» Monday, March 29, 2004Beverley Hughes
Questioned about the position of Beverley Hughes, the PMOS said that her position had not changed since this morning, last week and even the week before when he had underlined the Prime Minister’s confidence in her. Asked if the Prime Minister would continue to support her were there to be further revelations about the way she had handled her immigration brief, the PMOS said that it wasn’t his policy to answer hypothetical questions. Questioned about the latest allegations, the PMOS said that the BRACE system or similar systems, as a method for clearing backlogs, had been applied by successive Administrations. Indeed, all Governments, going back at least as far as the 1980s, had had to address this problem and had followed similar procedures. Ms Hughes’s actions had therefore been justified. Asked to explain the difference between this case and Steve Moxon’s allegations relating to the IND in Sheffield, the PMOS said that as he understood it, the measures to tackle the backlog of applications in Sheffield were being applied to new cases, whereas the cases relating to the allegations over the weekend were older. Briefing took place at 15:45 | Search for related news Original PMOS briefings are © Crown Copyright. Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland. Click-use licence number C02W0004089. Material is reproduced from the original 10 Downing Street source, but may not be the most up-to-date version of the briefings, which might be revised at the original source. Users should check with the original source in case of revisions. Comments are © Copyright contributors. Everything else is © Copyright Downing Street Says. |
The unofficial site which lets you comment on the UK Prime Minister's official briefings. About us...
Search
Supported byRecent Briefings
Archives
LinksSyndicate (RSS/XML)CreditsEnquiriesContact Sam Smith. |
If Blair is still confident in Beverley he must be nuts – and one of very few (the rest being cronies) in the country. Where is the Blair of 97 please?
Comment by Hipster — 30 Mar 2004 on 2:11 pm | LinkHipster
The Blair of ’97 is in 10 Downing Street doing almost exactly what he said he would do, only some fools were never listening in ’97 and didn’t realise what a Blair government would mean.
Comment by David Boothroyd — 30 Mar 2004 on 2:16 pm | LinkThis is a bit like what happened with Major’s government. A minister screws up and the PM voice their full support (a bit like chairmen of football clubs and their managers.) The press decide to target a minister and then it is just a question of whether the minister can hang on until the next reshuffle or not.
The issue for TB (as it was for John Major) is that in the mind of the public, he is just supporting a crony who doesnt’t deserve to remain in her job. The rest of the UK know that if they had behaved like Hughes in their jobs, at best they’d gave been given a written warning if not sacked on the spot. It is made particularly worse by the prevarication shown by Hughes instead of any contrition whatsoever.
When taken together, this relentless support by TB of ministers who are useless just reinforces (and there have been a succession of ministers that this has happened with) the image of sleaze, incompetence and jobs for the boys (or girls). He would be far better to take a harder line with his incompetent ministers and state that he won’t tolerate mediocrity.
What irritates the public most is the incompetence and the fact nothing is being done about it. It reflects what the public experience every day in their dealing with government bodies such as the health service, the DSS and so on.
Comment by DEGREEK — 30 Mar 2004 on 3:12 pm | LinkUp to a point, perhaps. But immigration is a different and more charged issue than day-to-day service delivery.
The Government decided to ride the tiger of tabloid paranoia rather than shooting it, and it is now learning – too late – that you can’t stop that particular tiger from getting hungry.
I think it’s right for the Gvt to keep hold of Hughes. It’s not just a competence issue, it’s an issue of the putschists in the Daily Express trying to barge the Gvt (even) further to the right on this issue. Like the Vikings and the Danegeld, if you give in they’ll be back for more before too long.
Comment by Marek Ostrowski — 30 Mar 2004 on 3:59 pm | LinkThis is a Civil Service issue, not a Ministerial one, and they are generally hopeless. It is this level of incompetence that sparks Military Coups.
Comment by Hugh Tattersall — 30 Mar 2004 on 9:02 pm | Link