Looks like the ground is crumbling under Cat Woman – can’t see the ‘vote of confidence’ yet from DC, which suggests she has at least a week left before she joins Dr Fox on the back benches.

I’d shut a book on Theresa May. 😡

It’s rather funny really – she clearly has really poor judgement, and I get the impression Brodie Clark is about to “dish the pain” in an excruciatingly public manner.

I reckon Ken Clarke will be putting a few bob down in the Commons sweepstake…

David Cameron has full confidence in Mrs May, who has not offered to resign as a result of the controversy, the Prime Minister’s official spokesman said earlier.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/unknown-threat-from-relaxed-borders-6258421.html

I give her a week – maybe two.

She has already been shown to have lied over this issue and the suspended officals are fighting back . shes a gonner

http://politicalscrapbook.net/2011/11/theresa-may-immigration-quotes/

In a 2004 exchange which is set to haunt embattled Theresa May, the present home secretary told a Labour minister to resign over an immigration scandal, saying that she was “sick and tired” of ministers blaming other people “when things go wrong”.

The minister in question was Beverley Hughes, and the issue was a scandal over immigrants, erm, being admitted into the UK without background checks! Confronting Huhges on BBC Question Time, May told the minister:

“I do think Beverley should resign as minister on this particular issue and I find it absolutely extraordinary that she’s… blamed officials in her department for this decision to be taken”

The home secretary, who is currently blaming everyone else for a poor grasp on her portfolio, continued:

“I’m sick and tired of government ministers in this Labour government who simply blame other people when things go wrong.”

In a simply uncanny occurence of political deja vu, a number of immigrants were admitted to the UK without background checks in 2004. At the time, Hughes blamed officials in Sheffield for the backlog of applications which led to the blunder. That issue was highlighted by a civil service whistle blower who leaked the waiving of checks.

Beverley Huhges resigned 21 days later.

Top civil servants tend to be a damned sight brighter (and more honest) than the ministers they serve. She won’t survive. Go for the jugular Brodie boy!

i reckon cameron will pull out her stops to save her

loosing coulson and fox can be seen as unfortunate

loosing a 3rd minister is starting to loook like incompetence

all it would take would be a serious bit of civil unrest, say a large anti privatisation of education protest, some police beatings, some rioting and the home secretary is gonna make callmedaves work even harder

I get the impression Brodie Clark is about to “dish the pain” in an excruciatingly public manner.

his early use of the “Shoesmith defence” is classic, look forward to your taxes going to fight a constructive dismissal case

loosing coulson and fox can be seen as unfortunate

loosing a 3rd minister is starting to loook like incompetence

Coulson was never a minister

It’s rather funny really – she clearly has really poor judgement,

can be said about most of the previous administration to be honest

anyway Sadiq Khan will soon be distracting us with the GMB cash for policy scandal 😉

This is all rather reminiscent of the Michael Howard debacle when he was Home Secretary. She’s even using the same semantics about ‘operational matters’

Can’t see it leading to anything as entertaining as this:

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KHMO14KuJk[/video]

Here’s hoping though eh? 😀

wwaswas post above has one point of attack and the fact that she has blamed an official when he was carrying out longstanding policy is another.

Cameron can defend her all she wants – her position is untenable and the longer she struggles the worse for Cameron.

Coulson understood this which is why he quit.

good vid binners, would have been better if it ended with paxman strapping him down and started drilling his teeth repeatedly saying “did you threaten…” in an “is it safe” stylee. ah well.

Coulson understood this which is why he quit.

Coulson had no direct political ambition though, I think May will want to duke it out – she has no real loyalty to Cameron per se.

I have never liked her and I have to question Cameron’s ability to choose who he has working for him (and the country).

highclimber – a part of the problem is Cameron is not free to choose -he is beholden to various groupings and has to placate them with his appointments – he is weak – both innately and as a result of the compromises he has had to make to gain support

highclimber – a part of the problem is Cameron is not free to choose -he is beholden to various groupings and has to placate them with his appointments – he is weak – both innately and as a result of the compromises he has had to make to gain support

unlike Ed who is in no way compromised 😉

I have never liked her

me neither,

anyone who resigns rather than duking it out at that level is obviously going for the compensation. If he was rock solid he would have taken the emails and minutes of meetings to the Parliamentary Committee and be the one left in a job. He’s been advised to go to minimise the sanctions to himself and to claim compensation due to the minister not following appropriate disciplinary procedures

“If he was rock solid he would have taken the emails and minutes of meetings to the Parliamentary Committee and be the one left in a job”

He stopped being rock solid the moment his own minister started slagging him off. Regardless of what he’s done or not done, May made his position untenable.

Oops, looks like this one’s coming back to bite Labour on the Arse…

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/8886486/Labour-dragged-into-border-fiasco-over-dropped-passport-checks.html

Not sure why. Teresa May has been in post for 18 months. She has had plenty of time to make a change if she didn’t agree with the existing policy.

Oops, looks like this one’s coming back to bite Labour on the Arse…

…and then goes on to link an article in the Torycockograph. Desperation. I’m looking forward to the Tories having another week of eating themselves from the inside out. Euro sceptics are currently masturbating themselves into a froth. Cameron is stuck trying to appease them without telling them they’re idiots. And then his home secretary does an enormous shit in her pants and then blames everyone else when the stink becomes apparent. This is political entertainment at its finest. 😆

Does anyone actually believe the minsters are anything but figureheads for the agencies? My admitedly limited experience is they tend to know bugger all about what they are supposed to be in charge of and just leave the directors to it.

big_n_daft – Member

“It’s rather funny really – she clearly has really poor judgement”

can be said about most of the previous administration to be honest

I never thought I would see the day when you would admit that the Tories are no better than New Labour Big n Daft.

And you now seem to have been joined by Zulu-Eleven….. Who would have thought it, eh ?

Specially after all those countless posts, over a considerable length of time, telling us how much better than New Labour the Tories were.

If one is going to link to the ‘graph of course, this would be a more entertaining article:

Mercer also does a big shit in his pants. Lolz.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15718237

Give her a week mibbe 2

wont give her 1 tho.

He can’t sack her though. As this would leave only 2 women in the entire Tory party. And one of those is his wife!

He has somehow belatedly realised that saying ‘calm down dear’ to everyone female and generally being a boorish, condescending, patronising misogynist isn’t exactly playing well with the female electorate. Though his aproach is hardly surprising having spent your formative years playing with boys, in or out of the closet, after lights out 🙄

Asked about his decision to allow staff to relax fingerprint checks at some airports, Mr Clark acknowledged that the home secretary had been against the move.

Brodie Clark: “I did not enlarge, extend or redefine the scope in any way”.

He said she had refused to allow it as part of the pilot, but had made no mention of being against it being done for health and safety reasons at busy times.

The 2007 guidance does not explicit permit the relaxation of fingerprint checks, but Mr Clark said he chose to do it – without asking ministers first – and maintain warnings index checks instead.

So, he asked about it, didn’t get the answer he wanted, and sneaked it in through the back door.

Bang to rights I’m afraid

Reading the live blog’s of the Rob Whiteman evidence, and Brodie Clark has been totally and utterley hung out there.

He said she had refused to allow it as part of the pilot, but had made no mention of being against it being done for health and safety reasons at busy times.

Might try that logic for the next bike purchase.

“Oh Dearest, can I buy a new set of wheels for muddy trails.”

MrsBreathe “No”

“Ah ha, she didn’t mention I couldn’t buy some for dry trails. Result”

Euro sceptics are currently masturbating themselves into a froth. Cameron is stuck trying to appease them without telling them they’re idiots. And then his home secretary does an enormous shit in her pants and then blames everyone else when the stink becomes apparent.

Genuine office LOL then, you bastard

I read it that Brodie Clarke kept the two issues entirely separate:

1 – A trial was put in place at the Home Secretary’s request, and run entirely to her requirements

2 – An entirely separate policy of reducing checks was in place for busy periods.

Any links between the two are of TM’s and the media’s making, no?

From the Whiteman evidence

Whiteman says Clark asked for three measures to be part of pilot – two were agreed (chips and children); the third was fingerprints. This was January. In April the Home Sec said no.

In July, the provisions around fingerprints had been dropped when the pilot launched because ministers did not support them, Whiteman says.

He says there were no further submissions from Clark on this.

It is “completely inconsistent” to do something anyway, albeit under a different policy, if ministers don’t want it, he suggests.

and

He says he also spoke to Jonathan Sedgwick who was chief executive of UKBA before he took over. He says Sedgwick very clear ministers had said fingerprint checking should always take place.

Rob Whiteman says ministers had no knowledge of the “health and safety provisions” that Brodie Clark was using to stop taking finger prints

He says it is clear in his mind ministers were not aware, based on the submissions they received, that finger prints were not always checked; they asked for them to be checked; which is why he feels he was right to justify suspending Clark.

yeah id say clark is stuffed on whitemans evidence

if the H&S regulations did say he could relax checks when busy then why didnt ministers know about these rules?

i also get the impression this is just one of many issues that has the torygraph talkback xenophobes frothing at the mouth

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/nov/14/passport-checks-travellers-private-jets

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/8890918/Home-Office-used-highly-selective-drug-figures-to-make-UKBA-look-good.html

flashy’s rather quiet on all of this.

cant understand why there isnt a damning paper trail one way or the other…

Well Brodie Clark on the Today Programme has made life a lot easier for Tezza this morning.

His hubris when the “retirement offer” got pulled is going to cost him a probably well earned reputation as a good civil servant.

He certainly didnt sound like the publication of relevant minutes was going to bail him out either.

Whitmarsh’s evidence did for him yesterday, as a result today he had to backpedal furiously. The only question now will be the constructive dismissal claim, which won’t be resolved in the short term. However this is very different from Balls/Shoesmith because he wasn’t dismissed.

Should have said Whiteman not Whitmarsh

Ive not followed this closely, but am I right in thinking that everyone is crying out for the home secretary to resign or be sacked because one of her ministers sacked an official for going against a policy put in place?

sancho; its more like uk border control is an absolute farce underfunded, understaffed and facing large cuts

to deflect from the mr bean levels of effectiveness the top civil servant has been sacked and the home secretary is keeping her job claiming she didnt know what the people in her department were up to

Can’t see it leading to anything as entertaining as this:

It was entertaining. Paxman later admitted (possibly for the purposes of humour) that by the tenth time, he’d forgotten what the original question was.