7mins 50s in
Reminded me of "The think of it"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01k9ptr/Newsnight_26_06_2012/
Nice link as I missed that last night. Well done Paxo, he correctly gave CS a complete grilling there. Her wounded, then aggressive posturing was absurd.....and so "Westminster Village! " Compelling, uncomfortable and ultimately disturbing to watch these people in action. And they run our country?
That is worth watching.
Good link, well worth 8 mins of anyone's time.
Thanks.
Up there with Michael Howard!
Thanks for that.
I would also add extremely annoying 👿Compelling, uncomfortable and ultimately disturbing to watch these people in action
Class!
I'd love to see the footage of Malcom Tucker before and after that interview.
And Paxo's final question........!!!!
Perhaps one BBC high flyer who is worth his salary...ok, that's taking things too far. But great to watch him on a roll with a hapless and helpless politician/treasury official spouting BS. The body language experts would have a field day with the eye movements, the water crutch and the attempts to fight out of a corner. Almost political comedy.
She took one for Osborne there. Was never going to be pretty.
The sad thing is that she didn't have to get all bogged down in when she heard, or where the money was coming from. So what if she only heard the final decision today?
Video not entirely SFW due to sweariness...
A future training aid for image consultants. How not to appear on TV.
Youtube link, if it makes it easier to view for some. Interview starts at 6:17 on this link
Tommy Squeaker at 10:45
the anti-toff, pro-life go to tory with a chip on her shoulder has been sounding off about it....
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18608133 ]George Osborne 'a coward' for making Chloe Smith defend fuel U-turn[/url]
new series of the Thick Of It Soon, i hope iannucci gets a reference to this in!
lol at the background image of georgy grinning through the whole interview!
[url= http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/37879/chloe_and_cam.html ]Here's a break down of how she got her job in the Treasury[/url]
LOL @ omnishambles
this is nice too
Paxo in full flow is always good value, whoever the victim!!
😆
Wow she took that beating pretty well, Paxmans ego is getting out of control though.
Doing a number on Howard was great that one was a bit like Gripper Stebson getting dinner money out of the ginger kid (apologies to ginger kids) he seems to have lost all subtlety.
I really must watch this - I vaguely knew Chloe Smith when I went to university (we weren't at the same university, but we had a mutual acquaintance and one weekend she ended up sleeping on my floor). I think I'm going to enjoy watching her get a grilling.
Hmmm... On the one hand I feel quite sorry for her in that she was rolled out by the cowardly Gidiot to face the press in his place when she was so obviously out of her depth.
On the other hand I feel quite angry that an incompetent shower like her has any degree of control over my life.
Wow she took that beating pretty well, Paxmans ego is getting out of control though.
I agree.
Still not sure where the anger is here - assuming it's not all some fantastical ruse to confuse, make the assumption that they've identified an excess in a few budgets and decided to postpone the increase for a while to help out - how is that a bad thing? It doesn't mean there's any great shift in plan or that the world is falling apart. I don't see why it's a sign of incompetence, and I don't see the relevance of the point at which the person was told of it. I can quite easily see this being mooted at a table some months ago as a possibility and then one morning someone being given the go-ahead to announce it as the numbers have been checked out.
But don't let that get in the way of a good anti-tory bashing.
As coffeeking; Labour were apparently asking for the fuel price raise to be withdrawn, (despite their refusal to do the same when in power), then that fatuous oaf Balls sneering because the government took notice of concerns and did as asked. Listening and acting sounds like democracy to me.
I dont feel sorry for any politician that goes up in front of Paxo, or the team from Radio 4's today programme for example.
Its well known they are robust interviewers, its well known they are dogmatic in their approach and its well known they pursue straight answers with BS detectors on stun.
The politicians should do like the interviewers seem to have done and know their stuff and be properly prepared.
The end.
The politicians should do like the interviewers seem to have done and know their stuff and be properly prepared.
One assumes they did, though the answers were selective it doesn't mean they don't know the answers. If you asked about how a business does it's business they'd probably not tell you the ins and outs of their board room either, especially when it doesn't make any difference to the outcome.
Why cant Paxman be so belligerent with call me Dave or Gideon?
Still not sure where the anger is here - assuming it's not all some fantastical ruse to confuse, make the assumption that they've identified an excess in a few budgets and decided to postpone the increase for a while to help out - how is that a bad thing? It doesn't mean there's any great shift in plan or that the world is falling apart. I don't see why it's a sign of incompetence, and I don't see the relevance of the point at which the person was told of it. I can quite easily see this being mooted at a table some months ago as a possibility and then one morning someone being given the go-ahead to announce it as the numbers have been checked out.
But don't let that get in the way of a good anti-tory bashing.
I don't think it's particularly anti-Tory, for me anyway it's the comical trying to pretend that they're all (of any party) in the loop when they aren't.
The poor girl was thrown to the lions and showed herself either ill-prepared or incapable to deal a heavy hitter like Paxman. It does show the competence required of those politicians that can talk around him. Osborne not man enough to defend his policy U turn himself
Honestly I thought she did very well- I'm assuming, here, that she was given a list of things she could and couldn't say. And if that's right, well, she stayed on course despite taking an absolute kicking. Failure would have been getting angry, or giving paxman what he wanted when she wasn't supposed to, in those terms...
Particularily liked the bit where Paxman says "When did you change your mind", and she just says "Go on" rather than walk into the trap. Well played.
Shouldn't Ed Balls have been on as well? By all accounts it was HIS policy after all!
Why cant Paxman be so belligerent with call me Dave or Gideon?
Because he's a bully, plain and simple.
He's passed his sell by date...i'm sick of his pointless point scoring, he's viewed as someone how brings the politicians to account, but he's becoming part of the reason the politicians are all cynical careerists'.
paxman is what he is, every politician knows it
she knew what she was getting into and gideon knew too, which is why he was at a party (although he claimed he was at the HOP)
Cant feel any sympathy for her, a fresh young face, perhaps, but just as much a career politicians as the rest of them,she took one for the team, handled it as best she could and CMD/gideon owes her a favour now. Another boost up the greasy pole for ms smith.
Because he's a bully, plain and simple.He's passed his sell by date...i'm sick of his pointless point scoring, he's viewed as someone how brings the politicians to account, but he's becoming part of the reason the politicians are all cynical careerists'.
Inclined to agree, childish snipes while people are talking or just before the end of the interview. All a bit pathetic.
The poor girl was thrown to the lions and showed herself either ill-prepared or incapable to deal a heavy hitter like Paxman. It does show the competence required of those politicians that can talk around him. Osborne not man enough to defend his policy U turn himself
I think she was well prepared. She didn't have all of the answers (or did but didn't want to admit them) but she held her own and never came across as flustered by his childish MO. She deflected the questions quite well. If she'd answered with "no, I only found out this morning for definite" it would be used against her despite being a perfectly reasonable answer.
Lodious, well put.
you see thats what she wants you to think- the poor girl (and therfore the government) was the victim of bullying by the evil paxo
why else did they put up such a lightweight?
rather than the truth- caught out lying and unable to defend another spineless u-turn after a another pr balls up and being wrongfooted by balls (ed) the entire thing another legacy of the omnishables budget
Of course it was all about "families and businesses". That's identikit spiel very similar to the sort spouted by Harmarrhoid on Question Time when Labour were about to be shafted in 2010. They've suddenly "found" money at a time when they're borrowing unexpectedly spikes? Morons.
That said, Paxo was being a colossal bully. I'd far rather see him roast Cameron or Osborne than some ill briefed political robot at the very start of her career.
I agree that Paxo is half way up his own whatsit a lot of the time, but on the whole I can forgive him. Why should it be tolerated for politicians who are serving us to be allowed to lie or mislead. If it takes people like him and Humphries to call them to account then I can tolerate their egos getting in the way at times. Politicians should remember that they are civil not self servants.
Yup.
Everyone whines on about the ministers but as soon as Paxo grills a junior he's the bad boy.
She signed up for it, without questioning like Paxman's we'd find out even less about this shower.
.......than some ill briefed political robot at the very start of her career
Having had a quick look at her 'career' in Wiki I find it astonishing that someone can go from reading English literature, to being a management consultant with a rather large firm, to being appointed a Treasury Minister, in such a staggeringly short space of time, with next to bugger all experience or training for the job in hand.
Is it any wonder things are in such a mess 👿
that interview served no real purpose whatsoever.
waste of airtime really.
just a bit of political new miss fancypants exposure and can-carrying.
definitely a Westminster Village ponce-around and nothing to do with 'homes and businesses'
I find it astonishing that someone can go from reading English literature, to being a management consultant with a rather large firm
i found it amasing you could have a degree in English literature and then go straight into a management consultant role tbh never mind the rest
I'd far rather see him roast Cameron or Osborne than some ill briefed political robot at the very start of her career.
Welcome to 2012 politics, this is how it is right now. There is no easy warm up event. Get with the programme.
Woody....nail and head.
Traditionally politics was a second career, generally speaking people did something constructive with their lives before deciding to stand for Parliament.
Now its seen as a career in itself and the PPE degree from top Universities, then working as a researcher for a party, then working as an assistant to an MP, then standing for election yourself can happen in worrying short time and with the successful candidate reaching Westminster having known nothing but education and the bubble of party politics.
I'd be in favour of a minimum age to stand for election to Parliament.
She was woefully unprepared and he was all over her like a lion on a wounded baby gazelle. That said, I have no idea why politicians couldn't just say:
"We were challenged on this so we looked at the numbers again and realised that we had the leeway to cut the duty so, in response to public requests, we're cutting it"
Which is basically what happened. But for some reason nobody can say "Hey we're doing what the public want". Either stick to your guns to reduce the debt or tell the truth. Don't try both.
On the subject of Chloe Smith; I agree, I'd rather have someone with experience of life than someone trying to climb the greasy pole of politics more or less directly from Uni (given my guess is she had 4 years between leaving and being selected as a candidate).
It was more Peter O'hanraha-hanrahan than The Thick Of It.
[url=
[i]
i found it amasing you could have a degree in English literature and then go straight into a management consultant role tbh never mind the rest [/i]
it's as good a background for management consultancy as any other
it's as good a background for management consultancy as any other
What, equivalent to say, a background in management of numerous small/medium businesses ? Really ?
I reckon Paxman was well within his rights to have a go at her. He was asking her some straight forward questions which she was reusing to answer. They were a matter of public interest and she witheld that information. She needs to be answerable to the public and if she tries to avoid that responsibility then she needs to be taken to task about it.
[i]What, equivalent to say, a background in management of numerous small/medium businesses ? Really ? [/i]
Ah, I see you're approaching this from a 'management consultancy is actually useful and is not just a monkey in a suit telling people to cut costs and increase profits' standpoint.
My experience of management consultants is they tell the board what they wanted to hear or if it;s not what they wanted to hear what they'd already been told by others but didn't believe because they're not highly paid management consultants.
I've had one too many meetings with consultants who say idiotic things like "all businesses are the same so I'm going to use an analogy that everyone understands, like fruit and veg selling". All well and good but the only person in the room who didn't understand what we did WAS the consultant so the analogy just confused the shit out of everyone.
Seem to be a lot of "consultants" these days, many of whom lack any experience and knowledge in any field whatsoever, or any applicable education. I feel sorry for real consultants who actually know their onions...
In defence of the best English Literature degrees (ahem), it does teach you [i]how[/i] to think (critically, analytically) and how to make an argument for or against something.
it does teach you how to think (critically, analytically) and how to make an argument for or against something
This is of course assuming that you have an idea about the subject you are talking about which in my experience most "consultants" don't and seeming fewer MPs do.
[i]In defence of the best English Literature degrees (ahem), it does teach you how to think (critically, analytically) and how to make an argument for or against something. [/i]
yep a you can go along way in this country talking crap, as long express yourself well.
She deflected the questions quite well
Is this what we want, then? - politicians that can deflect the questions? How about politicians that tell the truth?
She is a keen cyclist, well according to wiki anyway, so it must be true 😉
Having had a quick look at her 'career' in Wiki I find it astonishing that someone can go from reading English literature, to being a management consultant with a rather large firm, to being appointed a Treasury Minister, in such a staggeringly short space of time, with next to bugger all experience or training for the job in hand.
+1 from me too!
I've got quite a few friends who've studied an arts degree who've gone on the join the Civil Service in one of the central departments and promoted quickly, well paid, great expenses etc (periods abroad for a few months all expenses paid when their houses/flats at home are rented out paying the mortgage).
This would all be find if it seemed like they were earning their money but i don't think they are.
All of the complex work is carried out by other people, and then arts graduates completely fail to grasp the technicalities or even the GCSE level statistics behind many of the issues they are trying to manage.... which is why you end up with this sort of thing happening
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/bike-blog/2012/may/25/cycling-governed-dimwits
How the hell can they make any effective decisions about anything!?
She deflected the questions quite well
If she had done this well we woul dnot have noticed that she [s]failed to answeer the qwquestion that was asked of her [/s] deflected
TBH, having seen the footage and read the context (the u-turn on fuel duty), her performance on NN and ill-preparedness speaks volumes about the Tories and Cameron and Osborne in particular.
They haven't got a strategy and when the sh!t hits the fan, they'll duck the fallout and send in the junior ranks to take the flak.
Losers