 with a pledge to clean up politics and deliver a “total crackdown on cronyism.”" [Post edited 1 Jul 2024 8:16]
|  | | |  |
| Tony's cronies? on 08:26 - Jul 1 with 1178 views | PassionNotAnger |
Forgetting the partisan element for a bit this is generally pretty standard in many organizations, a new CEO will invariably bring in some of those they have worked with before because the trust them and are perhaps aligned culturally and commercially. They’d have probably laid out the rough plans or scale of the challenge and worked out of its a good fit.
That situation is common and comfortable (for me at least) but the more recent Boris version of giving your friend Peerages for personal gain, absolutely not.
Time will tell which category Starmer appointments will fall into but those with blue tinted glasses will probably assume the latter, those with red tinges probably the former and the more balanced will wait and see before jumping to any conclusions |  | | |
| Tony's cronies? on 08:27 - Jul 1 with 1169 views | GlasgowBlue |
Don’t see any issues with this. Pretty standard that they would want their own people running these organisations so they are signing from the same hymn sheet. |  |
| |
| Tony's cronies? on 08:45 - Jul 1 with 1100 views | DJR |
| Tony's cronies? on 08:26 - Jul 1 by PassionNotAnger |
Forgetting the partisan element for a bit this is generally pretty standard in many organizations, a new CEO will invariably bring in some of those they have worked with before because the trust them and are perhaps aligned culturally and commercially. They’d have probably laid out the rough plans or scale of the challenge and worked out of its a good fit.
That situation is common and comfortable (for me at least) but the more recent Boris version of giving your friend Peerages for personal gain, absolutely not.
Time will tell which category Starmer appointments will fall into but those with blue tinted glasses will probably assume the latter, those with red tinges probably the former and the more balanced will wait and see before jumping to any conclusions |
I have red tinted glasses and what you say may well be true and justifiable in the case of the corporate world.
But NHS England is a non-departmental public body which is defined thus.
"In the United Kingdom, non-departmental public body (NDPB) is a classification applied by the Cabinet Office, Treasury, the Scottish Government, and the Northern Ireland Executive to public sector organisations that have a role in the process of national government but are not part of a government department. NDPBs carry out their work largely independently from ministers and are accountable to the public through Parliament; however, ministers are responsible for the independence, effectiveness, and efficiency of non-departmental public bodies in their portfolio."
To have former politicians in charge of such bodies just seems wrong and unnecessary to me but then again I suppose I deplore the blurring of the distinction between public and private over the last 40 odd years.
EDIT. As it is, it used to be the responsibility of the Secretary of State to provide or secure the provision of NHS services, but the Lansley reforms removed this responsibility and so made the NHS independent. Perhaps it is this issue that underlies what Labour plan to do, but the more proper thing to do would be to restore the Secretary of State's responsibility for the provision of NHS services. And even without that I am sure they could achieve what they want without appointing a political crony, whilst waiting for an opportunity to change the legislation.
[Post edited 1 Jul 2024 9:08]
| | | |
| Tony's cronies? on 08:46 - Jul 1 with 1086 views | blueasfook |
I wouldnt have thought a kebab would be useful in public office. |  |
| |
| Tony's cronies? on 11:37 - Jul 2 with 867 views | DJR |
This is also something that annoys me about politicians, who are public servants and just shouldn't be doing this.
Keir Starmer has received more freebies than any other MP since last General Election, the latest being for the Taylor Swift concert.
The following article is based on an FT article.
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/keir-starmer-received-more-freebies-100453391.html
It's public service with benefits! [Post edited 2 Jul 2024 11:41]
| | | |
| Tony's cronies? on 12:05 - Jul 2 with 820 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| Tony's cronies? on 11:37 - Jul 2 by DJR |
This is also something that annoys me about politicians, who are public servants and just shouldn't be doing this.
Keir Starmer has received more freebies than any other MP since last General Election, the latest being for the Taylor Swift concert.
The following article is based on an FT article.
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/keir-starmer-received-more-freebies-100453391.html
It's public service with benefits! [Post edited 2 Jul 2024 11:41]
|
Clearly somebody doesn’t like him very much-
“ four hospitality tickets worth £698 to see Coldplay perform” | | | |
| Tony's cronies? on 14:27 - Jul 2 with 750 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Tony's cronies? on 11:37 - Jul 2 by DJR |
This is also something that annoys me about politicians, who are public servants and just shouldn't be doing this.
Keir Starmer has received more freebies than any other MP since last General Election, the latest being for the Taylor Swift concert.
The following article is based on an FT article.
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/keir-starmer-received-more-freebies-100453391.html
It's public service with benefits! [Post edited 2 Jul 2024 11:41]
|
Yep, I broadly agree. There’ll be times when it’s appropriate, but it opens up the possibility of temptation of cronyism doesn’t? Although at least he’s disclosing his gifts I suppose. So it seems there’s no problem as the rules stand, and the question should be do the rules need to be more restrictive? |  |
| |
| Tony's cronies? on 14:56 - Jul 2 with 720 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
*Assuming Labour wins the General Election*
If the NHS was doing really well right now, and a succeeding Chief Exec was being thrown out for a sycophant, then I would agree.
But Starmer wants to get stuck in to turning around 14 years of decline, and if he needs to appoint the person he thinks is best equipped to help him achieve that, then that is fine with me.
And then we judge him on the results at the next General Election. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
