Ken Clarke

Rinoa

Shifted to economic role according to BBC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19472688

KC will advise PM on issues - including economic strategy

Doesn't say much for his confidence in George Osborne.

Mr._Pricklepants

Rinoa wrote: »

Doesn't say much for his confidence in George Osborne.

Perhaps. But to me it looks more like sidelining one of the more left/liberal leaning members of cabinet (KC) to appease the tory back bench.

Loughton_Monkey

Cameron and his current cabinet have about as much backbone as a paraplegic jellyfish. It's OK to get rid of a few lefties like Ken, but I think he needs to go a lot further. Possibly starting by changing himself!

C_Mababejive

What does Ken know about economics? He majored in law at Cambridge.

Why do we appoint talking heads into positions of power and influence over our everyday lives when they have no experience in those roles?

Would you employ a checkout assistant to service your car or a motor mechanic to mend your television?

noodle_doodle

C_Mababejive wrote: »

What does Ken know about economics? He majored in law at Cambridge.

Why do we appoint talking heads into positions of power and influence over our everyday lives when they have no experience in those roles?

Would you employ a checkout assistant to service your car or a motor mechanic to mend your television?

you can same the same about every cabinet position

What does Georgy-Porgy know about economics, the bloke didn't even run the eton tuck shop?

Has Philip Hammond ever been in a fight?

The fact PMs shuffle these people between supposedly the most important jobs in the country on the basis of who they're currently chummy with is a joke. You couldn't rock up and start teaching in a school without qualifications, but be a political chum of call-me-dave's like Michael Gove and you can turn up and run the entire education system...

N1AK

I actually think Clarke was a great choice for his previous role as Secretary for Justice, although he was never going to be a popular choice for conservative voters (or the british public in general) as he is considerably more lenient than average.

Bringing Laws back pretty much ensures that this will be a negative news story for the coalition as it'll be reported everywhere and reminds everyone about the expenses abuse. I'm sure the Libs have pushed extremely hard for it otherwise there is no way it'd happen.

Wookster

Ken Clarke is one of the few pragmatic politicians left. He's not so interested in soundbites but more interested in policies which work.

Generali

Wookster wrote: »

Ken Clarke is one of the few pragmatic politicians left. He's not so interested in soundbites but more interested in policies which work.

He was also a very good Chancellor back in the day. He knew that he didn't understand economics so got himself the best advice he could find.

kabayiri

Generali wrote: »

He was also a very good Chancellor back in the day. He knew that he didn't understand economics so got himself the best advice he could find.

What if the advice KC was offered today contained radical policy suggestions? Would he have the mandate to accept and implement?

We are dominated by middle ground politics without vision and conviction.

michaels

Wookster wrote: »

Ken Clarke is one of the few pragmatic politicians left. He's not so interested in soundbites but more interested in policies which work.

In the Moj they wanted to follow policies that reduce reoffending and tackle addiction rather than concentrating on how many people they could bang up for how long. Persuing policies that work is anathema to a dominant section of the Tory party who prefer to be dogmatic and wrong.

Wookster

michaels wrote: »

Persuing policies that work is anathema to a dominant section of the Tory party who prefer to be dogmatic and wrong.

I'd say its an anathema to most politicians, of all parties and across the entire political spectrum.

The reason is pragmatic policies are much harder to sell than soundbites.