Michael Gove's Qualifications Watch

This discussion is closed.
markova21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#41
Report 2 years ago
#41
(Original post by Logical_person)
Thank you sir, at least you see my logic!
About the Liam fox thing I said " an exceptional doctor " not any old doctor. Being a doctor isn't enough. Not only do you have to pick people at the top of their respective field, they also have to be exceptional and wise. Please don't tell me no one like this exists because if that is true we are doomed
"Sir?" I'm a woman. See my Avatar. That is me.
0
username3466266
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#42
Report 2 years ago
#42
(Original post by markova21)
"Sir?" I'm a woman. See my Avatar. That is me.
I am very sorry please accept my sincere apologies I swear I never looked at your avatar. Again I apologise for the mistake.
0
Notoriety
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#43
Report 2 years ago
#43
(Original post by markova21)
"Sir?" I'm a woman. See my Avatar. That is me.
I have seen many men dressed like that in my time. Unless your avatar is a pic of your womb, it doesn't exactly prove anything.
0
markova21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#44
Report 2 years ago
#44
(Original post by Logical_person)
I am very sorry please accept my sincere apologies I swear I never looked at your avatar. Again I apologise for the mistake.
LOL, don't worry about it, you're grand. Markova refers to Dame Alicia Markova, who was Britain's first Prima Ballerina. [ Her real name was Alicia Marks, but in those days it was fashionable for all Ballerinas to give themselves exotic Russian sounding names].
1
username3466266
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#45
Report 2 years ago
#45
(Original post by markova21)
LOL, don't worry about it, you're grand. Markova refers to Dame Alicia Markova, who was Britain's first Prima Ballerina. [ Her real name was Alicia Marks, but in those days it was fashionable for all Ballerinas to give themselves exotic Russian sounding names].
I never knew that. Very interesting. But you do see my point and if more people realise how messed up this system is, the better the country can be run better and smoother
. If what I say happens, this country would be unparalleled, we would reach the top at everything. What do you think?
0
markova21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#46
Report 2 years ago
#46
(Original post by Logical_person)
I never knew that. Very interesting. But you do see my point and if more people realise how messed up this system is, the better the country can be run better and smoother
. If what I say happens, this country would be unparalleled, we would reach the top at everything. What do you think?
I understand your argument. It's just that the Government must already take advice from Generals etc in military affairs. But to have such people also running other areas of Government too, where they have no knowledge would be madness. I can only think of these tin-pot Dictatorships around the world; where the leader stands there, surrounded by his top Generals. These are usually the countries where there is no valid opposition party, and the leader's face beams out at you on posters absolutely everywhere you go. The military must always be separate and impartial to Government, or else the Government, if any time people decided to revolt, would set their own army on the population, who if they were one and the same, would be only to happy to cut down any dissenters and protect their own interests. That isn't democracy.
0
username3466266
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#47
Report 2 years ago
#47
(Original post by markova21)
I understand your argument. It's just that the Government must already take advice from Generals etc in military affairs. But to have such people also running other areas of Government too, where they have no knowledge would be madness. I can only think of these tin-pot Dictatorships around the world; where the leader stands there, surrounded by his top Generals. These are usually the countries where there is no valid opposition party, and the leader's face beams out at you on posters absolutely everywhere you go. The military must always be separate and impartial to Government, or else the Government, if any time people decided to revolt, would set their own army on the population, who if they were one and the same, would be only to happy to cut down any dissenters and protect their own interests. That isn't democracy.
Nice one I must admit. But there is a simple solution to this: as soon as the military personnel is instated as minister of defence they would automatically relinquish their position in the military an become an ordinary citizen temporarily until they get voted out of the position and again I never said that all Minsters would be from the army only minister of defence would be from the army. There rest of the Minsters would be from their respective fields. What do you think about this idea? Do you have any more input I really want to hear your ideas. You seem like a reasonable person. I don't know why most people don't get me. I try my best to look at things for their true value and nature. I don't care how people look or dress. The most important thing is the core, the true nature. appearances can be deceiving.
0
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#48
Report 2 years ago
#48
(Original post by Logical_person)
Nice one I must admit. But there is a simple solution to this: as soon as the military personnel is instated as minister of defence they would automatically relinquish their position in the military an become an ordinary citizen temporarily until they get voted out of the position and again I never said that all Minsters would be from the army only minister of defence would be from the army. There rest of the Minsters would be from their respective fields. What do you think about this idea? Do you have any more input I really want to hear your ideas. You seem like a reasonable person. I don't know why most people don't get me. I try my best to look at things for their true value and nature. I don't care how people look or dress. The most important thing is the core, the true nature. appearances can be deceiving.
And when you have appointed your Minister of Defence from the ranks of generals will you be surprised when he wants to spend his budget on tanks rather than frigates and fighter jets?

The reason for having politicians rather than "experts" as ministers is to prevent regulatory capture.

You want hospitals to be run in the interests of patients, not doctors; schools to be run in the interests of parents and children not teachers; and the military to run in the interests of national defence, not soldiers.

Politicians can disagree about what serves the public interest and opposition politicians often make common cause with producer interests, but politicians tend to have the voter at heart.

There is one caveat to this and that is that politicians need to know what the issues are, and in recent times some of them have not been close enough to their subjects. Special Advisers were originally supposed to be that, but they have tended to become wet behind the ears wannabe politicians with little experience of the real world.

When some years ago, a Health Secretary negotiated an overgenerous G.P. contract, it was obvious he didn't have any pals who were medics or any special advisers able to give any advice.

It is one of the reasons the best Lord Chancellors are non-practising lawyers; close enough to understand the issues but not beholden to the legal profession.
0
Llamageddon
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#49
Report 2 years ago
#49
(Original post by Logical_person)
This isn't driving a car or operating a washing machine this is much more serious each decision no matter how small can have a tremendous impact and potentially catastrophic effects maybe even for years to come for all the people and the country as a whole. A car if crashed for instance could cause harm to a few people at most not the whole country. And even with a car you need a driving test but being a minister it seems you don't need anything even related to your field of work. You go figure..
And anyway a driver drives cars engineers design and fixes machines. if you let your driver fix your car he'll probably put it's face in its butt and it's butt in its face with Catastrophic effects. I say this again put the right person in the right place.A good example of putting the right person in the right place is the Russian minister of defence he is an actual army general Sergey Kuzhugetovich Shoygu. I could get you more examples from around the world. Let's face it, an army general is what he is and it's what he is best at but I wouldn't trust him with my health care though. You see what I'm getting at?
I don't know if you're trolling or just a simpleton but you clearly don't understand delegation or management chains.
0
username3466266
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#50
Report 2 years ago
#50
(Original post by nulli tertius)
And when you have appointed your Minister of Defence from the ranks of generals will you be surprised when he wants to spend his budget on tanks rather than frigates and fighter jets?

The reason for having politicians rather than "experts" as ministers is to prevent regulatory capture.

You want hospitals to be run in the interests of patients, not doctors; schools to be run in the interests of parents and children not teachers; and the military to run in the interests of national defence, not soldiers.

Politicians can disagree about what serves the public interest and opposition politicians often make common cause with producer interests, but politicians tend to have the voter at heart.

There is one caveat to this and that is that politicians need to know what the issues are, and in recent times some of them have not been close enough to their subjects. Special Advisers were originally supposed to be that, but they have tended to become wet behind the ears wannabe politicians with little experience of the real world.

When some years ago, a Health Secretary negotiated an overgenerous G.P. contract, it was obvious he didn't have any pals who were medics or any special advisers able to give any advice.

It is one of the reasons the best Lord Chancellors are non-practising lawyers; close enough to understand the issues but not beholden to the legal profession.
I said wise. You seem to be describing a bunch of absolute lunatics in office. Spending your whole budget on tanks isn't very wise is it?
Oh yeah btw doctors, nurses etc are the nhs, soldiers and military personnel are the army. School staff are the education system. Most people always seem to forget this, you give them a crappy time, crappy money and resources and crappy leaders without knowledge , you will get crappy result, I'm sure that whatever job you do or going to do you would like it if the top people cared about you and your wellbeing with the public and not the public only. A person is only as good as the training, equipment and wellbeing is. anyone of these pillars fall and the person is compromised at doing the job. And you also cannot have too many restrictive rules made by people who don't know what they are doing or else people cannot perform to their full potential. When you tell a doctor to follow a ridiculous one size fits all treatment it will never work, so many times I was told to send people home with a couple of aspirin tablets and assign whatever they have to psychological or other reasons just because they are just under the regulations the ministry of health put in place when I know they will come back with a disaster and I could have done better.

Politicians have the public's best interests at heart? I doubt it. And even if so is not enough and here is an analogy why. There is a bear who really liked a kitten, it liked it so much it protects it from everything. A fly stood on the kittens head one day and the bear wanted it to leave so it picked up a heavy rock and threw it at the fly killing both the fly and the kitten. Politicians like the bear don't have a clue they don't have the technical knowledge . Sure they might have your best interests at heart but maybe without meaning to they mess up everything because they simply don't know .
0
3121
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#51
Report 2 years ago
#51
Personally if I was PM I would appoint an ex-military man as Secretary of State for defence, a doctor or other medical professional as Secretary of State for health, an ex diplomat as Foreign sec, ideally a high ranking police officer to Home Sec, an ex
teacher/lecturer as Sec of State for Education, you get the drift.

These are crucial cabinet positions, people are sick of politicians acting like they know what’s best when they haven’t a clue.
0
username3466266
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#52
Report 2 years ago
#52
(Original post by Llamageddon)
I don't know if you're trolling or just a simpleton but you clearly don't understand delegation or management chains.
I am neither. You are just getting annoyed because you clearly can't put forward a good argument against my last comment so Who is the simpleton? You are a person who thinks that running a country is like driving a car you go figure!! Delegate by using someone that represents you or a people as a whole, someone that voices the opinion of the people, you have your elected area mp for that. Please give me a break now you are just clutching at straws
0
username3466266
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#53
Report 2 years ago
#53
(Original post by zayn008)
Personally if I was PM I would appoint an ex-military man as Secretary of State for defence, a doctor or other medical professional as Secretary of State for health, an ex diplomat as Foreign sec, ideally a high ranking police officer to Home Sec, an ex
teacher/lecturer as Sec of State for Education, you get the drift.

These are crucial cabinet positions, people are sick of politicians acting like they know what’s best when they haven’t a clue.
Thank you. That is what I am saying but some people just don't get it like this Llamageddon person.
0
Llamageddon
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#54
Report 2 years ago
#54
(Original post by Logical_person)
I am neither. You are just getting annoyed because you clearly can't put forward a good argument against my last comment so Who is the simpleton? You are a person who thinks that running a country is like driving a car you go figure!! Delegate by using someone that represents you or a people as a whole, someone that voices the opinion of the people, you have your elected area mp for that. Please give me a break now you are just clutching at straws
I make decisions at my level based on the advice of engineers, economists, and so on. I am much closer to my policy area than any minister could ever be.

He needs to give strategic direction. He needs to hold us accountable. He needs to be able to ask the right questions. He does not need to get involved in the minutiae of hundreds of policy areas. He does not need to know how to do statistics to interrogate the findings and assumptions.

More to the point he would be unable to regardless of his academic background. What I described requires decision making skills, vision and the ability to push it through a hostile parliament. Technical knowledge is totally irrelevant. This is obvious to everybody here who isn't you.
0
username3466266
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#55
Report 2 years ago
#55
(Original post by Llamageddon)
I make decisions at my level based on the advice of engineers, economists, and so on. I am much closer to my policy area than any minister could ever be.

He needs to give strategic direction. He needs to hold us accountable. He needs to be able to ask the right questions. He does not need to get involved in the minutiae of hundreds of policy areas. He does not need to know how to do statistics to interrogate the findings and assumptions.

More to the point he would be unable to regardless of his academic background. What I described requires decision making skills, vision and the ability to push it through a hostile parliament. Technical knowledge is totally irrelevant. This is obvious to everybody here who isn't you.
Oh I see why you are annoyed. It's because if the minister and the top people know what they are doing people like you would be out of the job or see you for what you really are worth (nothing). How could a minister hold anyone to account if he doesn't know what to hold you accountable for, he must have knowledge Mr so-called advisor. decision making skills, vision and the ability to push it through a hostile parliament only requires leadership skills which would be one of the additional requirements to my suggested qualifications of holding office (many top level professionals have the skill senior advisor llama ). And I doubt you say who you say you are because you would be too busy to even think of replying to this post. And if you are who you say you are you wouldn't have a handle like llamageddon very childish indeed. And you would be nothing without your team you wouldn't be able to take a step you wouldn't have a damn clue where to begin .if technical knowledge is so irrelevant let your team go. Back up your words Mr/ms llama. People like you make me sick to the stomach (people who think they are soo important and without you the world will stop, whilst in reality 1000 of you are worth 1 penny and maybe not even that). I saw a post asking you for advice on what to expect or bring on working at Heathrow for the first day which points to You being some sort of trolley person or something along those lines (delusions of grandiosity anyone?) go make your next decision on where to park the next bunch of trolleys senior advisor llama. Don't go spitting at the passengers now or else you could get fired. I can see why you said that you are closer to your policy areas than any minister could ever be, it is because ministers don't push trollys for a living. You little fibber. Disrespect will get you nowhere, you started it.
"
themanyouknow
06-01-2014Hello Llamageddon.

I am starting at heathrow in a weeks time. I am starting to get really nervous!!
I was wondering if you could explain how your first week panned out and what I should expect/bring?

Thank you for your time. "

You never actually said what you do and what ministry you work for, you edited out the part where you say you are a senior advisor (I wonder why you did that?). There is no ministry of trolley pushing.maybe the ministry of kebabs?
0
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#56
Report 2 years ago
#56
(Original post by zayn008)
Personally if I was PM I would appoint an ex-military man as Secretary of State for defence, a doctor or other medical professional as Secretary of State for health, an ex diplomat as Foreign sec, ideally a high ranking police officer to Home Sec, an ex
teacher/lecturer as Sec of State for Education, you get the drift.

These are crucial cabinet positions, people are sick of politicians acting like they know what’s best when they haven’t a clue.
So why would you be PM? What previous running-a-country level experience do you have?
0
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#57
Report 2 years ago
#57
(Original post by Logical_person)
I said wise. You seem to be describing a bunch of absolute lunatics in office. Spending your whole budget on tanks isn't very wise is it?
Except we appointed Admiral Lord West as a defence minister and then immediately blew the budget on two aircraft carriers with a lifespan of 50 years than we can't afford to equip with planes or to operate.

The RAF assume that the Typhoon will be their last manned fighter and they will be flying drones off any scraggy bit of land or cheap freighter ship to which they can get access.The Army is planning for a future of low intensity ground warfare against irregulars in jeeps. The Navy wish to sink the Bismark.

[/QUOTE]
0
3121
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#58
Report 2 years ago
#58
(Original post by Drewski)
So why would you be PM? What previous running-a-country level experience do you have?
Now now, it’s not the PM who runs the country. It’s the Queen, and she delegates the authority, equally to the cabinet/HM Goverment who are led by the cabinet anyway. They say power is equally distributed yet the PM is ‘first among equals’, I guess that also sums up gender equality. We’re all equal but men are just first among equals, criticise me but I didn’t write the law.

The PM simply leads the cabinet and speaks as a whole on their behalf. Maybe Chairman of a company will qualify me. You just need leadership skills to command the cabinet. I’m sure the royal family would guide me along my quest. Clearly someone hasn’t read the constitution of the United Kingdom.
0
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#59
Report 2 years ago
#59
(Original post by zayn008)
Now now, it’s not the PM who runs the country. It’s the Queen, and she delegates the authority, equally to the cabinet/HM Goverment who are led by the cabinet anyway. They say power is equally distributed yet the PM is ‘first among equals’, I guess that also sums up gender equality. We’re all equal but men are just first among equals, criticise me but I didn’t write the law.

The PM simply leads the cabinet and speaks as a whole on their behalf. Maybe Chairman of a company will qualify me. You just need leadership skills to command the cabinet. I’m sure the royal family would guide me along my quest. Clearly someone hasn’t read the constitution of the United Kingdom.
So if you can lead the heads of departments based on having lead something before, why can't the heads of those departments also work to the same theory?

Do you disagree that sometimes outside opinions can help an organisation, rather than hinder?
0
3121
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#60
Report 2 years ago
#60
(Original post by Drewski)
So if you can lead the heads of departments based on having lead something before, why can't the heads of those departments also work to the same theory?

Do you disagree that sometimes outside opinions can help an organisation, rather than hinder?
If I was doing a heart surgery would I opt to be lead by the Chairman of google? Heavily qualified guy, or so I’ve heard but no knowledge in that specific sector.

No I don’t disagree but rather than have specialists rant, advise and complain about the actions of department heads, why not just make them the department heads?
0
X
new posts

All the exam results help you need

1,824

people online now

225,530

students helped last year
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How are you feeling about GCSE Results Day?

Hopeful (214)
12.52%
Excited (156)
9.13%
Worried (306)
17.91%
Terrified (380)
22.24%
Meh (168)
9.83%
Confused (37)
2.17%
Putting on a brave face (234)
13.69%
Impatient (214)
12.52%

Watched Threads

View All