Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » It’s going to be a blue Monday for some cabinet ministers as M

SystemSystem Posts: 3,967
edited January 7 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » It’s going to be a blue Monday for some cabinet ministers as Mrs May brings in a new order with a reshuffle

Night of the blunt knives: @ShippersUnbound reporting that Patrick McLoughlin, Justine Greening, Greg Clark and Andrea Leadsom are for the chop in a Monday reshuffle. But the big Cabinet beasts are staying put. pic.twitter.com/v3c75YYRBQ

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 25,550
    Bizarre Gove Triangle?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 20,612
    No Kwasi Kwarteng or Rory Stewart?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 19,516
    Young's response to the tweet about the kleenex was sick, but undeniably funny. But, I doubt if Theresa May would laugh.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 7,189
    I'd be sceptical about sacking Leadsom who came second to May in the leadership election, and why plan it on a whiteboard unless you intend it to be leaked? The whole thing smacks of kite-flying.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 7,189
    rcs1000 said:

    No Kwasi Kwarteng or Rory Stewart?

    Is the prime minister especially fond of Old Etonians?
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,299
    Sean_F said:

    Young's response to the tweet about the kleenex was sick, but undeniably funny. But, I doubt if Theresa May would laugh.

    I deny it is funny. I looked through his Twitter feed when the story broke and was struck by just how feeble his sense of humour is generally.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 15,460
    edited January 7

    I'd be sceptical about sacking Leadsom who came second to May in the leadership election, and why plan it on a whiteboard unless you intend it to be leaked? The whole thing smacks of kite-flying.

    Yes it’s kite-flying. The only vacancies are to replace Damian Green in the Cabinet Office and to replace Patrick McLaughlin who wants to stand down as party chair. The one person who has really earned a promotion, Jeremy Hunt, is stuck with his current job for a couple of months as he steers Health through a very cold winter.

    I can’t see an extensive reshuffle at the moment, it would be about as much fun as watching England lose by an innings. Again.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 9,947
    Got to agree with the poster yesterday who was amazed at the suggestion of Grayling being promoted.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 17,879

    Got to agree with the poster yesterday who was amazed at the suggestion of Grayling being promoted.

    That would indeed be bizarre. I still think that this will prove more limited. May does some crazy and self defeating things but this looks like suicide to me.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 9,020

    I reckon Jo Johnson is doomed now.

    The tweet that threatens to end Mr Young’s appointment stems from 2009, when Cowell was filmed in Kenya with children scavenging from a rubbish dump to survive. The pop mogul called it ‘hell on Earth’.

    A female Twitter user tweeted she had ‘gone through 5 boxes of Kleenex’ watching the harrowing scenes. Minutes later, just after midnight, Young tweeted a sarcastic and sick response, saying: ‘Me Too, I havn’t [sic] w***** so much in ages.’

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5242487/Theresa-Mays-disgust-student-tsars-sordid-tweets.html

    Ah his famed caustic wit engendering debate about important issues there again.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 40,050
    Good morning, everyone.

    Hope Grayling's Stonehenge Tunnel gets the chop. A historian I follow on Twitter, Tom Holland, is perpetually irked and perplexed by how such a thing could be considered.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 9,824

    Sean_F said:

    Young's response to the tweet about the kleenex was sick, but undeniably funny. But, I doubt if Theresa May would laugh.

    I deny it is funny. I looked through his Twitter feed when the story broke and was struck by just how feeble his sense of humour is generally.
    He seems more of a shock jock than a genuinely amusing writer - the Kleenex "joke" is more notable for its heartlessness than its "funny" use of dual purposes for Kleenex.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 15,460

    Good morning, everyone.

    Hope Grayling's Stonehenge Tunnel gets the chop. A historian I follow on Twitter, Tom Holland, is perpetually irked and perplexed by how such a thing could be considered.

    What would be your preferred solution to the hour-long queues caused by the current single-carriageway road every evening?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 303
    Sandpit said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Hope Grayling's Stonehenge Tunnel gets the chop. A historian I follow on Twitter, Tom Holland, is perpetually irked and perplexed by how such a thing could be considered.

    What would be your preferred solution to the hour-long queues caused by the current single-carriageway road every evening?
    It was bloody stupid to build Stonehenge so close to a major trunk road. What were those druids thinking?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 40,050
    Mr. Sandpit, I don't know, although I suspect tunnelling through an area of unique historical interest wouldn't feature on my shortlist.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 303

    Sean_F said:

    Young's response to the tweet about the kleenex was sick, but undeniably funny. But, I doubt if Theresa May would laugh.

    I deny it is funny. I looked through his Twitter feed when the story broke and was struck by just how feeble his sense of humour is generally.
    He seems more of a shock jock than a genuinely amusing writer - the Kleenex "joke" is more notable for its heartlessness than its "funny" use of dual purposes for Kleenex.
    His book "How to lose Friends and Alienate People" is quite funny, and worth a read. Perhaps the clue was in the title though.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,127

    Good morning, everyone.

    Hope Grayling's Stonehenge Tunnel gets the chop. A historian I follow on Twitter, Tom Holland, is perpetually irked and perplexed by how such a thing could be considered.

    Wouldn't have described Tom Holland as an historian - more a writer who occasionally writes history books, most of them aimed at the popular market.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,127
    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Hope Grayling's Stonehenge Tunnel gets the chop. A historian I follow on Twitter, Tom Holland, is perpetually irked and perplexed by how such a thing could be considered.

    What would be your preferred solution to the hour-long queues caused by the current single-carriageway road every evening?
    It was bloody stupid to build Stonehenge so close to a major trunk road. What were those druids thinking?
    They probably thought the commuters would be willing to make a little sacrifice of time to see it...
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 18,202
    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Hope Grayling's Stonehenge Tunnel gets the chop. A historian I follow on Twitter, Tom Holland, is perpetually irked and perplexed by how such a thing could be considered.

    What would be your preferred solution to the hour-long queues caused by the current single-carriageway road every evening?
    It was bloody stupid to build Stonehenge so close to a major trunk road. What were those druids thinking?
    In my youth I was a Steward of St George based down at Windsor. I once genuinely got asked why the built the castle so close to Heathrow...
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 15,460

    Mr. Sandpit, I don't know, although I suspect tunnelling through an area of unique historical interest wouldn't feature on my shortlist.

    Well the options are a tunnel, a dual carriageway or the current massive queues caused by the A303 trunk road merging into a single lane past Stonehenge.

    Disclaimer: Before I moved to the sandpit I lived in Salisbury and used to get stuck in that bloody traffic jam every bloody night!
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 303
    On topic, 6 Cabinet members is quite a reshuffle, what Sir Humphrey might call a corageous decision. Perhaps she should have read DH's header yesterday, but having leaked it, needs to follow through.

    On the face of it this year has few betting opportunities, but I was speaking to an LD friend last night who reckons that we will have a further GE this year. Probably the mechanism would be a change of PM collapsing the government.
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 486
    edited January 7

    Got to agree with the poster yesterday who was amazed at the suggestion of Grayling being promoted.

    Grayling promoted?! Is the Maybot off her trolley?

    Also, sacking Greening and Leadsom is hardly promoting women.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,127
    Foxy said:

    On topic, 6 Cabinet members is quite a reshuffle, what Sir Humphrey might call a corageous decision. Perhaps she should have read DH's header yesterday, but having leaked it, needs to follow through.

    On the face of it this year has few betting opportunities, but I was speaking to an LD friend last night who reckons that we will have a further GE this year. Probably the mechanism would be a change of PM collapsing the government.

    The logistics of that are formidable though. It still requires the DUP and the Conservatives to vote for one, or to fail to form a government of their own. Neither seems likely while a Corbyn leads Labour, and an election would severely complicate the last nine months of haggling with M. Barnier.

    For me, the next GE is next year at the earliest, although if May continues to alienate the PCP at this rate it becomes more probable there will indeed be one in 2019.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 9,947
    Foxy said:

    Sean_F said:

    Young's response to the tweet about the kleenex was sick, but undeniably funny. But, I doubt if Theresa May would laugh.

    I deny it is funny. I looked through his Twitter feed when the story broke and was struck by just how feeble his sense of humour is generally.
    He seems more of a shock jock than a genuinely amusing writer - the Kleenex "joke" is more notable for its heartlessness than its "funny" use of dual purposes for Kleenex.
    His book "How to lose Friends and Alienate People" is quite funny, and worth a read. Perhaps the clue was in the title though.
    It is indeed. I don’t want to be po-faced, but tales of how he shafted people and so on are really best forgotten.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 40,050
    Mr. Doethur, did an excellent programme on ISIS/the Yazidis last year too.

    Mr. Sandpit, I don't live near there or have a car :p
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 9,947
    daodao said:

    Got to agree with the poster yesterday who was amazed at the suggestion of Grayling being promoted.

    Grayling promoted?! Is the Maybot off her trolley?

    Also, sacking Greening and Leadsom is hardly promoting women.
    Certainly not mothers!
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 9,947

    Mr. Doethur, did an excellent programme on ISIS/the Yazidis last year too.

    Mr. Sandpit, I don't live near there or have a car :p

    Mr D, have you a ref for that programme?

    My father spent his last few years near Yeovil and I was frequently called upon to drive down (from S Essex) there on some emergency or other and even early on a Saturday we could be delayed there.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 18,202
    daodao said:

    Got to agree with the poster yesterday who was amazed at the suggestion of Grayling being promoted.

    Grayling promoted?! Is the Maybot off her trolley?

    Also, sacking Greening and Leadsom is hardly promoting women.
    Shouldn’t people be judged on ability and performance rather than gender?
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 486
    daodao said:

    Got to agree with the poster yesterday who was amazed at the suggestion of Grayling being promoted.

    Grayling promoted?! Is the Maybot off her trolley?

    Also, sacking Greening and Leadsom is hardly promoting women.
    Personally, I would sack BoJo, Fox, Leadsom and Grayling as they are all incompetent and full of hubris.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,127
    daodao said:

    Also, sacking Greening and Leadsom is hardly promoting women.

    Greening has been the best Secretary of State for Education since John Macgregor in 1990, and I mean that entirely seriously.

    She has been the first one who has managed to do precisely nothing. All the others were ambitious, arrogant and/or incompetent and royally screwed things up to get good headlines in the Mail to promote their own careers.

    I shall be exceedingly pissed off if she is replaced by some other nonentity who starts tinkering again.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 13,415
    That Toby Young comment got a chuckle out of me. Definitely hope he stays now. People who don't find that funny are genuinely humourless losers.
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 486
    Charles said:

    daodao said:

    Got to agree with the poster yesterday who was amazed at the suggestion of Grayling being promoted.

    Grayling promoted?! Is the Maybot off her trolley?

    Also, sacking Greening and Leadsom is hardly promoting women.
    Shouldn’t people be judged on ability and performance rather than gender?
    Yes - I would get rid of Leadsom, as I stated in a later post, but how has Greening failed?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 40,050
    King Cole, 'fraid not but I did watch it and thought it very interesting.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 15,389
    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Hope Grayling's Stonehenge Tunnel gets the chop. A historian I follow on Twitter, Tom Holland, is perpetually irked and perplexed by how such a thing could be considered.

    What would be your preferred solution to the hour-long queues caused by the current single-carriageway road every evening?
    It was bloody stupid to build Stonehenge so close to a major trunk road. What were those druids thinking?
    Stonehenge was actually built on an early traffic island in the A303....
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 486

    daodao said:

    Got to agree with the poster yesterday who was amazed at the suggestion of Grayling being promoted.

    Grayling promoted?! Is the Maybot off her trolley?

    Also, sacking Greening and Leadsom is hardly promoting women.
    Certainly not mothers!
    Greening doesn't have any children as far as I'm aware.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 5,327
    edited January 7
    May can juggle as much as she likes, the Govt is full of losers, tho' not quite so many as in the opposition.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 4,228
    MaxPB said:

    That Toby Young comment got a chuckle out of me. Definitely hope he stays now. People who don't find that funny are genuinely humourless losers.

    Really? It is the most tired joke on the internet, along with the related "X is typing one-handed because..." Or I am genuinely humourless, of course.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 15,389

    Bizarre Gove Triangle?

    Gove will tear us apart......
  • alex.alex. Posts: 2,652
    edited January 7
    daodao said:

    daodao said:

    Got to agree with the poster yesterday who was amazed at the suggestion of Grayling being promoted.

    Grayling promoted?! Is the Maybot off her trolley?

    Also, sacking Greening and Leadsom is hardly promoting women.
    Certainly not mothers!
    Greening doesn't have any children as far as I'm aware.
    As she’s openly gay it would seem somewhat unlikely
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 5,327
    alex. said:

    daodao said:

    daodao said:

    Got to agree with the poster yesterday who was amazed at the suggestion of Grayling being promoted.

    Grayling promoted?! Is the Maybot off her trolley?

    Also, sacking Greening and Leadsom is hardly promoting women.
    Certainly not mothers!
    Greening doesn't have any children as far as I'm aware.
    As she’s openly gay it would seem somewhat unlikely
    really .. gay people are having children all the time, either by AI or adoption.. get with the 21st century!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,127
    Completely off-topic, but surely this match is the last of Vince's Test career?

    If England can't recall Hameed or Jennings, they would be better off with James Anderson at no. 3. At least he can play a defensive shot when required.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 15,460
    ydoethur said:

    Completely off-topic, but surely this match is the last of Vince's Test career?

    If England can't recall Hameed or Jennings, they would be better off with James Anderson at no. 3. At least he can play a defensive shot when required.

    Eleven county players chosen at random would be better than this shower of sh....
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 9,824
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    On topic, 6 Cabinet members is quite a reshuffle, what Sir Humphrey might call a corageous decision. Perhaps she should have read DH's header yesterday, but having leaked it, needs to follow through.

    On the face of it this year has few betting opportunities, but I was speaking to an LD friend last night who reckons that we will have a further GE this year. Probably the mechanism would be a change of PM collapsing the government.

    The logistics of that are formidable though. It still requires the DUP and the Conservatives to vote for one, or to fail to form a government of their own. Neither seems likely while a Corbyn leads Labour, and an election would severely complicate the last nine months of haggling with M. Barnier.

    For me, the next GE is next year at the earliest, although if May continues to alienate the PCP at this rate it becomes more probable there will indeed be one in 2019.
    FWIW I was told by a non-Labour source that the general expectation in Parliament is an election this year. To balance that, I don't regard him as especially well-informed, and it seems unlikely to me.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 303
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    On topic, 6 Cabinet members is quite a reshuffle, what Sir Humphrey might call a corageous decision. Perhaps she should have read DH's header yesterday, but having leaked it, needs to follow through.

    On the face of it this year has few betting opportunities, but I was speaking to an LD friend last night who reckons that we will have a further GE this year. Probably the mechanism would be a change of PM collapsing the government.

    The logistics of that are formidable though. It still requires the DUP and the Conservatives to vote for one, or to fail to form a government of their own. Neither seems likely while a Corbyn leads Labour, and an election would severely complicate the last nine months of haggling with M. Barnier.

    For me, the next GE is next year at the earliest, although if May continues to alienate the PCP at this rate it becomes more probable there will indeed be one in 2019.
    I could only see it if there were defections reducing the majority, and those are unlikely unless open warfare breaks out between Tory factions. He was thinking that it would be the Irish border that would bring down the government, but I reckon that the DUP would accept a hard border if landed with one.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 37,494
    If Chris Grayling does become Deputy PM and First Secretary of State it will be precisely because he has no leadership ambitions and having run May's leadership campaign is ultra-loyal to the PM.

    Leadsom's leadership chances went last time whether she stays or goes, especially as Boris and Mogg will now have more appeal to the MPs she got last time.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 9,824
    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Hope Grayling's Stonehenge Tunnel gets the chop. A historian I follow on Twitter, Tom Holland, is perpetually irked and perplexed by how such a thing could be considered.

    What would be your preferred solution to the hour-long queues caused by the current single-carriageway road every evening?
    It was bloody stupid to build Stonehenge so close to a major trunk road. What were those druids thinking?
    That did make me laugh!
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 18,202
    daodao said:

    Charles said:

    daodao said:

    Got to agree with the poster yesterday who was amazed at the suggestion of Grayling being promoted.

    Grayling promoted?! Is the Maybot off her trolley?

    Also, sacking Greening and Leadsom is hardly promoting women.
    Shouldn’t people be judged on ability and performance rather than gender?
    Yes - I would get rid of Leadsom, as I stated in a later post, but how has Greening failed?
    She hasn’t - and I wouldn’t sack her - but your criteria were skewed
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 3,937

    Sean_F said:

    Young's response to the tweet about the kleenex was sick, but undeniably funny. But, I doubt if Theresa May would laugh.

    I deny it is funny. I looked through his Twitter feed when the story broke and was struck by just how feeble his sense of humour is generally.
    Agreed. I have no problem with sick jokes - as long as they are funny.
    Young' problem is that he has the self awareness to recognise that he's a bumptious prick, but seems to wish to publicly celebrate the fact on a regular basis.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 303

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    On topic, 6 Cabinet members is quite a reshuffle, what Sir Humphrey might call a corageous decision. Perhaps she should have read DH's header yesterday, but having leaked it, needs to follow through.

    On the face of it this year has few betting opportunities, but I was speaking to an LD friend last night who reckons that we will have a further GE this year. Probably the mechanism would be a change of PM collapsing the government.

    The logistics of that are formidable though. It still requires the DUP and the Conservatives to vote for one, or to fail to form a government of their own. Neither seems likely while a Corbyn leads Labour, and an election would severely complicate the last nine months of haggling with M. Barnier.

    For me, the next GE is next year at the earliest, although if May continues to alienate the PCP at this rate it becomes more probable there will indeed be one in 2019.
    FWIW I was told by a non-Labour source that the general expectation in Parliament is an election this year. To balance that, I don't regard him as especially well-informed, and it seems unlikely to me.
    Yes, the potential for twists and turns in a year with little happening other than Brexit is there. Certainly parties should have contingency plans.

    Another possibility is May trying to railroad an eiderdown BINO through Parliament, annoying her own headbangers. Predicting black swan events is not easy.

    On the other hand, managing a minority government requires a level of political deftness and emotional intelligence that May blatently lacks, so the possibility is always there.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 12,892
    Sandpit said:

    Eleven county players chosen at random would be better than this shower of sh....

    That's an interesting option for a May reshuffle. She might do worse.

    Moeen Ali as First Secretary of State would improve the government spin operation at the margin and clearly tick the diversity box (down his cricketing whites) ....
  • alex.alex. Posts: 2,652
    I don’t know why anyone pays any attention to speculation on possible moves in the papers. Most of it presumably comes from people without any knowledge of what May is thinking, and is just Cabinet minister trying to sure up their own positions. After all if you were one of the “big beasts” wouldn’t you be seeking to cast attention on lower ranking ministers?
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 486
    Charles said:

    daodao said:

    Charles said:

    daodao said:

    Got to agree with the poster yesterday who was amazed at the suggestion of Grayling being promoted.

    Grayling promoted?! Is the Maybot off her trolley?

    Also, sacking Greening and Leadsom is hardly promoting women.
    Shouldn’t people be judged on ability and performance rather than gender?
    Yes - I would get rid of Leadsom, as I stated in a later post, but how has Greening failed?
    She hasn’t - and I wouldn’t sack her - but your criteria were skewed
    There aren't/weren't my criteria, but "promotion of women" is attributed to May as one of her aims in this reshuffle in the thread header.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 9,947
    Nigelb said:

    Sean_F said:

    Young's response to the tweet about the kleenex was sick, but undeniably funny. But, I doubt if Theresa May would laugh.

    I deny it is funny. I looked through his Twitter feed when the story broke and was struck by just how feeble his sense of humour is generally.
    Agreed. I have no problem with sick jokes - as long as they are funny.
    Young' problem is that he has the self awareness to recognise that he's a bumptious prick, but seems to wish to publicly celebrate the fact on a regular basis.
    +1
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 37,494
    edited January 7

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    On topic, 6 Cabinet members is quite a reshuffle, what Sir Humphrey might call a corageous decision. Perhaps she should have read DH's header yesterday, but having leaked it, needs to follow through.

    On the face of it this year has few betting opportunities, but I was speaking to an LD friend last night who reckons that we will have a further GE this year. Probably the mechanism would be a change of PM collapsing the government.

    The logistics of that are formidable though. It still requires the DUP and the Conservatives to vote for one, or to fail to form a government of their own. Neither seems likely while a Corbyn leads Labour, and an election would severely complicate the last nine months of haggling with M. Barnier.

    For me, the next GE is next year at the earliest, although if May continues to alienate the PCP at this rate it becomes more probable there will indeed be one in 2019.
    FWIW I was told by a non-Labour source that the general expectation in Parliament is an election this year. To balance that, I don't regard him as especially well-informed, and it seems unlikely to me.
    Given this year is the key year for Brexit negotiations highly unlikely. Even Corbyn would not want to become PM this year I expect as he would then be lumbered with delivering the Brexit deal and would have to annoy either his Remain or Leave voters.

    Essentially if there was going to be an early general election it would have been last autumn, now it is increasingly likely there will not be one until 2021/2022 ie post Brexit and the end of the transition period
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 3,937
    ydoethur said:

    Completely off-topic, but surely this match is the last of Vince's Test career?

    If England can't recall Hameed or Jennings, they would be better off with James Anderson at no. 3. At least he can play a defensive shot when required.

    It should be, but given the immediate lack of abvious alternatives at three, might not be.

    In any event, I think it an entirely secondary consideration. England have plenty of possibilities at the top of the order, and enough strong batters already in the team to give them a run in the side without making it obviously worse than it is now (particularly if we get Stokes back).

    The real problem is the bowling, where we have a single world class bowler who is in his mid thirties, and literally no one else better than reliably mediocre outside of English conditions.
    The bowling statistics for this series are utterly and historically gruesome.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 15,460
    JackW said:

    Sandpit said:

    Eleven county players chosen at random would be better than this shower of sh....

    That's an interesting option for a May reshuffle. She might do worse.

    Moeen Ali as First Secretary of State would improve the government spin operation at the margin and clearly tick the diversity box (down his cricketing whites) ....
    LOL, I like your thinking. Maybe Alistair Campbell and Andy Coulson should pack their bags and head for Australia, as the best couple of spinners we’ve had for a decade?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 9,947
    ydoethur said:

    Completely off-topic, but surely this match is the last of Vince's Test career?

    If England can't recall Hameed or Jennings, they would be better off with James Anderson at no. 3. At least he can play a defensive shot when required.


    Not keen on Jennings, and Hameed was injured, albeit slowly recovering, when the selections were made. Would let Browne have a go at opening, though, and/or give Lawrence a go at 3 or 4. If Porter was fit, of course, he should be bowling.
    But then I’m Essex, so prejudiced!
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 9,947
    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Completely off-topic, but surely this match is the last of Vince's Test career?

    If England can't recall Hameed or Jennings, they would be better off with James Anderson at no. 3. At least he can play a defensive shot when required.

    It should be, but given the immediate lack of abvious alternatives at three, might not be.

    In any event, I think it an entirely secondary consideration. England have plenty of possibilities at the top of the order, and enough strong batters already in the team to give them a run in the side without making it obviously worse than it is now (particularly if we get Stokes back).

    The real problem is the bowling, where we have a single world class bowler who is in his mid thirties, and literally no one else better than reliably mediocre outside of English conditions.
    The bowling statistics for this series are utterly and historically gruesome.
    Graeme Swann made the point in his book that it’s very different bowling with the Aussie Kookaburra ball than with the Brit Dukes.
    If that is the case, it should be reasonably easy to sort out, though.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 3,937
    MaxPB said:

    That Toby Young comment got a chuckle out of me. Definitely hope he stays now. People who don't find that funny are genuinely humourless losers.

    If sharing your and Young' sense of humour is the new definition of humourless loser, then I'm entirely happy to be counted among their number.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 303
    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    On topic, 6 Cabinet members is quite a reshuffle, what Sir Humphrey might call a corageous decision. Perhaps she should have read DH's header yesterday, but having leaked it, needs to follow through.

    On the face of it this year has few betting opportunities, but I was speaking to an LD friend last night who reckons that we will have a further GE this year. Probably the mechanism would be a change of PM collapsing the government.

    The logistics of that are formidable though. It still requires the DUP and the Conservatives to vote for one, or to fail to form a government of their own. Neither seems likely while a Corbyn leads Labour, and an election would severely complicate the last nine months of haggling with M. Barnier.

    For me, the next GE is next year at the earliest, although if May continues to alienate the PCP at this rate it becomes more probable there will indeed be one in 2019.
    FWIW I was told by a non-Labour source that the general expectation in Parliament is an election this year. To balance that, I don't regard him as especially well-informed, and it seems unlikely to me.
    Given this year is the key year for Brexit negotiations highly unlikely. Even Corbyn would not want to become PM this year I expect as he would then be lumbered with delivering the Brexit deal and would have to annoy either his Remain or Leave voters.

    Essentially if there was going to be an early general election it would have been last autumn, now it is increasingly likely there will not be one until 2021/2022 ie post Brexit and the end of the transition period
    I don't think anyone would plan an early GE, it is more that there is always the possibility of events conspiring to produce one. Those same events may also render current polling obselete, but I think you are right, zombie governments can shuffle for a long time.

    Countries function surprisingly well without a government, Germany at present is booming for example. There really is not much for the government to do other than Brexit and increasing austerity, the first being largely determined by the EU27 policy, and the latter by the poor state of the public finances. No Queens Speech this year, and no budget until November means little in the way, of things for politicians to do other than plot and brief against each other.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,095
    alex. said:

    I don’t know why anyone pays any attention to speculation on possible moves in the papers. Most of it presumably comes from people without any knowledge of what May is thinking, and is just Cabinet minister trying to sure up their own positions. After all if you were one of the “big beasts” wouldn’t you be seeking to cast attention on lower ranking ministers?

    This is precisely why there shouldn't be any awareness from anyone beyond the PM and possibly one or two extremely close colleagues - the Chief Whip and an utterly trusted deputy, pehaps - that a reshuffle is in the offing.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 3,937

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Completely off-topic, but surely this match is the last of Vince's Test career?

    If England can't recall Hameed or Jennings, they would be better off with James Anderson at no. 3. At least he can play a defensive shot when required.

    It should be, but given the immediate lack of abvious alternatives at three, might not be.

    In any event, I think it an entirely secondary consideration. England have plenty of possibilities at the top of the order, and enough strong batters already in the team to give them a run in the side without making it obviously worse than it is now (particularly if we get Stokes back).

    The real problem is the bowling, where we have a single world class bowler who is in his mid thirties, and literally no one else better than reliably mediocre outside of English conditions.
    The bowling statistics for this series are utterly and historically gruesome.
    Graeme Swann made the point in his book that it’s very different bowling with the Aussie Kookaburra ball than with the Brit Dukes.
    If that is the case, it should be reasonably easy to sort out, though.
    It is very different, but I'm not sure sorting it out is quite so easy. We and the WI are the only test nations that uses the Dukes ball. I suppose we could just drop it for the Kookaburra, but the immediate effect would be to lose a significant part of our home advantage without any benefit.
    We'd still have the problem of county bowlers learning their trade on seaming pitches (and playing only one day cricket during most of the summer months), so it would do little to encourage the development of either spinners or truly fast bowlers.

  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 18,051
    Toby Young's problem is not just that he is an empty vessel but that journalists hate nothing more than other journalists being promoted on skimpy merits. His appointment planted a big target on his back and he has supplied enough bullets to arm a battalion of hacks.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 18,051
    If Theresa May isn't going to shake up the more senior posts, there isn't any point to the reshuffle.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 13,415

    If Theresa May isn't going to shake up the more senior posts, there isn't any point to the reshuffle.

    Hammond is safe, Boris is not moveable and Rudd is her second in command.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 18,051
    MaxPB said:

    If Theresa May isn't going to shake up the more senior posts, there isn't any point to the reshuffle.

    Hammond is safe, Boris is not moveable and Rudd is her second in command.
    Why is Boris Johnson immoveable? He's out of his depth and conspicuously disloyal. If he could despatch her, he already would have. He'd be no loss to the government.

    And my point stands. If a reshuffle is to do anything, it's to give the administration a fresh look. Keeping the same senior faces won't do that.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 13,415
    On Justine Greening, if she has pushed through transgender self certification for children it would have been a complete disaster, but it looks like she has bowed to medical advice and the advice of colleagues and ignored the transgender lobby.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 9,947
    edited January 7
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Completely off-topic, but surely this match is the last of Vince's Test career?

    If England can't recall Hameed or Jennings, they would be better off with James Anderson at no. 3. At least he can play a defensive shot when required.

    It should be, but given the immediate lack of abvious alternatives at three, might not be.

    In any event, I think it an entirely secondary consideration. England have plenty of possibilities at the top of the order, and enough strong batters already in the team to give them a run in the side without making it obviously worse than it is now (particularly if we get Stokes back).

    The real problem is the bowling, where we have a single world class bowler who is in his mid thirties, and literally no one else better than reliably mediocre outside of English conditions.
    The bowling statistics for this series are utterly and historically gruesome.
    Graeme Swann made the point in his book that it’s very different bowling with the Aussie Kookaburra ball than with the Brit Dukes.
    If that is the case, it should be reasonably easy to sort out, though.
    It is very different, but I'm not sure sorting it out is quite so easy. We and the WI are the only test nations that uses the Dukes ball. I suppose we could just drop it for the Kookaburra, but the immediate effect would be to lose a significant part of our home advantage without any benefit.
    We'd still have the problem of county bowlers learning their trade on seaming pitches (and playing only one day cricket during most of the summer months), so it would do little to encourage the development of either spinners or truly fast bowlers.

    Not sure about simply swapping the Kookaburra for the Dukes, but completely agree about the foolishness of playing only one day cricket (and the short version to boot) in the hottest months.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 15,460

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Completely off-topic, but surely this match is the last of Vince's Test career?

    If England can't recall Hameed or Jennings, they would be better off with James Anderson at no. 3. At least he can play a defensive shot when required.

    It should be, but given the immediate lack of abvious alternatives at three, might not be.

    In any event, I think it an entirely secondary consideration. England have plenty of possibilities at the top of the order, and enough strong batters already in the team to give them a run in the side without making it obviously worse than it is now (particularly if we get Stokes back).

    The real problem is the bowling, where we have a single world class bowler who is in his mid thirties, and literally no one else better than reliably mediocre outside of English conditions.
    The bowling statistics for this series are utterly and historically gruesome.
    Graeme Swann made the point in his book that it’s very different bowling with the Aussie Kookaburra ball than with the Brit Dukes.
    If that is the case, it should be reasonably easy to sort out, though.
    Do the ECB really not have the resources to buy a box or two of Aussie Kookaburra balls for training purposes? Maybe they could even set up a training ground with a load of Aussie grass on an imported Aussie pitch too. These things aren’t expensive to do, in the grand scheme of things. Compared to the cost of a humiliating Ashes series, nothing is expensive.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 13,415

    MaxPB said:

    If Theresa May isn't going to shake up the more senior posts, there isn't any point to the reshuffle.

    Hammond is safe, Boris is not moveable and Rudd is her second in command.
    Why is Boris Johnson immoveable? He's out of his depth and conspicuously disloyal. If he could despatch her, he already would have. He'd be no loss to the government.

    And my point stands. If a reshuffle is to do anything, it's to give the administration a fresh look. Keeping the same senior faces won't do that.
    I agree with you, she flew a kite about the Brexit super department, but that seems have come to nothing.

    I also agree that a reshuffle which leaves the major players in place and doesn't promote any new faces to major roles is completely useless. Not worth doing.

    Agreeing with you twice in one day, Alastair, what has the world come to?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 18,051
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    If Theresa May isn't going to shake up the more senior posts, there isn't any point to the reshuffle.

    Hammond is safe, Boris is not moveable and Rudd is her second in command.
    Why is Boris Johnson immoveable? He's out of his depth and conspicuously disloyal. If he could despatch her, he already would have. He'd be no loss to the government.

    And my point stands. If a reshuffle is to do anything, it's to give the administration a fresh look. Keeping the same senior faces won't do that.
    I agree with you, she flew a kite about the Brexit super department, but that seems have come to nothing.

    I also agree that a reshuffle which leaves the major players in place and doesn't promote any new faces to major roles is completely useless. Not worth doing.

    Agreeing with you twice in one day, Alastair, what has the world come to?
    Stopped clocks.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 37,494
    May refuses to say whether she will fight the next general election but will serve as long as people want her to serve
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,267
    If true, exactly as I was saying yesterday. She urgently needs to bring in fresh faces and clear out dead wood. Boris should go as well, but I expect she sees his continuing as a widely-seen-to-be-struggling FS as the least worst option
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 3,937
    ydoethur said:

    daodao said:

    Also, sacking Greening and Leadsom is hardly promoting women.

    Greening has been the best Secretary of State for Education since John Macgregor in 1990, and I mean that entirely seriously.

    She has been the first one who has managed to do precisely nothing...
    Not strictly accurate...for example -
    https://governorsagenda.co.uk/2017/12/31/green-paper-on-mental-health-provision-in-schools-and-academies/

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 303

    MaxPB said:

    If Theresa May isn't going to shake up the more senior posts, there isn't any point to the reshuffle.

    Hammond is safe, Boris is not moveable and Rudd is her second in command.
    Why is Boris Johnson immoveable? He's out of his depth and conspicuously disloyal. If he could despatch her, he already would have. He'd be no loss to the government.

    And my point stands. If a reshuffle is to do anything, it's to give the administration a fresh look. Keeping the same senior faces won't do that.
    A pointless reshuffle that does nothing but sow discontent is very possible. After all, Theresa is not very good at this politics malarky.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 37,494
    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    On topic, 6 Cabinet members is quite a reshuffle, what Sir Humphrey might call a corageous decision. Perhaps she should have read DH's header yesterday, but having leaked it, needs to follow through.

    On the face of it this year has few betting opportunities, but I was speaking to an LD friend last night who reckons that we will have a further GE this year. Probably the mechanism would be a change of PM collapsing the government.

    The logistics of that are formidable though. It still requires the DUP and the Conservatives to vote for one, or to fail to form a government of their own. Neither seems likely while a Corbyn leads Labour, and an election would severely complicate the last nine months of haggling with M. Barnier.

    For me, the next GE is next year at the earliest, although if May continues to alienate the PCP at this rate it becomes more probable there will indeed be one in 2019.
    FWIW I was told by a non-Labour source that the general expectation in Parliament is an election this year. To balance that, I don't regard him as especially well-informed, and it seems unlikely to me.
    Given this year is the key year for Brexit negotiations highly unlikely. Even Corbyn would not want to become PM this year I expect as he would then be lumbered with delivering the Brexit deal and would have to annoy either his Remain or Leave voters.

    Essentially if there was going to be an early general election it would have been last autumn, now it is increasingly likely there will not be one until 2021/2022 ie post Brexit and the end of the transition period
    I don't think anyone would plan an early GE, it is more that there is always the possibility of events conspiring to produce one. Those same events may also render current polling obselete, but I think you are right, zombie governments can shuffle for a long time.

    Countries function surprisingly well without a government, Germany at present is booming for example. There really is not much for the government to do other than Brexit and increasing austerity, the first being largely determined by the EU27 policy, and the latter by the poor state of the public finances. No Queens Speech this year, and no budget until November means little in the way, of things for politicians to do other than plot and brief against each other.
    That would require a big enough vote for a no confidence vote which the government would survive anyway and in any case the focus this year is on the Brexit talks, neither main party really wants a general election this year and nor does the country
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 9,020
    Ishmael_Z said:

    MaxPB said:

    That Toby Young comment got a chuckle out of me. Definitely hope he stays now. People who don't find that funny are genuinely humourless losers.

    Really? It is the most tired joke on the internet, along with the related "X is typing one-handed because..." Or I am genuinely humourless, of course.
    I immediately knew what the joke would be from the setup. Tired would be the most generous description I could give of it.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 18,202
    edited January 7
    Sandpit said:

    JackW said:

    Sandpit said:

    Eleven county players chosen at random would be better than this shower of sh....

    That's an interesting option for a May reshuffle. She might do worse.

    Moeen Ali as First Secretary of State would improve the government spin operation at the margin and clearly tick the diversity box (down his cricketing whites) ....
    LOL, I like your thinking. Maybe Alistair Campbell and Andy Coulson should pack their bags and head for Australia, as the best couple of spinners we’ve had for a decade?
    Fallon used to play a useful straight bat before he was done for leg before...
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 61
    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    If Theresa May isn't going to shake up the more senior posts, there isn't any point to the reshuffle.

    Hammond is safe, Boris is not moveable and Rudd is her second in command.
    Why is Boris Johnson immoveable? He's out of his depth and conspicuously disloyal. If he could despatch her, he already would have. He'd be no loss to the government.

    And my point stands. If a reshuffle is to do anything, it's to give the administration a fresh look. Keeping the same senior faces won't do that.
    A pointless reshuffle that does nothing but sow discontent is very possible. After all, Theresa is not very good at this politics malarky.
    In fairness she's the first one to actually beat Corbyn, compared to the New Labour lot she's a superstar!
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 18,202
    Nigelb said:

    MaxPB said:

    That Toby Young comment got a chuckle out of me. Definitely hope he stays now. People who don't find that funny are genuinely humourless losers.

    If sharing your and Young' sense of humour is the new definition of humourless loser, then I'm entirely happy to be counted among their number.
    It’s not funny, but nor is it an unforgivable sin
  • alex.alex. Posts: 2,652
    edited January 7

    alex. said:

    I don’t know why anyone pays any attention to speculation on possible moves in the papers. Most of it presumably comes from people without any knowledge of what May is thinking, and is just Cabinet minister trying to sure up their own positions. After all if you were one of the “big beasts” wouldn’t you be seeking to cast attention on lower ranking ministers?

    This is precisely why there shouldn't be any awareness from anyone beyond the PM and possibly one or two extremely close colleagues - the Chief Whip and an utterly trusted deputy, pehaps - that a reshuffle is in the offing.
    You mean like Damien Green? ;) Who knows maybe there isn't a planned reshuffle. Or maybe there is. Or maybe they're thinking about it.

    But if you're thinking about it, or definitely planning one, then how can you quash (uninformed) newspaper speculation without closing down your options? It's like an early election all over again. Damned if you do (try to close down speculation) and damned if you don't.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 1,813
    Charles said:

    daodao said:

    Got to agree with the poster yesterday who was amazed at the suggestion of Grayling being promoted.

    Grayling promoted?! Is the Maybot off her trolley?

    Also, sacking Greening and Leadsom is hardly promoting women.
    Shouldn’t people be judged on ability and performance rather than gender?
    Of course, but sex discrimination is encouraged in politics.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 2,652
    Cabinet reshuffles are often a disaster, for the simple reason that the plans for them aren't shared with anyone in advance. So all the best laid plans are inevitably derailed when at least one individual (nobody having been sounded out in advance for the purposes of avoiding speculation) decides that they don't want to move, or accept the post offered, or will only do A if B happens etc etc.

    In some ways it was a lot easier when everyone knew that a reshuffle happened once a year, every year. No need to worry about damping down the speculation then!
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 15,460
    MattW said:

    Charles said:

    daodao said:

    Got to agree with the poster yesterday who was amazed at the suggestion of Grayling being promoted.

    Grayling promoted?! Is the Maybot off her trolley?

    Also, sacking Greening and Leadsom is hardly promoting women.
    Shouldn’t people be judged on ability and performance rather than gender?
    Of course, but sex discrimination is encouraged in politics.
    Is it a bit like Hollywood, where those who won’t have sex get discriminated against?
  • alex.alex. Posts: 2,652
    Some of the reasons given in the article are more than enough evidence that much of the speculation is simply that, speculation. Greening is being demoted because of a "patronising tone"? Really?

    The reasons for the reshuffle are to promote young, diverse and female talent, but prime among the speculated demotions are,... women (and in one case - Javid - from ethnic minorities).... etc etc
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,267
    Nothing new in May's interview afaics? The BBC is leading with the 'no hunting vote' story which is old news from the autumn.
  • stevefstevef Posts: 608
    I hope she does get rid of Andrea Leadsom who represents all that is appalling about the Tory party. Banish her to the back benches where she can plot and conspire in obscurity. May needs to get whoever is to succeed her in place quickly, and none of the stale Old Gang will do.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 1,813
    edited January 7
    Sean_F said:

    Young's response to the tweet about the kleenex was sick, but undeniably funny. But, I doubt if Theresa May would laugh.

    Witty, certainly, but probably not wise.

    Heartstrings tugging poverty-porn from charities or millionaire celebrities needs to be consistently and heavily satirised ... just like those "adopt me" photos that we used to see of miserable looking cats, dogs, and children. This was probably not the correct time, and Young should have scrubbed his twitter feed in advance to foil the trolls.

    PR fail.

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 15,389
    edited January 7

    If Theresa May isn't going to shake up the more senior posts, there isn't any point to the reshuffle.

    Except, there doesn't seem to be much agitation from junior ranks wanting senior jobs, so much as agitation from backbenchers, thinking they could do a better job than those currently in Government. So put them in junior posts and see if they prove up to it.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 3,457
    On Toby Young - it seemed like a strange appointment. Teresa May's main appeal to me is as the strict no nonsense matron who'll keep the Tory boys in line.
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 4,399
    If Leadsom is sacked and Grayling made deputy then a better bet would be on Leadsom as next PM than on Grayling as next PM.

    Leadsom has proven support amonst Con MPs fom the last Con leader contest.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 1,813
    Sandpit said:

    MattW said:

    Charles said:

    daodao said:

    Got to agree with the poster yesterday who was amazed at the suggestion of Grayling being promoted.

    Grayling promoted?! Is the Maybot off her trolley?

    Also, sacking Greening and Leadsom is hardly promoting women.
    Shouldn’t people be judged on ability and performance rather than gender?
    Of course, but sex discrimination is encouraged in politics.
    Is it a bit like Hollywood, where those who won’t have sex get discriminated against?
    Heh.

    No - it's like a specific exemption to the Equality Act that allows political parties to implement sex discrimination.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 5,279
    May didn't need a whiteboard to figure out who should get the chop - she needed a mirror.

    If we get a new transport sec then that would be a good thing.

    Any reshuffle where there are no changes in the great offices of state is always a bit 'so what?'.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 10,654
    IanB2 said:

    Nothing new in May's interview afaics? The BBC is leading with the 'no hunting vote' story which is old news from the autumn.

    Confirmed re-shuffle tomorrow, put Toby Young on a final warning, dispatched fox hunting vote, defended NHS and generally played a straight bat, unlike England
  • stevefstevef Posts: 608
    The Tories dont have to abandon blood sports altogether: just the cruel and barbaric ones like fox hunting. They do need to get on their horses, pursue and set the dogs on Jeremy Corbyn who is in Mexico at the moment paying homage at the grave of mass killer Leon Trotsky.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 5,279
    Oh, and how come Chloe Smith isn't being tipped for high office?
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 4,399
    Many people only just about know who is PM let alone Chacellor or Foreign Sec. They will not notice a change in cabinet members.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 10,654

    May didn't need a whiteboard to figure out who should get the chop - she needed a mirror.

    If we get a new transport sec then that would be a good thing.

    Any reshuffle where there are no changes in the great offices of state is always a bit 'so what?'.

    If she promotes Hunt and appoints Anne Milton to Health as is rumoured that would be a big headline
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 40,050
    Mr. Rentool, didn't she have a junior ministerial role under Cameron and perform so poorly on Newsnight (in the pre-McAlpine days) that it cut her career off at the knees?
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 4,399
    MattW said:

    Sean_F said:

    Young's response to the tweet about the kleenex was sick, but undeniably funny. But, I doubt if Theresa May would laugh.

    Witty, certainly, but probably not wise.

    Heartstrings tugging poverty-porn from charities or millionaire celebrities needs to be consistently and heavily satirised ... just like those "adopt me" photos that we used to see of miserable looking cats, dogs, and children. This was probably not the correct time, and Young should have scrubbed his twitter feed in advance to foil the trolls.

    PR fail.

    Political correctness lives.
This discussion has been closed.