Agree. He's been there too long IMO, I was disappointed when the press got it wrong about him being appointed Tory party Chairman.Reminds of Gilbert & Sullivan's 'HMS Pinafore' where great fun is had from the First Lord of the Admiralty knowing nothing about boats.
If he doesn't have the knowledge to make an informed decision, why is he still in the job?
He was down here in Penzance a few days ago, which called for a reworking of 'Pirates of Penzance'.He might bleat 'a Transport Secretary's job is not a happy one' but I notice he's still trousering the salary.Reminds of Gilbert & Sullivan's 'HMS Pinafore' where great fun is had from the First Lord of the Admiralty knowing nothing about boats.
I'd suspect one of two things happened re Grayling. I’d like to think that he was genuinely unaware of the problems as he assumed (wrongly) that the relevant departments would handle the issue, and he needn’t micro-manage (in which case the failure isn’t directly his fault).
What I suspect may have happened given his general level of incompetence (i.e. about average for this government) is that he was aware of the issue but hoped it would magically sort itself out through the wonders of capitalism, and so he kept quiet.
What actually happened I suspect we will never know exactly, but my money’s on more of option 2 than 1!
So the Transport Secretary has no clue about railways. I thought when an MP was chosen to run as a Secretary of State of a particular department that was because they have skills and experience appropriate to that department so they can make the big decisions and take responsibility for those decisions. Grayling needs to quit as Transport Secretary now before he messes up the DFT anymore!
He was down here in Penzance a few days ago, which called for a reworking of 'Pirates of Penzance'.He might bleat 'a Transport Secretary's job is not a happy one' but I notice he's still trousering the salary.
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".
I think the one you are looking for is ..He was down here in Penzance a few days ago, which called for a reworking of 'Pirates of Penzance'.He might bleat 'a Transport Secretary's job is not a happy one' but I notice he's still trousering the salary.
https://www.thoughtco.com/modern-major-general-lyrics-724020For my military knowledge, though I'm plucky and adventury,
Has only been brought down to the beginning of the century;
But still, in matters vegetable, animal, and mineral,
I am the very model of a modern Major-General.
A lot of people seem to think that Chris Grayling should be like Sir Topham Hat, and know each aspect of the railway
What next - demands that Grayling should resign because the vending machine at Leeds station was out of KitKats?
As much as I hope not, I fear that may be the case, and so due to the position of the government, he keeps his job, commuters get pittance for compensation and GTR/Northern continue to line their pockets . Let’s hope they do change the system one way or another (I won’t dare to mention the ‘n’ word here )Or he suspected it would go wrong (as many did, to varying degrees*), but knew that he could blame Govia and Network Rail as required and simply say he had people to do the job, and he didn't need to be a rail expert.
My local MP has certainly milked it to his benefit, being seen by some as the saviour who forced through the timetable recast and has suggested TfL could save the day by taking over inner London services (as if this was never thought of before, or likely to happen anyway come the next franchise/contract).
If services gradually get back to normal I think people will soon forget just how bad things were, and he can claim credit for having got things back on track (sic) and hope the issues fade away. Summer recess and people going on holiday will no doubt help sweep the problems under the carpet.
* There's also a lot of 'benefit of hindsight' stuff too, which has to be taken into account.
I'd suspect one of two things happened re Grayling. I’d like to think that he was genuinely unaware of the problems as he assumed (wrongly) that the relevant departments would handle the issue, and he needn’t micro-manage (in which case the failure isn’t directly his fault).
What I suspect may have happened given his general level of incompetence (i.e. about average for this government) is that he was aware of the issue but hoped it would magically sort itself out through the wonders of capitalism, and so he kept quiet.
What actually happened I suspect we will never know exactly, but my money’s on more of option 2 than 1!
Very true, the same could be said about recent Home Office scandals. Goodness only knows what else is under the Whitehall metaphorical carpets that we don’t know about!As a manager which is what he effectively is, 'not aware' is not a defence. One of the most important things as a manager is to be aware of what is going on around you. That doesn't just mean taking the everythings OK message that no doubt he was fed, but actually taking the time and effort to know what is actually happening. That doesn't mean you micro manage but you can then intervene at the first sign of trouble. All the warning signs for the timetable recast problems were there if you looked.
d have called a halt, and postponed it until December or even May 2019, whilst getting on people's case to ensure that the issues are resolved.
This is possibly the most pertinant part!Someone with more brains
I suspect that risks were down played by underlings who didn't want to be seen as rocking the boat.As a manager which is what he effectively is, 'not aware' is not a defence. One of the most important things as a manager is to be aware of what is going on around you. That doesn't just mean taking the everythings OK message that no doubt he was fed, but actually taking the time and effort to know what is actually happening. That doesn't mean you micro manage but you can then intervene at the first sign of trouble. All the warning signs for the timetable recast problems were there if you looked. Someone with more brains would have called a halt, and postponed it until December or even May 2019, whilst getting on people's case to ensure that the issues are resolved.
If he doesn't have the knowledge to make an informed decision, why is he still in the job?
Because as soon as Theresa May announced her candidature for Prime Minister there he was by her side, her pet poodle (actually, I rather like poodles so I'll take back that remark). If ever anyone could have been said to have risen way above their station, it is him. He makes Liz Truss and IDS look like geniuses!
I suspect that risks where down played by underlings who didn't want to be seen as rocking the boat.
That doesn't excuse him, the corporate culture comes from the top.
Don't forget Gordon Brown who presided over The Treasury and HMRC for a decade without any accountancy/tax qualifications/experience. What a foul up he made of that!
Yeah, because all the other lot are experts in their field, and never promote idiots beyond their capability. Remind me what Prescott’s specialist expertise was again?Typical tory tactic. Find someone else to blame so they're not blaming you.
Yeah, because all the other lot are experts in their field, and never promote idiots beyond their capability. Remind me what Prescott’s specialist expertise was again?
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 East Riding of Yorkshire. More seriously Prescott previously worked for Cunard and was a member of the National Union of Seaman when he was first elected to the House of Commons - I'm pretty sure ships come under transport.
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.
Because ministers are almost never qualified/experienced in the matters they are responsible for. They are mere figureheads, and always have been. They have professionally qualified/experienced civil servants working with them who are the experts, who stay in their departments regardless of who the minister is and regardless of which party is in power.
The CEO can only go by what he is being told by the people he's appointed, if (as had been the case) he had been told that everything was fine and here is why we think that is the case, why would they then step in. As an example, if the CEO of a large automotive company was a businessman rather than an engineer, I wouldn't be expecting them to challenge their subordinates on every little technical detail. That then leads on to a question about how important it is for executives in certain roles to have technical backgrounds/training, etc. Don't disagree about the staffing changes point though, and of course whilst he isn't responsible (IMO) for the events leading up to the 20th of May, he sure is responsible for dealing with the aftermath (which has been poorly done)
So the Transport Secretary has no clue about railways. I thought when an MP was chosen to run as a Secretary of State of a particular department that was because they have skills and experience appropriate to that department so they can make the big decisions and take responsibility for those decisions. Grayling needs to quit as Transport Secretary now before he messes up the DFT anymore!
Yeah, because all the other lot are experts in their field, and never promote idiots beyond their capability. Remind me what Prescott’s specialist expertise was again?
Yeah, because all the other lot are experts in their field, and never promote idiots beyond their capability. Remind me what Prescott’s specialist expertise was again?
In an earlier thread about the Thameslink new timetable it was clear that there are many causes of the fiasco, including not enough drivers, not enough time for them all to be trained, Network Rail not having finalised the timetable in sufficient time for GTR to have made sure all relevant staff were fully familiar with everything they needed to know. Grayling as Sec. of State might be considered responsible, but in practical terms he wasn't. It's irrelevant and makes absolutely no difference to the real situation to spend time here slagging him off.
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