advertisement


Priti Patel

Priti Patel has a talent by default in that she unites different people in the condemnation of her...
 
It’s scary that leaders will accept this behaviour in their party and say it publicly without so much as a look over the shoulder. It implies that the behaviour clearly exists throughout the party and is seen as acceptable. They probably convinced themselves that they are fighting against the evidence based logic of the civil service and it is wrong that they can’t overturn this for their own political benefit. Her behaviour is only the tip of the iceberg as this has been going on for a long time. Departmental leaders and gurus having tantrums in the office because they can’t have their own way or they’ve announced a new policy on TV that is near impossible to implement due to laws etc. Or simply, they are out of their depth and desperate to keep their job and serve their Masters. Many have long trails of bullying accusations behind them. I think they need to be reminded what Democracy means and the electorate need to vote and push for a clean up because the beliefs we all fought for are being eroded and corrupted daily by the likes of Johnson, his buddies and Trump.
 
Joe Hutch said:
Well, quite. Comparisons with Diane Abbot are beside the point (AFAIK no-one's accused her of bullying). A closer fit might be John Prescott, who by all accounts was noted for 'inappropriate' behaviour towards women and ignoring bullying in his department, but who was kept in place by Blair because Prescott was the token left-winger, and a bit of a 'character'. A bit like the school bully who's also captain of the rugby team and therefore exempt from criticism.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2006/jan/26/Whitehall.uk

'One in 10 of Mr Prescott's staff has felt bullied and 14% of black staff had experienced racial prejudice, it showed.

The findings are revealed today by a committee of MPs, which is demanding urgent action to end the bullying culture in Mr Prescott's department.

The internal survey was passed to the select committee for the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, as part of its scrutiny of the department's annual report.

The committee said it was "particularly concerned" about the amount of reported bullying and that 22% of staff had witnessed unfair treatment.'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4649834.stm

'The department's top civil servant acknowledged that the bullying and intimidation was of real concern, which was welcomed by the committee.

But the committee said: "The department should take steps immediately to reinforce the message that bullying and intimidation is unacceptable."

"It should ensure that all staff are confident, such reports will be taken seriously."

The report also criticised the failure of Mr Prescott himself to appear before the committee, due to dealing with work connected with the UK's past presidency of the EU. "We believe that the most senior minister in a department should make himself available to a parliamentary select committee when his presence in sought," it said.'
Click to expand...


Thanks for the reply Joe, I’d forgotten about Prescott’s sleazyness. I think that women in power tend to get a harder time than men generally, certainly in the Companies I’ve worked at, boys will be boys attitude not extended to women. Perhaps going slightly OT so I’ll leave it there.
 
Del monaco said:
It’s scary that leaders will accept this behaviour in their party and say it publicly without so much as a look over the shoulder.
Click to expand...

But if you fess up you’ll get mullered. It’s much better to lie, cheat, deny, deflect and deceive. It costs less votes in the end
 
Joco said:
Thanks for the reply Joe, I’d forgotten about Prescott’s sleazyness. I think that women in power tend to get a harder time than men generally, certainly in the Companies I’ve worked at, boys will be boys attitude not extended to women. Perhaps going slightly OT so I’ll leave it there.
Click to expand...
That’s not been my experience but I have only worked in education and IT, maybe women get a better deal there.
 
Joe Hutch said:
Well, quite. Comparisons with Diane Abbot are beside the point (AFAIK no-one's accused her of bullying). A closer fit might be John Prescott, who by all accounts was noted for 'inappropriate' behaviour towards women and ignoring bullying in his department, but who was kept in place by Blair because Prescott was the token left-winger, and a bit of a 'character'. A bit like the school bully who's also captain of the rugby team and therefore exempt from criticism.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2006/jan/26/Whitehall.uk

'One in 10 of Mr Prescott's staff has felt bullied and 14% of black staff had experienced racial prejudice, it showed.

The findings are revealed today by a committee of MPs, which is demanding urgent action to end the bullying culture in Mr Prescott's department.

The internal survey was passed to the select committee for the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, as part of its scrutiny of the department's annual report.

The committee said it was "particularly concerned" about the amount of reported bullying and that 22% of staff had witnessed unfair treatment.'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4649834.stm

'The department's top civil servant acknowledged that the bullying and intimidation was of real concern, which was welcomed by the committee.

But the committee said: "The department should take steps immediately to reinforce the message that bullying and intimidation is unacceptable."

"It should ensure that all staff are confident, such reports will be taken seriously."

The report also criticised the failure of Mr Prescott himself to appear before the committee, due to dealing with work connected with the UK's past presidency of the EU. "We believe that the most senior minister in a department should make himself available to a parliamentary select committee when his presence in sought," it said.'
Click to expand...

ISTR that the excuse trotted out at the time by Blair (I think) was "That's just John being John."

Oh well. That's OK then. :rolleyes:
 
ks.234 said:
You say fewer, I say she’s a bullying, lying, pustule of a human being!
Click to expand...
She will make a good PM though. Tory scum like a tough woman to lick them into shape. History doth reveal.
And she will get a hefty slice of the vote from hang 'em, flog' em and Brexit 'em Britain.
At least 51% I would say.
Gawd elp us.
 
Minio said:
She will make a good PM though. Tory scum like a tough woman to lick them into shape. History doth reveal.
And she will get a hefty slice of the vote from hang 'em, flog' em and Brexit 'em Britain.
At least 51% I would say.
Gawd elp us.
Click to expand...

Yes. Patel’s appeal is that she reminds Tory MP’s of their dominatrix
 
Joco said:
I think that women in power tend to get a harder time than men generally, certainly in the Companies I’ve worked at, boys will be boys attitude not extended to women.....
Click to expand...
I disagree, maybe because it is harder for women to get to the top, the ones that do have a tendency to be really nasty people. Thatcher was a good example
 
Del monaco said:
It’s scary that leaders will accept this behaviour in their party and say it publicly without so much as a look over the shoulder. It implies that the behaviour clearly exists throughout the party and is seen as acceptable. They probably convinced themselves that they are fighting against the evidence based logic of the civil service and it is wrong that they can’t overturn this for their own political benefit. Her behaviour is only the tip of the iceberg as this has been going on for a long time. Departmental leaders and gurus having tantrums in the office because they can’t have their own way or they’ve announced a new policy on TV that is near impossible to implement due to laws etc. Or simply, they are out of their depth and desperate to keep their job and serve their Masters. Many have long trails of bullying accusations behind them. I think they need to be reminded what Democracy means and the electorate need to vote and push for a clean up because the beliefs we all fought for are being eroded and corrupted daily by the likes of Johnson, his buddies and Trump.
Click to expand...
What Johnson and his ilk have noticed is that the institutions designed to maintain basic standards of behaviour can be ignored, as long as the media don't make too much of a fuss. And they don't, really. Good governance is also not a priority so the demoralisation and resignation of decent civil servants is also not an issue. Basically, nothing can stop them and they're destroying everything, I mean the basic fabric of government, its institutions, rules and norms, all that.

I do think it's important to keep reminding ourselves though that this is the Home Office we're talking about here. The people that are being bullied are themselves so many mini-Eichmanns, the rules and norms that are being torn up are the same ones that maintained what is basically a machine for grinding down marginalised people, making their lives unliveable. I mean that's its actual, express purpose, to create a hostile environment for migrants! The UK is sick at its roots.
 
davidsrsb said:
I disagree, maybe because it is harder for women to get to the top, the ones that do have a tendency to be really nasty people. Thatcher was a good example
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t be surprised if there were as many nasty men at the top, I’ve seen a few.
 
As part of my charity work, I teach responsible behaviour, empathy and also the effects/consequences of bullying and peer pressure to year 6 students.

How do we explain this result to them? (It’s rhetorical, btw;))
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top