| Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Cabinet secretary has David Cameron ‘by the balls’, says former Tory adviser; Prime minister does nothing without Sir Jeremy Heywood’s permission, claims Dominic Cummings | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Nov 19 2014, 10:11 PM (90 Views) | |
| Boxter | Nov 19 2014, 10:11 PM Post #1 |
Regular Member
  ![]](http://z5.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)
|
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/19/cabinet-secretary-david-cameron-balls-dominic-cummings-jeremy-heywood David Cameron, above, has no political priorities and operates through a system of chaos, according to Dominic Cummings. Photograph: Getty Images The cabinet secretary, Sir Jeremy Heywood, has David Cameron “by the balls” and the prime minister does nothing without Heywood’s permission, according to the former Conservative special adviser Dominic Cummings. Speaking at an event organised by the IPPR thinktank, Cummings said: “Heywood is more important than anyone in the cabinet, apart from Cameron and Osborne and arguably more important than Osborne. He sits right next to the prime minister. He has him completely by the balls and Cameron does not do anything without Heywood’s permission.” Giving a deeply unflattering account of a dysfunctional government machine driven by a short-term media agenda and crisis management, he added: “He is not just a policy adviser to the prime minister” pointing out the new chief operating officer for the civil service will be answerable to Heywood and not to Cameron. Cummings was the former special adviser to former education secretary Michael Gove, and has been scathing about the prime minister before, but not in such revealing terms. He claimed Cameron had no political priorities whatsoever and had always operated through a system of chaos. “It’s the nature of the Cameron team. Quite simply, chaos is all they have ever known. They operate in a bubble in which it is at most 10 days planning or more usually 48 hours or 72 hours. There is no long-term priority. There is no long-term plan. The central people operate in that kind of culture. They don’t think anything can change. They just think that is politics. His most important advisers are Ed Llewellyn and Craig Oliver – both of them are totally and utterly useless. It is not their fault. They are just in the wrong job. The fault lies in Cameron putting them there. “If you have a prime minister who has no sense of priorities and cannot manage his way out of a paper bag, and his two chief advisers who don’t know what they are doing with Craig Oliver running round with a ridiculous grid which is worrying about Twitter and the news cycle for the next three hours, of course it’s going to be a farce.” The Cabinet Office system also does not work properly and does not connect properly with the No 10 machine, he said. “It is not abnormal. It is normal. You might think somewhere there must be a quiet calm centre like in a James Bond move where you open the door and there is where the ninjas are who actually know what they are doing. There are no ninjas. There is no door.” He said that there were no incentives in politics to produce cooperation between government departments, so that during a spending review the departmental strategy is to treat the Treasury as a hostile entity and not to tell the Treasury or Downing Street anything. “The Treasury knows all departments have got money … hidden away form the centre and from ministers, but if you tell the Treasury where it is they will ask for it. It encourages lying and cheating. Why would you ever tell the truth about where the money is? “People are not encouraged to think of this as a collective exercise. There is no collective priority setting. It is particularly bad with Cameron there because there are no priorities with Cameron whatsoever.” He claimed the Treasury did not have the skills needed to cut budgets effectively: “They have never worked in business where you have to cut costs by 35% a year they say: ‘oh my god’ when they have to cut by 3%. |
 |
 
|
| Tigger | Nov 19 2014, 10:42 PM Post #2 |
|
Senior Member
|
I have a small amount of admiration for Cameron, he has one of the most dispiriting jobs in politics, he has to try and present the Tory party as anything but what it really is ie a bunch of self centred self serving tossers who would help you out of your shirt if they thought they could turn a profit out of it. |
|
|
|
| Rich | Nov 19 2014, 11:37 PM Post #3 |
|
Senior Member
|
Are you suggesting that the conservative party alone are unique in the "self serving" department? |
|
|
|
| Tigger | Nov 19 2014, 11:40 PM Post #4 |
|
Senior Member
|
Absolutely Rich!  They were of course the originators of greedy and self serving politics that was virtually free from everyday morals, the others just copied them because the electorate did not punish them for it, possibly until fairly recently. |
|
|
|
| Steve K | Nov 19 2014, 11:53 PM Post #5 |
Once and future cynic
|
Yep that pretty much says it for me Has been the story of British politics for most of my life. A Tory party that really doesn't care about the poor, a Labour Party that creates even more poor, a Liberal party that couldn't organise a social event in a brewery and now the innumerate UKIP that has lots of disconnected policies made up on the fly by its candidates. Back to the OP. Rather seems like hell have no fury like a political adviser scorned. Seems he's decided to twist what everyone that's been anywhere near government knows: no minister in their right mind ignores their permanent secretary, they know what it is actually legal for ministers - even prime ministers - to do. And they have a damn good idea on what is wise and unwise too. Edited by Steve K, Nov 19 2014, 11:57 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Affa | Nov 20 2014, 12:21 AM Post #6 |
|
Senior Member
|
How can it be that a policy advisor to the Government can serve under four different Prime Ministers each having ideologically differing stand points? I've read the wikipedia page on Sir Jeremy and he is very versatile it would seem - even did a stint as an investment banker. There is an answer to the question that fits all the controversies here - Sir J H is representing the 'Establishment', is the agent (or partner) of that unelected ethereal entity that has no body, no authority, and no accountability, that in essence shapes the course all PMs of all colours must heed and obey. The State is the State is the State ......... nothing and nobody is allowed to divert away from where the State leads. It's old hat now, but the Iraq invasion was an example of the State directing the course of events leading up to the Iraq debate and the Parliamentary decision to invade. This is what I have believed ever since. Was it Sir Jeremy taking the lead then as it is alleged he does now? - rhetorical. But for along time now it has been clear to me that being PM is not the top job, certainly not the most powerful position. But it could be if any had the balls to take Whitehall on. Edited by Affa, Nov 20 2014, 12:22 AM.
|
|
|
|
| RJD | Nov 20 2014, 08:09 AM Post #7 |
Prudence and Thrift
|
I think you indicate why it is best to vote for the political Party that offers to do the least. What they attempt to do usually ends up with a massive cock-up at a high cost to Taxpayers. All Labour's £b spent on social engineering has made the situation worse not better. Look at the fortune wasted on IT. A smaller Nanny with limited horizons will do less, waste less and produce fewer disasters. |
|
|
|
| papasmurf | Nov 20 2014, 08:13 AM Post #8 |
|
Senior Member
|
Iain Duncan Smith being a prime example. (Cameron is going to regret not sacking him when the massive cock-ups, cost, and cover ups became obvious.) |
|
|
|
| RJD | Nov 20 2014, 08:18 AM Post #9 |
|
Prudence and Thrift
|
Because in the scheme of things, in the history of political cock-ups in living memory, it does not yet rate. It is a minnow in a pond full of sharks and many believe it to be on the right track, correcting past mistakes. Not only that no Politicians of standing claim they will reverse these reforms. They as a majority, with the vast majority of the voting public, think it is on the right track and very much overdue. Me thinks Mr Smurf you are p155ing in the wind. |
|
|
|
| papasmurf | Nov 20 2014, 08:20 AM Post #10 |
|
Senior Member
|
It more than rates RJD, he has wasted thus far more than the cost of several benefits. |
|
|
|
| AndyK | Nov 20 2014, 08:23 AM Post #11 |
|
Senior Member
|
Did anyone really think we are masters of our own destiny? I predict if UKIP win the next GE, Farage will mysteriously become pro EU. |
|
|
|
| Affa | Nov 20 2014, 08:34 PM Post #12 |
|
Senior Member
|
|
|
|
|
| Tigger | Nov 20 2014, 08:35 PM Post #13 |
|
Senior Member
|
The entire British establishment is now unfit for purpose, it is still living in the 19th century and is far to cosy and chummy and seems hell bent on protecting rank and privilege no matter what the ultimate cost. Sort that out and most problems will fix themselves |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
 Our users say it best: "Zetaboards is the best forum service I have ever used." |
|
| « Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic » |
12:37 AM Jul 14