Grayling: It's not my fault the May recast went wrong, I'm no rail expert

[northwichcat]

Off topic, the finances of the country were going awry before the 2008 crash. Brown's time as Chancellor can be separated into phases, the first half when he was very prudent the second when he started splashing the cash

Between 1979 and 1986 a £10m deficit was seen as normal. Brown delivered a £32m deficit in 2006, Geoffrey Howe delivered a deficit of £10m in 1980, taking in to account inflation that would have been equivalent to £30m in 2006 money. Unlike Geoffrey Howe, Brown had the years he delivered a surplus to help improve his average figure.

 

[krus_aragon]

Reminds of Gilbert & Sullivan's 'HMS Pinafore' where great fun is had from the First Lord of the Admiralty knowing nothing about boats.

...

Another Gilbert and Sullivan song that features how the ability to attain the highest office with no idea of what the position entails is "When I was a Lad".

With thanks to Wikipedia:

When I was a lad I went away
To Cambridge Uni for a nice BA
I studied history then paid my dues
By being a producer for the TV news
By being a producer for the TV news
I stood for election to become MP
And now I am the ruler of the DfT
He stood for election to become MP
And now he is the ruler of the DfT

 

[northwichcat]

He was a ship’s steward. I’m sure that must have helped a lot with, for example with his strategic decisions on Thameslink infrastructure.

The same person can't be expected to be an expert on rail, roads, maritime, aviation and anything else transport related but they do have junior ministers and civil servants to help them with the brief, plus they should acquire some additional knowledge while undertaking the brief. (Although people like Phillip Hammond and Stephen Hammond saw transport roles as a stepping stone to something better so probably didn't care that much about improving their transport knowledge.)

 

[Mikey C]

Between 1979 and 1986 a £10m deficit was seen as normal. Brown delivered a £32m deficit in 2006, Geoffrey Howe delivered a deficit of £10m in 1980, taking in to account inflation that would have been equivalent to £30m in 2006 money. Unlike Geoffrey Howe, Brown had the years he delivered a surplus to help improve his average figure.

The 1980 deficit was during a recession, when you expect the government to be borrowing. The 2006 deficit was during a boom period

 

[Mikey C]

The same person can't be expected to be an expert on rail, roads, maritime, aviation and anything else transport related but they do have junior ministers and civil servants to help them with the brief, plus they should acquire some additional knowledge while undertaking the brief. (Although people like Phillip Hammond and Stephen Hammond saw transport roles as a stepping stone to something better so probably didn't care that much about improving their transport knowledge.)

Just about ALL transport secretaries see the job as a stepping stone. Adonis was perhaps the exception, but then he wasn't an MP

 

[ArchieWoodbine]

Reminds of Gilbert & Sullivan's 'HMS Pinafore' where great fun is had from the First Lord of the Admiralty knowing nothing about boats.

To be honest, one gets the impression that this could also apply to a lot of railway senior management!

"Stick by your desks and ignore the P-Way; and you could be the ruler of the Queen's Railway!"

 

[A0wen]

Between 1979 and 1986 a £10m deficit was seen as normal. Brown delivered a £32m deficit in 2006, Geoffrey Howe delivered a deficit of £10m in 1980, taking in to account inflation that would have been equivalent to £30m in 2006 money. Unlike Geoffrey Howe, Brown had the years he delivered a surplus to help improve his average figure.

A tad misleading that - Brown only ran a surplus up to 2001. It was falling after 1999, so again I maintain most of the boom was due to Ken Clarke, not Brown.

Brown made matters worse post 2001 by running a deficit at the height of an economic boom - which flies in the face of both the monetarist approach and the Keynesian approach to economics. Brown dishonestly claimed he was following the Keynesian approach - yet Keynes never advocated running a deficit at the height of a boom.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...et-ons-philip-hammond-austerity-a8319321.html

 

[farleigh]

Statistically Gordon Brown is one of the best Chancellors the country has had in the last 30 years. The recession (which actually happened after Gordon Brown had become PM and Alistair Darling was Chancellor) was no worse than the 'Black Friday' recession which happened under Norman Lamont when you take inflation in the account. The difference is John Major removed Norman Lamont from the position as a result of the recession and replaced him with Ken Clarke, who did a very good job under the circumstances. Labour lost the 2010 election meaning Darling was replaced by George Osborne, who did a very bad job under the circumstances with the Conservatives spreading misinformation to make it sound like Labour caused such a big **** up that Osborne had an impossible task.

I agree. I'd place him at seventh best.

 

[B&I]

Odd, when the current Tory transport minister is under attack for his squirming, spineless incompetence in running the railways, today, now, at the moment, that certain people on this forum (which is about the railways, not macroeconomic policy) suddenly find Gordon Brown's period as chancellor, which ended 11 years ago, of acute importance

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

At this point in our debate, one is reminded of how the senior civil servants guide their minister, as was so often shown by "Sir Humphrey" who knew that his minister knew naught of the niceties and nuances of the office he held.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Odd, when the current Tory transport minister is under attack for his squirming, spineless incompetence in running the railways, today, now, at the moment, that certain people on this forum (which is about the railways, not macroeconomic policy) suddenly find Gordon Brown's period as chancellor, which ended 11 years ago, of acute importance

No amount of deflection is going to hide that fact that he doesn't want to take responsibility for his Departments actions.

 

[DarloRich]

At this point in our debate, one is reminded of how the senior civil servants guide their minister, as was so often shown by "Sir Humphrey" who knew that his minister knew naught of the niceties and nuances of the office he held.

it is also worth noting that the minster does not need to follow the advice given. They may want to take a "courageous" decision.

 

[northwichcat]

The 1980 deficit was during a recession, when you expect the government to be borrowing. The 2006 deficit was during a boom period

So are you saying the Chancellors between 1979 and 1997 did alright despite the fact we only had two years when a surplus was delivered because most of the time we were in a recession? Who's fault was it that we were in constant recessions then?

 

[DarloRich]

If he doesn't have the knowledge to make an informed decision, why is he still in the job?

because he still has use as shield to absorb and deflect criticism that would otherwise land on the PM. Once he isnt doing that job he will be removed.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

it is also worth noting that the minster does not need to follow the advice given. They may want to take a "courageous" decision.

Indeed, was that not the case that having decided to do exactly that, it took a step into chaos, from which "Sir Humphrey" had to come to the rescue..

 

[northwichcat]

Odd, when the current Tory transport minister is under attack for his squirming, spineless incompetence in running the railways, today, now, at the moment, that certain people on this forum (which is about the railways, not macroeconomic policy) suddenly find Gordon Brown's period as chancellor, which ended 11 years ago, of acute importance

It's also a forum where the early Blair/Brown years are commonly criticised for how little was spent on the railways and now some are suggesting Labour shouldn't have had a change in policy and started spending more. I'm guessing those people are unhappy with London Midland getting brand new Turbostars and Desiros when they could have kept their old trains going and saved the taxpayer some money.

 

[northwichcat]

it is also worth noting that the minster does not need to follow the advice given. They may want to take a "courageous" decision.

Indeed. We know that his predecessor ignored the advice of a civil servant in mandating that the Northern franchise should replace all the Pacer trains.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Indeed. We know that his predecessor ignored the advice of a civil servant in mandating that the Northern franchise should replace all the Pacer trains.

In the context of a forthcoming General Election they were not guaranteed to win and needed Northern Tory seats.

 

[northwichcat]

I'm yet to be convinced Jo Johnson knows his brief as Rail Minister (unlike his predecessor Paul Maynard, who did).

Maynard understood accessibility requirements for public transport for obvious reasons and it was rumoured he was moved because of how extensive his proposals for improving accessibility at stations were (which the government didn't want to pay for.) I expect Maynard will lose his seat at the next election, not because of what he's done but because of the Conservatives in Westminster overruling the local council on fracking on the Fylde Coast because 'what the public wantedwasn't isn't in the country's best interests.' (Funny how that reasoning doesn't apply to Brexit. )

 

[edwin_m]

...


With thanks to Wikipedia:

When I was a lad I went away
To Cambridge Uni for a nice BA
I studied history then paid my dues
By being a producer for the TV news
By being a producer for the TV news
I stood for election to become MP
And now I am the ruler of the DfT
He stood for election to become MP
And now he is the ruler of the DfT

I always voted for my party's call
and I never thought of thinking for my self at all.
I thought so little, they rewarded me
by making me the ruler of the DfT
He thought so little etc

As requested by Paul S...

 

[WelshBluebird]

Of course, a minister doesn't have to be an expert in the area they cover. But surely they should have some knowledge of it? And they are absolutely responsible for what happens in their own department. For Grayling to claim he isn't, well, what is he responsible for then?

A tad misleading that - Brown only ran a surplus up to 2001. It was falling after 1999, so again I maintain most of the boom was due to Ken Clarke, not Brown.

Brown made matters worse post 2001 by running a deficit at the height of an economic boom - which flies in the face of both the monetarist approach and the Keynesian approach to economics. Brown dishonestly claimed he was following the Keynesian approach - yet Keynes never advocated running a deficit at the height of a boom.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...et-ons-philip-hammond-austerity-a8319321.html

Of course, the Tories actually supported Labours spending during this time and in 2007 promised to match it. Indeed a nice quote from George Osborne which hasn't exactly aged well - "under a Conservative government, there will be real increases in spending on public services, year after year. The charge from our opponents that we will cut services becomes transparently false."

 

[northwichcat]

Of course, the Tories actually supported Labours spending during this time and in 2007 promised to match it. Indeed a nice quote from George Osborne which hasn't exactly aged well - "under a Conservative government, there will be real increases in spending on public services, year after year. The charge from our opponents that we will cut services becomes transparently false."

Osborne also guaranteed university tuition fees will be scrapped - funny how people forget the person actually responsible for increasing them promised that but remember how a party which promised to scrap them didn't prevent their coalition partners going through with their plan (to increase them.)

 

[WelshBluebird]

Osborne also guaranteed university tuition fees will be scrapped - funny how people forget the person actually responsible for increasing them promised that but remember how a party which promised to scrap them didn't prevent their coalition partners going through with their plan.

Of course, just so I am being fair, people also tend to forget that Labour were the ones who introduced both tuition fees and then "top up fees" (as they were called back then!).
However this is very much off topic now!

 

[Malcolmffc]

He does have a point though, I wouldn't expect (nor particularly want) the Government minister to be individually involved in every decision made by the department - their job is to make the major decisions (HS2, Heathrow Expansion, electrification or lack thereof) across their entire remit but otherwise to appoint the right people to the right job and to set out strategy and vision for the department. Should the transport secretary be making decisions about the Thameslink Programme on a large scale, yes. Should they be go/no-going timetables, definitely not.

You wouldn't expect the CEO of most companies to be performing important, technical tasks such as setting timetables, but you would expect them to be outlining what they want from a project - why should the DfT be any different?

Yes. Grayling’s failure here was that the Industry Readiness committee he setup to make the recommendation on whether the TT change should go ahead clearly made the wrong decision. This implies that either the people appointed to the committee are not up to the job, or the committee is setup in a way that does not allow for correct decision making, eg perverse incentives from DfT pressure to deliver Thameslink on time.

 

[Mollman]

If he knows nothing about railways then why is he so adamant that bi-modes are the future and that extra through platforms at Man Picc are not needed because of 'Digital' signalling despite industry experts saying the opposite?

 

[northwichcat]

This implies that either the people appointed to the committee are not up to the job, or the committee is setup in a way that does not allow for correct decision making, eg perverse incentives from DfT pressure to deliver Thameslink on time.

It's not just Thameslink though. There were more cancellations and delays due to Northern's and TPE's bodged timetable following Network Rail saying they wouldn't deliver the electrification by the deadlines Network Rail had set themselves. Plus there's the 769 issue - Porterbrook promised them in service by May 2018 and they are a DfT funded solution to Network Rail falling behind with wiring schedules.

 

[Senex]

If he knows nothing about railways then why is he so adamant that bi-modes are the future and that extra through platforms at Man Picc are not needed because of 'Digital' signalling despite industry experts saying the opposite?

Because he's a party hack — you don't need to know about anything to have a very strong opinion about it!

 

[Mikey C]

If he knows nothing about railways then why is he so adamant that bi-modes are the future and that extra through platforms at Man Picc are not needed because of 'Digital' signalling despite industry experts saying the opposite?

Advice from the DfT I assume.

 

[al78]

you don't need to know about anything to have a very strong opinion about it!

As forums across the internet will illustrate.

 

[hwl]

If he knows nothing about railways then why is he so adamant that bi-modes are the future and that extra through platforms at Man Picc are not needed because of 'Digital' signalling despite industry experts saying the opposite?

Because he know DfT don't have the budget for electrification! Hence Bi-modes as the solution because of the lower up front cost. Same hope with Digital Signalling to kick the can down the road for a while on things like grade separation... by which time everyone involved will have retired