GRENFEL = a civil service disaster. We already dealt with this months ago. They hired a moron to grant permits to material he KNEW was a disaster waiting to happen. HE KNEW.

 

POST OFFICE SCANDAL - again - an arms length civil service type body - the Post Office ran a malign regime and covered up its evil policies and failures. Not in any way subject to Ministerial oversight.

 

BLOOD SCANDAL - do you think any government politician connived at buying infected blood products or even had a clue where the blood products were being obtained from? Ministers don't deal with that level of detail and have no qualifications to make such decisions. They rely on civil service procurement.

 

 

EDIT:

 

AI Overview

 

Brian Martin, a senior civil servant, was responsible for building regulations and fire safety guidance at the time of the Grenfell Tower fire. He was the head of technical policy for building regulations. The inquiry found that he could have potentially prevented the fire on several occasions by clarifying guidance about the use of combustible cladding. He admitted to not realizing the severity of the risk and forgetting to issue a clarification about the use of aluminum composite material (ACM) cladding on high-rise buildings.

 

 

• Inside Housing - News - Government official ‘forgot’ to issue clarification that Grenfell-style cladding was banned
  23 Mar 2022
   
  Inside Housing
   
  
   
   
  
• Grenfell Tower: Official admits he could have prevented fire
  30 Mar 2022 — A civil servant has admitted he could have potentially prevented the Grenfell Tower fire on a number of occasions. Bria...
  
  BBC
   
  
  

Cummings talked about how to reform the Civil Service as if he were Sir Humphries in 'Yes, Prime Minister'. That guy in the Grenfell saga is not typical of the caliber Cummings was talking about and he already admitted that it was a mistake. Much more than Cummings ever admitted to anything wrong he has done for brexit.

You miss the point entirely. Cummings is a managerial expert. When given a task, he gets it done. It is not about whether BREXIT was right or wrong. It is not about whether in the end Boris or Corbyn were the best PM, it IS ABOUT whether Cummings gets things done and whether we might in our morass of inept Britain catastrophes, LISTEN to someone who KNOWS how to get the job done, when he lists a whole swathe of failing management systems.

 

Politicians of ALL parties have watched civil service fk up their plans for more than a generation. It NEEDS RADICAL reform.

 

Why do you think ordinary people are always saying - 'It makes no difference who you vote for, it is always the same?'

 

Those parties are not the same - not at all - but the outcome is always expensive, useless and not what the people voted for. Not all countries are like that.

 

The common cancerous factor is Civil Service inertia, ineptitude and disastrous obstruction.

Cummings talked about how to reform the Civil Service as if he were Sir Humphries in 'Yes, Prime Minister'. That guy in the Grenfell saga is not typical of the caliber Cummings was talking about and he already admitted that it was a mistake. Much more than Cummings ever admitted to anything wrong he has done for brexit.

 

Of course Brian Martin is typical. Why else are so many major projects a disaster?

 

READ THIS:

 

https://chatgpt.com/share/689c6341-fc7c-8001-967d-6d7439892f6f

You miss the point entirely. Cummings is a managerial expert.

You and I have got some proven managerial skills over our 50 year working life but Cummings? What managerial skills has he got? He's got a degree in History! He's good with languages too, I give you that but would you trust him to manage your savings?

His education and career past has not exactly prepared him to be in charge of 500 billion quid spending a year.

I listed the managerial accomplishments he has earlier in the thread. They are far greater and more substantial than any i have had to deal with, and i dare say the same is true of your career.

 

Did you run and win a campaign for a national referendum which resulted in all the pundits choking with shock?

 

Did you run and win a campaign for a candidate in a general election that won by eighty seats?

 

Did you perhaps persuade a mop headed scarecrow to let Kate Bingham run the vaccine programme rather than letting Hancock and the Dept Health (civil service);sabotage it?

 

This is the planet i am on right now. Which one are you on?

 

Right now image.

 

Edited August 13, 2025Aug 13 by Tony1951

Did you run and win a campaign for a national referendum which resulted in all the pundits choking with shock?

 

Did you run and win a campaign for a candidate in a general election that won by eighty seats?

 

Did you perhaps persuade a mop headed scarecrow to let Kate Bingham run the vaccine programme rather than letting Hancock and the Dept Health (civil service);sabotage it?

so he's got a good track record on political wins in the 2016-2021 era.

His notable claim to fame was the 3 word slogan 'take back control'.

That proves is he's a good political hack.

That does not qualify him for the role of reforming the Civil Service or government machine though. He may have impressed a few but not me.

The kind of things he said 'No one is fired for failure' proved that he should have studied PPE instead of ancient and modern history when he was at Oxford. That would have taught him at least how government and the civil service work.

The civil service is notorious - absolutely NOTORIOUS for moving abject failures sideways and even promoting them.

 

The key takeaway from the video if you had really watched it and taken it in is not that Cummings wants to run everything himself, but that from deep experience of working with the civil service in the cabinet office at a time of grave national crisis, he wants to see change. The following are some of his issues:

 

Accountability for failure and promotion due to proven track record of success rather than time serving.

 

A MUCH wider pool of candidates need to be considered - especially people who have experience of STEM subjects such as data management.

 

It isn't just him saying some of these things. All Party Select Committees have repeatedly brought up similar complaints about the civil service. They have repeatedly complained that civil servants provide incomplete or overly defensive evidence, avoiding responsibility for mistakes.

 

I refer you back to the earlier post and pasting from AI sources:

 

https://chatgpt.com/share/689c6341-fc7c-8001-967d-6d7439892f6f

 

In the UK nothing changes when government's fall and new parties take over. The country fails more and more and has done over several decades. Infra structure projects taking much longer than our near neighbour countries and massive waste in procurement are just some of the issues which are down to them.

 

Remember - the civil service is arm of government which actions and over sees policy implementation.

Edited August 13, 2025Aug 13 by Tony1951

The civil service is notorious - absolutely NOTORIOUS for moving abject failures sideways and even promoting them.

 

The key takeaway from the video if you had really watched it and taken it in is not that Cummings wants to run everything himself, but that from deep experience of working with the civil service in the cabinet office at a time of grave national crisis, he wants to see change. The following are some of his issues:

 

Accountability for failure and promotion due to proven track record of success rather than time serving.

 

A MUCH wider pool of candidates need to be considered - especially people who have experience of STEM subjects such as data management.

 

It isn't just him saying some of these things. All Party Select Committees have repeatedly brought up similar complaints about the civil service. They have repeatedly complained that civil servants provide incomplete or overly defensive evidence, avoiding responsibility for mistakes.

 

I refer you back to the earlier post and pasting from AI sources:

 

https://chatgpt.com/share/689c6341-fc7c-8001-967d-6d7439892f6f

 

This is nothing changes and the country fails more and more and has done over several decades. Infra structure projects taking much longer than our near neighbour countries and massive waste in procurement are just some of the issues which are down to them.

 

Remember - the civil service is arm of government which actions and over sees policy implementation.

So those failures* have absolutelynothing to do with half baked project objectives and milestones, changes in political leaderships, public finance and regulatory obstacles then?

 

* such as Osborne's Northern Powerhouse, HS2, Priti Patel's Rwanda scheme etc

Edited August 13, 2025Aug 13 by Woosh

Human Rights Act Nonsense.

 

This man belongs in a cage and so does the lunatic Southport Murderer.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz95kggw7nxo

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckge2qdr88eo

 

Both of these have been able to do serious harm to prison officers because they are allowed to wander about looking for opportunities to harm other people. They are clearly devoted to doing so.

 

Abedi in earlier reports was alleged to have thrown hot oil over a prison officer and seriously stabbing others.

 

He also received an additional 3 year sentence for a previous serious attack on prison officers.

 

The Southport killer threw boiling water over a guard. If they were caged and fed only cold food through a slot, they could not hurt anyone else.

So those failures* have absolutelynothing to do with half baked project objectives and milestones, changes in political leaderships, public finance and regulatory obstacles then?

 

* such as Osborne's Northern Powerhouse, HS2, Priti Patel's Rwanda scheme etc

 

Skip the first three minutes and watch it.

 

Skip the first three minutes and watch it.

 

I have no knowledge of the European history of the 1840s nor the deep state, TBH.

Cummings cited Klemens von Metternich who was of course one of the most important politicians of the period, it will take some time to make sense of the context.

Still, I wonder where did I see people who wear suits and baseball caps like Cummings in a public meeting before?

I have no knowledge of the European history of the 1840s nor the deep state, TBH.

Cummings cited Klemens von Metternich who was of course one of the most important politicians of the period, it will take some time to make sense of the context.

Still, I wonder where did I see people who wear suits and baseball caps like Cummings in a public meeting before?

 

Are you suggesting he is like Musk?

A little bit. I think he is or would like to be more like Steve Bannon.

So 23 hours to travel 581 miles is average *25mph*!

Pathetic and unsafe, pulled over. Did they get arrested for obstruction?

"20% to zero gave another 8 miles", fake.

"AA diesel van followed with charger in case they broke down", is that "broke down in tears"?

Car costs £69,910, wow, small change, eh Tony?

So 23 hours to travel 581 miles is average *25mph*!

Pathetic and unsafe, pulled over. Did they get arrested for obstruction?

"20% to zero gave another 8 miles", fake.

"AA diesel van followed with charger in case they broke down", is that "broke down in tears"?

Car costs £69,910, wow, small change, eh Tony?

 

It's just a silly test for marketing.

The important point is EV tech is maturing fast because the car market is ready for the switch over to EVs in the next 2-3 years.

Recently, if you watch tv ads for EVs, all the new EVs are equipped with long range, fast charging capable batteries. CATL which has about 50% of Chinese ev battery market, announced that their aluminium batteries are 90% cheaper to make than current ev LFP which is about 25% the cost of the whole car. That wiĺl reduce the battery cost to about 5%-10% of the whole car. Low EV prices are here to stay. Critics of evs tend to make the point about batteries are expensive to replace or repair. That will have to be addressed next.

Skip the first three minutes and watch it.

OK. I watched a few interviews of your guy, Cummings, and also refreshed my history lessons on the 1840s and the 1848 revolution. Cummings fancies himself a new architect of democracy with a f... you attitude to the establishment. He is already so myopic that he cannot see beyond his own echo chamber and his history course. Just another has been activist albeit one of the best known, famous but without charm or charisma, so no opening for him as a politician.

Youtube influencer seems to be the obvious career path for him. Even then, compare him with other hasbeens like Alistair Campbell and Rory Stewart. You'll see what I mean.

It's just a silly test for marketing.

The important point is EV tech is maturing fast because the car market is ready for the switch over to EVs in the next 2-3 years.

Recently, if you watch tv ads for EVs, all the new EVs are equipped with long range, fast charging capable batteries. CATL which has about 50% of Chinese ev battery market, announced that their aluminium batteries are 90% cheaper to make than current ev LFP which is about 25% the cost of the whole car. That wiĺl reduce the battery cost to about 5%-10% of the whole car. Low EV prices are here to stay. Critics of evs tend to make the point about batteries are expensive to replace or repair. That will have to be addressed next.

 

Not sure if you intended to put this post here, because I didn't notice the post you were responding to, but -

 

I'd be interested in how aluminium batteries compare with lithium as regards gravimetric energy density and volumetric energy density. I'm no expert on this by any means, but I have experimented with aluminium salt batteries and the voltage obtainable is low - about 2v, which means the cells have an overall low energy density.

 

The key issue for aluminium batteries is the electrolyte and the cathode materials used, how stable they are, whether the cathodes expand and contract in use, and also how toxic the materials are.

 

This video deals with some of the issues and it is quite current and presented by a person who is obviously a chemist. His conclusion is that the new developments he mentions in alu battery technology would maybe have an impact in the energy storage market, but not vehicles.

 

OK. I watched a few interviews of your guy, Cummings, and also refreshed my history lessons on the 1840s and the 1848 revolution. Cummings fancies himself a new architect of democracy with a f... you attitude to the establishment. He is already so myopic that he cannot see beyond his own echo chamber and his history course. Just another has been activist albeit one of the best known, famous but without charm or charisma, so no opening for him as a politician.

Youtube influencer seems to be the obvious career path for him. Even then, compare him with other hasbeens like Alistair Campbell and Rory Stewart. You'll see what I mean.

 

He isn't 'my guy Cummings'. I introduced the discussion of his views by saying he was a bit of a weirdo, but that he has something to say about the way the country is actually run (the machine behind the facade of our 'democracy') which is worth thinking about.

 

To my mind - in a country where the politicians run about constantly telling us that 'Parliament is Supreme' in all things and that no parliament can bind a future one, the continual spectacle of PMs and ministers being over-ruled by courts - even worse - foreign courts in the face of the will of the British Electorate and Parliament, turns us into a non-country and something of a vassal state, beholden to people we never chose or elected.

 

That's it. Cummings has worked inside administrations for years and has seen the deliberate frustration of policy and the inept, self-serving and seemingly immovable bureaucracy which facilitates this.

 

You don't want to hear it and use ad-hominem remarks to discredit what he and others have said - that's up to you.

To my mind - in a country where the politicians run about constantly telling us that 'Parliament is Supreme' in all things and that no parliament can bind a future one, the continual spectacle of PMs and ministers being over-ruled by courts - even worse - foreign courts in the face of the will of the British Electorate and Parliament, turns us into a non-country and something of a vassal state, beholden to people we never chose or elected.

OK, he is not your guy. I will accept that.

Cummings doesn't understand democracy and government as much as he thinks he does. Government is the machine that we need to keep running, in good times and bad times, even when it doesn't work properly. The important point to remember is government is like a trivet, if the legs are too close together, it will lose its stability. The strength of government relies on everyone concerned to keep the 3 branches clearly separated and independent from each others. That depends very much on how everyone concerned respects the laws.

In our system of government, the checks and balances are there to set out boundaries of the executive powers of the PM who presumably has won the popular mandate to govern.

Our system of goverment has a perenial weakness. Often, all the three branches are controlled by the same party , between the conservatives or Labour, neither has a robust enough constitution to restrain the extremists from within. Cummings disputes the role of the justice branch. He clearly doesn't accept the role of the courts as guardians of our democracy. Flexible law and order for him I guess.

You can see what is happening in the US with a similar 3 branch system. One person decides to misuse the mandate he's got given and it's chaos. The failure of our democracy is politicians are not sufficiently punished when they don't respect the laws. Perhaps If the death penalty were still with us, there would be fewer authoritarians.

Edited August 14, 2025Aug 14 by Woosh

 

I enjoyed this video.

The failure of our democracy is politicians are not sufficiently punished when they don't respect the laws. Perhaps If the death penalty were still with us, there would be fewer authoritarians.

 

Do you not see the contradiction in this statement?

 

For me - the core idea of democracy is that it represents THE PEOPLE not that it preserves laws made once upon a time when the circumstances and will of the people and politicians were different.

 

I accept the results of elections and offer quiet support for a party I did not want to be in power. They won. They now have the levers of power and the right to change the law.

 

You seem on the other hand to want the death penalty for a new generation of legislators who react to changing conditions and want to disallow laws past in previous times. This presumably reserved for the people who change laws you want retained.

 

Your view of law and politics is that it must be stagnant, rotten and corrupt. Corrupt because the will of the majority is ignored.

 

Such a view will inevitably lead to very bad circumstances and politicians would be impotent under pain of even death, under your ridiculous desire for enforcement, to react to change and to introduce adapted law.

 

I'm done really with this one.

Do you not see the contradiction in this statement?

 

For me - the core idea of democracy is that it represents THE PEOPLE not that it preserves laws made once upon a time when the circumstances and will of the people and politicians were different.

 

I accept the results of elections and offer quiet support for a party I did not want to be in power. They won. They now have the levers of power and the right to change the law.

 

You seem on the other hand to want the death penalty for a new generation of legislators who react to changing conditions and want to disallow laws past in previous times. This presumably reserved for the people who change laws you want retained.

 

Your view of law and politics is that it must be stagnant, rotten and corrupt. Corrupt because the will of the majority is ignored.

 

Such a view will inevitably lead to very bad circumstances and politicians would be impotent under pain of even death, under your ridiculous desire for enforcement, to react to change and to introduce adapted law.

 

I'm done really with this one.

You misunderstood what democracy is. It's just a system of law.

The overarching concept is to live in a society, you must accept and obey its laws.

If you don't, emigrate or leave and live alone.

Imagine some immigrant (like me) pick and choose what laws I like to respect and which I don't. What would you think?

Being given a mandate does not equate that our PM can ride roughshot over our laws. He/she must obey the same laws like the rest of us and should be even more severely punished when not. Especially judges. When a high ranking politician like a minister breaks law (eg rape an underling or insider trading on the stock market), there usually be additional charges like abuse of power, corruption on top of the main charge.

Edited August 14, 2025Aug 14 by Woosh

An interesting way of using AI to carry out focus group analysis.

 

I was watching a video yesterday when someone suggested that the days of expensive focus group, opinion analysis might be over.

 

Typically, political parties spend a lot of money trying to work out how ordinary people react to their policies and what their views are about what politics should change on their behalf.

 

This person dropped a 'seed':

 

Why not use AI instead of doing all that cumbersome, expensive analysis.

 

Big AI, already knows from its vast training data sets what people are talking about and what they think and what their problems are. It usually has vast datasets of online discussion on a vast range of subjects.

 

So I asked chat GPT to reflect what it though two different demographics would be concerned about and want politicians to change.

 

If you click the link, you will need to scroll back up to the top of the page. For some reason these chat gpt links always place you at the end of the page.

 

I was surprised how closely the virtual consultation seemed to reflect what I might have expected for the two groups I specified. Take a look -

 

https://chatgpt.com/share/689db315-f52c-8001-ba87-d9ad30822fb5

You misunderstood what democracy is. It's just a system of law.

The overarching concept is to live in a society, you must accept and obey its laws.

If you don't, emigrate or leave and live alone.

Imagine some immigrant (like me) pick and choose what laws I like to respect and which I don't. What would you think?

Being given a mandate does not equate that our PM can ride roughshot over our laws. He/she must obey the same laws like the rest of us and should be even more severely punished when not. Especially judges. When a high ranking politician like a minister breaks law (eg rape an underling or insider trading on the stock market), there usually be additional charges like abuse of power, corruption on top of the main charge.

 

You missed my comment above about being done with this -

 

However your recipe for democracy would leave us with disenfranchised women and non property owners, a slave trade, capital punishment and persecution of homosexual men.

 

Law must remain the same as it was ......

 

I REALLY am done with this discussion.