Death in the channel…again

[Roy Bloom]

Do you think it was a stunt?

It looks like they were asked questions they felt they should have the answer to. If you are in a meeting and someone asks you a question that is not in your responsibility to answer, why would you not answer - We have not prepared data on that question or similar. The fact you look stumped and shuffle papers implies you were asked something you should have known.

Or did know and had been instructed to not divulge it.
And a question posed from a Tory to make the civil service look ridiculous.

 

[Roy Bloom]

With an impending election in the offing, very smart.

Of course, bury bad news, and if it can be blamed on someone else's incompetence, what's not to like.

 

[gant]

Of course, bury bad news, and if it can be blamed on someone else's incompetence, what's not to like.

So civil servants not knowing would put it back in the home offices department according to notchy.
Whichever way you look at it the blame lies with the government, not a good look before an impending election besides opening up a can of worms in the meantime in the publics eye.

 

[Brigadier]

Absolutely not you could not be more wrong if you tried.


Home office is a govt department…..knowing how many asylum seekers get deported and where they is the govts responsibility to know.

blaming civil servants for Tory govt failings is what Daily Mail readers do, because they lack,any ability to think for themselves (Gnat and Bianca being prime candidates)

Quit doubling down.

You're just making yourself look even more silly.

You're wrong, end of.

 

[Roy Bloom]

Quit doubling down.

You're just making yourself look even more silly.

You're wrong, end of.

Not necessarily.
Why would a government Tory MP (the chairman no less) need to ask the question directly of a civil servant?
Wouldn't the question be better directed to the minister concerned?
It looks like a stunt to me.

 

[Brigadier]

Can only assume nobody had ever asked for the figures before or they would have been available.

Civil servants are there to provide, as requested

Is the correct answer; let Notch know, would you

 

[gant]

Not necessarily.
Why would a government Tory MP (the chairman no less) need to ask the question directly of a civil servant?
Wouldn't the question be better directed to the minister concerned?
It looks like a stunt to me.

If it is, whoever engineered it should be expecting the DCM in the post anytime soon.

 

[gant]

Is the correct answer; let Notch know, would you

The only problem with that is what were they expecting questions on, it would be prudent to have some answers rather than do your best take of Laurel and Hardy.

 

[Roy Bloom]

If it is, whoever engineered it should be expecting the DCM in the post anytime soon.

Do you mean tjhe Distinguished Conduct Medal or the Digital Cinematic Media award?
One is deserved, the other less so.

 

[Odds]

The only problem with that is what were they expecting questions on, it would be prudent to have some answers rather than do your best take of Laurel and Hardy.

Time to do away with pre-prepared questions, sez i.
Ask 'em on the spot and make the suckers squirm.

 

[motorbiking]

Or did know and had been instructed to not divulge it.
And a question posed from a Tory to make the civil service look ridiculous.

thats dedication - throw yourself under the bus.

 

[Roy Bloom]

thats dedication - throw yourself under the bus.

And keep your job.
But the question should have been directed at the minister concerned. It's their policy.

 

[motorbiking]

Time to do away with pre-prepared questions, sez i.
Ask 'em on the spot and make the suckers squirm.

I would argue for the reverse.

Provide your questions up front. No need to try to catch people out. You are trying to get to the facts and solve problems.

In my world you exchange arguments in advance, the idea is to avoid having anything sprung in the moment as that is when bad decisions are made.

The MP/minister should be presented with facts and options that are well thought through and prepared by experts. They should never need to be an expert. Otherwise we may as well have an Autocratic Government. At the end of the day democracy is about having the people we choose in power. If Diane Abbott or Angela Rayner are ministers the civil service must support them irrelevant of their knowledge

 

[Roy Bloom]

I would argue for the reverse.

Provide your questions up front. No need to try to catch people out. You are trying to get to the facts and solve problems.

In my world you exchange arguments in advance, the idea is to avoid having anything sprung in the moment as that is when bad decisions are made.

The MP/minister should be presented with facts and options that are well thought through and prepared by experts. They should never need to be an expert. Otherwise we may as well have an Autocratic Government. At the end of the day democracy is about having the people we choose in power. If Diane Abbott or Angela Rayner are ministers the civil service must support them irrelevant of their knowledge

So it should be the relevant ministers being asked the questions. It's their policies that create the results.

 

[denso13]

It's the civil servants job to have that information and find it out if they don't! They're supposed to be keeping the government informed, not the other way round for god sake!

So when the government asked them what the figures are/were over the last 13 years, and they said they didn't know, what did they do about it?

Absolutely nothing by the looks of it. That's the complete asylum policy though, do nothing.