The Student Room Group

The biggest mistake that Theresa May did regarding Brexit is...

...not managing the focus of the Cabinet's members.

Brexit should've been the focus of David Davis ONLY and his political and civil service teams.

The other Cabinet ministers should've been managed in a way that they focus on the issues associated with their portfolios.

But, as a result, we have a situation where since the triggering of Article 50 the non-Brexit (i.e. all the other important) matters have been pretty much abandoned and everyone has been focussed on Brexit and voicing their opinions.

This led to the Tories presiding over declining quality of health services, transport and home affairs (among others), while Brexit became unmanageable by Theresa May because of contradicting voices at the top.

Yes, she isn't a strong leader. But she doesn't have to be. She could've put people around her who would manage these relationships and made sure that any Cabinet member that voices their views on issues that don't relate to them are punished or banished.

The Tories are a capable bunch. They always have been. It would be a hell lot easier to manage Brexit if only David Davis was involved in it, with the other Cabinet members managing their portfolios (with a focus on post-Brexit Britain, sure) and Theresa May and David Lidington (although someone strong and more influential than him or Damian Green would be more useful) managing the whole Government operation (let me remind you - as it should be).

Easy to say it now though, we couldn't have known that it'll pan out like this.

Scroll to see replies

Original post by committee
...not managing the focus of the Cabinet's members.

Brexit should've been the focus of David Davis ONLY and his political and civil service teams.

The other Cabinet ministers should've been managed in a way that they focus on the issues associated with their portfolios.

But, as a result, we have a situation where since the triggering of Article 50 the non-Brexit (i.e. all the other important) matters have been pretty much abandoned and everyone has been focussed on Brexit and voicing their opinions.

This led to the Tories presiding over declining quality of health services, transport and home affairs (among others), while Brexit became unmanageable by Theresa May because of contradicting voices at the top.

Yes, she isn't a strong leader. But she doesn't have to be. She could've put people around her who would manage these relationships and made sure that any Cabinet member that voices their views on issues that don't relate to them are punished or banished.

The Tories are a capable bunch. They always have been. It would be a hell lot easier to manage Brexit if only David Davis was involved in it, with the other Cabinet members managing their portfolios (with a focus on post-Brexit Britain, sure) and Theresa May and David Lidington (although someone strong and more influential than him or Damian Green would be more useful) managing the whole Government operation (let me remind you - as it should be).

Easy to say it now though, we couldn't have known that it'll pan out like this.


May didn’t get to choose the best team to implement a carefully thought out manifesto. She had to choose a cabinet that was representative of the myriad factions in the Conservative Party; with the number of those factions growing during the leadership contest. No-one in their right mind would have chosen Fox and Leadsom and no-one would have given the FCO to Boris. The big disappointment was Davies. I don’t anyone had twigged how idle he was idle.
(edited 5 years ago)
The general election last year.
Being Theresa May/ being born
Original post by committee
...not managing the focus of the Cabinet's members.

Brexit should've been the focus of David Davis ONLY and his political and civil service teams.

The other Cabinet ministers should've been managed in a way that they focus on the issues associated with their portfolios.

But, as a result, we have a situation where since the triggering of Article 50 the non-Brexit (i.e. all the other important) matters have been pretty much abandoned and everyone has been focussed on Brexit and voicing their opinions.

This led to the Tories presiding over declining quality of health services, transport and home affairs (among others), while Brexit became unmanageable by Theresa May because of contradicting voices at the top.

Yes, she isn't a strong leader. But she doesn't have to be. She could've put people around her who would manage these relationships and made sure that any Cabinet member that voices their views on issues that don't relate to them are punished or banished.

The Tories are a capable bunch. They always have been. It would be a hell lot easier to manage Brexit if only David Davis was involved in it, with the other Cabinet members managing their portfolios (with a focus on post-Brexit Britain, sure) and Theresa May and David Lidington (although someone strong and more influential than him or Damian Green would be more useful) managing the whole Government operation (let me remind you - as it should be).

Easy to say it now though, we couldn't have known that it'll pan out like this.

Davis Davis, as described by a fellow Tory Leave supporter:
'as thick as mince, lazy as a toad and vain as Narcissus'

Theresa May must have known this though, so as a Remainer her appointment of Davis to lead the negotiations was a stroke of genius.
Original post by Lit teacher
Davis Davis, as described by a fellow Tory Leave supporter:
'as thick as mince, lazy as a toad and vain as Narcissus'

Theresa May must have known this though, so as a Remainer her appointment of Davis to lead the negotiations was a stroke of genius.


I've heard some suggest that May never really expected Davis to seriously succeed in negotiations, but rather to obstinately hold them up so that she could then play good cop over Barnier's head and negotiate directly with the EU member states' leaders.

Not a bad strategy at first sight, but worth remembering that this is essentially what Tsipras ended up trying (and failing) to do in 2015 - and Yanis Varoufakis was and is a far more intelligent man than David Davis.
Original post by committee
...not managing the focus of the Cabinet's members.

Brexit should've been the focus of David Davis ONLY and his political and civil service teams.

The other Cabinet ministers should've been managed in a way that they focus on the issues associated with their portfolios.


What are you on about? If there is one strength of Theresa May (and I am no fan) it is that she has kept her cabinet on side, mainly by balancing 50/50 Brexit/Remain. And it is not for individual ministers to weigh in randomly to negotiations. I want the health secretary to be worrying about health, not Brexit. And the way any government works is that they agree a strategy behind closed doors and then speak with one voice. The very fact that Brexit has been such a shambol is precisely because cabinet ministers have been sticking their noses into what Teressa should be doing. She looks weak because she is constantly undermined and her weakness is enforced by the fact that she can't sack anyone because that will make waves that will force her hand in her minority government.

The fact that we are where we are is a miracle.
You MAKE a mistake, you don't 'do' one.
(edited 5 years ago)
Lets break it down. In 2016 the UK public by MAJORITY voted to LEAVE the EU/freedom of movement/Customs union.

David Cameron who was a Remainer promptly resigns... so logic has it that the new PM should be someone who was from the Leave camp..... well this is what happened.

Teresa May ( Prime Minister) - Remain
Phillip Hammond ( Chanchellor)- Remain
Amber Rudd ( H. Sec)- Remain
Jeremy Hunt ( Health Sec)- Remain
Boris Johnson (Foreign Sec)- Leave
Michael Fallon (Defence Sec) - Remain

Now when only 1/6 of the Important Cabinet posts is a Brexiteer... how in the name of MERLINS BOXERS are you going to get a government actually serious to get UK out of the EU in the best way possible and what was voted on. It is in their INTEREST to **** up things so bad that the public loose appetite for Brexit and there is a reversal. Labour is hand and hand with Theresa May to derail Brexit. There is no soft brexit or hard brexit. There is just BREXIT.

Mark my words there will be a civil war if that happens.
Original post by committee
...not managing the focus of the Cabinet's members.

Brexit should've been the focus of David Davis ONLY and his political and civil service teams.

The other Cabinet ministers should've been managed in a way that they focus on the issues associated with their portfolios.

But, as a result, we have a situation where since the triggering of Article 50 the non-Brexit (i.e. all the other important) matters have been pretty much abandoned and everyone has been focussed on Brexit and voicing their opinions.

This led to the Tories presiding over declining quality of health services, transport and home affairs (among others), while Brexit became unmanageable by Theresa May because of contradicting voices at the top.

Yes, she isn't a strong leader. But she doesn't have to be. She could've put people around her who would manage these relationships and made sure that any Cabinet member that voices their views on issues that don't relate to them are punished or banished.

The Tories are a capable bunch. They always have been. It would be a hell lot easier to manage Brexit if only David Davis was involved in it, with the other Cabinet members managing their portfolios (with a focus on post-Brexit Britain, sure) and Theresa May and David Lidington (although someone strong and more influential than him or Damian Green would be more useful) managing the whole Government operation (let me remind you - as it should be).

Easy to say it now though, we couldn't have known that it'll pan out like this.

Putting other none Brexit issues on the back burner is not a problem. Brexit is something we all need to follow with undivided passion as we break the shackles of the EU and take back control of our borders.
Brexit is not a dinner party or afternoon tea. Brexit is forcibly breaking out of the EU dictatorship.

Once we are free people need to be judged on their passion for Brexit. For instance to be a teacher you need to be a very passionate brexiter. Those who are most passionate get the better life. Those who lack passion get counselling to help them not only come to terms with Brexit but be loyal focused and passionate Brexiters.

Brexit does not finish at the end of next March it goes in for 5, 10 or more years as we remove European ideas and culture from our country and society. So expect a lot more things to be put on the back burner because Brexit takes our undivided attention.
Original post by sachinisgod
Lets break it down. In 2016 the UK public by MAJORITY voted to LEAVE the EU/freedom of movement/Customs union.

David Cameron who was a Remainer promptly resigns... so logic has it that the new PM should be someone who was from the Leave camp..... well this is what happened.

Teresa May ( Prime Minister) - Remain
Phillip Hammond ( Chanchellor)- Remain
Amber Rudd ( H. Sec)- Remain
Jeremy Hunt ( Health Sec)- Remain
Boris Johnson (Foreign Sec)- Leave
Michael Fallon (Defence Sec) - Remain

Now when only 1/6 of the Important Cabinet posts is a Brexiteer... how in the name of MERLINS BOXERS are you going to get a government actually serious to get UK out of the EU in the best way possible and what was voted on. It is in their INTEREST to **** up things so bad that the public loose appetite for Brexit and there is a reversal. Labour is hand and hand with Theresa May to derail Brexit. There is no soft brexit or hard brexit. There is just BREXIT.


You seem to be forgetting that there was a General Election last year. The British electorate had the option to vote out remain supporting MPs yet chose not to.

Mark my words there will be a civil war if that happens.


Project Fear.
Reply 11
Avatar for L i b
L i b
19
Original post by committee
...not managing the focus of the Cabinet's members.

Brexit should've been the focus of David Davis ONLY and his political and civil service teams.

The other Cabinet ministers should've been managed in a way that they focus on the issues associated with their portfolios.

But, as a result, we have a situation where since the triggering of Article 50 the non-Brexit (i.e. all the other important) matters have been pretty much abandoned and everyone has been focussed on Brexit and voicing their opinions.

This led to the Tories presiding over declining quality of health services, transport and home affairs (among others), while Brexit became unmanageable by Theresa May because of contradicting voices at the top.

Yes, she isn't a strong leader. But she doesn't have to be. She could've put people around her who would manage these relationships and made sure that any Cabinet member that voices their views on issues that don't relate to them are punished or banished.

The Tories are a capable bunch. They always have been. It would be a hell lot easier to manage Brexit if only David Davis was involved in it, with the other Cabinet members managing their portfolios (with a focus on post-Brexit Britain, sure) and Theresa May and David Lidington (although someone strong and more influential than him or Damian Green would be more useful) managing the whole Government operation (let me remind you - as it should be).

Easy to say it now though, we couldn't have known that it'll pan out like this.


If you're seriously suggesting that DEXEU and David Davis should've been the only ones working on Brexit, I'm afraid I think that's quite farcical. There's not a single major policy area that isn't co-ordinated by the Cabinet Office and Number 10. This is probably the most important policy area that there has been in decades in the UK: the idea that the PM would cede it to one department and one Secretary of State isn't realistic.

As you effectively concede, virtually every government department has a significant Brexit focus because Brexit has a major impact on their portfolios. Again, this is why the Cabinet Office co-ordinates across departments.

If anything, I think the creation of DEXEU was a mistake. The previous directorate within the Cabinet Office has greater authority and reach. The PM should've been front and centre of this, possibly with a few junior ministerial posts to manage specific parts of leaving and designing the new relationship (again, DIT was a daft move as well).
Original post by Sulfolobus
You seem to be forgetting that there was a General Election last year. The British electorate had the option to vote out remain supporting MPs yet chose not to.



Project Fear.


That is the real Project fear my friend.

The 2016 election people were forced to believe Teresa May and the Conservatives were the only ones that could realistically deliver Brexit on the terms people voted for as they could not expect that from Labour, hence;

1. The reman tories kept their seats as the alternative to that would be a Labour Remainer.

2. Remain Labour kept their seats despite overwhelming numbers in their areas voting to Leave purely because the people could not vote Tories.

3. Couple this with the fact that UKIP's vote share was destroyed due to Project fear and voters going back to Conservatives just to be on the safe side and get Brexit which isnt going to happen because the Government and the Opposition and the House of Lords is hell bent on denying the will of the people over their self interests.
Original post by sachinisgod
because the Government and the Opposition and the House of Lords is hell bent on denying the will of the people over their self interests.


This phrase is often trotted out like a pony at a gymkhana with little actual meaning behind it.

What do you mean - 'denying the will of the people'?
Original post by Reality Check
This phrase is often trotted out like a pony at a gymkhana with little actual meaning behind it.

What do you mean - 'denying the will of the people'?


Maybe the 52% that voted to Leave in a democratic referendum? Democracy is the elected officials carry out what the electorate they represent vote on maybe?
Original post by sachinisgod
Maybe the 52% that voted to Leave in a democratic referendum? Democracy is the elected officials carry out what the electorate they represent vote on maybe?


And is democracy something which you think only needs to happen once? We had a 'democratic' general election in 1987: does that mean we don't need to have another one? I love how you people seem to think an exercise in democracy (i.e. asking the people to vote on any 'deal' ) is 'undemocratic'
Original post by sachinisgod
Maybe the 52% that voted to Leave in a democratic referendum? Democracy is the elected officials carry out what the electorate they represent vote on maybe?


Er… I think you mean the 31% who voted to leave as opposed to the 28% who voted to remain. The rest simply didn't have enough coherent information to decide. They have now and that is what Brexiteers fear most. This 52% of the people voted to leave is yet another Brexit fantasy worthy of Boris himself.
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by nulli tertius
May didn’t get to choose the best team to implement a carefully thought out manifesto. She had to choose a cabinet that was representative of the myriad factions in the Conservative Party; with the number of those factions growing during the leadership contest. No-one in their right mind would have chosen Fox and Leadsom and no-one would have given the FCO to Boris. The big disappointment was Davies. I don’t anyone had twigged how idle he was idle.


Apparently Lazy Dave was a well known phenomenon amongst people who've worked with him - Iain Dale, who used to work for him and was a mate, used to say openly that Davies shouldn't be put in charge of anything too important as he was too uninterested in the work. (Not unlike Boris, who is also notoriously slackish when it comes to actual jobs and is basically never in charge of his brief.) This was so well known in Tory circles that it's difficult to believe that May putting him in that job was anything but designed to produce a chaotic situation. How better to prevent an early Brexit? We are now reaching the crunch point, where it will be declared that another few year's delay is needed for extended discussions and issue resolution. It is Theresa's dearest wish that this be left to another government.
Original post by Reality Check
And is democracy something which you think only needs to happen once? We had a 'democratic' general election in 1987: does that mean we don't need to have another one? I love how you people seem to think an exercise in democracy (i.e. asking the people to vote on any 'deal' ) is 'undemocratic'


Shades of Hitlerism. where all referenda were 'final' - and 98% in favour.
Original post by Fullofsurprises
Apparently Lazy Dave was a well known phenomenon amongst people who've worked with him - Iain Dale, who used to work for him and was a mate, used to say openly that Davies shouldn't be put in charge of anything too important as he was too uninterested in the work. (Not unlike Boris, who is also notoriously slackish when it comes to actual jobs and is basically never in charge of his brief.) This was so well known in Tory circles that it's difficult to believe that May putting him in that job was anything but designed to produce a chaotic situation. How better to prevent an early Brexit? We are now reaching the crunch point, where it will be declared that another few year's delay is needed for extended discussions and issue resolution. It is Theresa's dearest wish that this be left to another government.


Screen Shot 2018-09-30 at 19.09.44.png

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you