Recognising intelligence

@wanderlust wrote:It just goes to show how little some folk know about government and the nature of government departments. I suspect some folk have watched too much Yes Minister.
For those who are interested, it works like this:
* New Government appoints Cabinet of ministers to enact their new policies
* Minister takes over government department and appoints managers and teams to enact policies. Usually this entails creating new workstreams/sub-departments and the injection of staff who support the policy.
* Existing managers and programmes are usually canned if they go against new government's policy

So for example when Michael Gove was appointed SS for Education:

"Gove terminated the previous Labour government's Building Schools for the Future programme; reformed A-Level and GCSE qualifications, abolishing modular units and coursework in most subjects, in favour of final examinations , and responded to the Trojan Horse scandal"

The Department of Education may not be staffed by politicians, but they did enact the wishes of the politicians - and those who dissented were sidelined. This is true of all Government departments and as amusing as Yes Minister was, it bears no resemblance to the reality of central gevernment departments where programmes, managers and staff come and go with every new policy shift.

As for the Anderson thing - I hope everyone has noticed that it wasn't me who raised the subject (yet again) - it was my shit stirring troll. So less of the "you two" please.

Dear God, they say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

I've said before wikipedia is a good entry point for people looking to find out things but when you're talking about a professional service you really need to know where to look for facts rather than how you may think the service works, to this end I refer you to the Institute for Government.

In the following link the Institute states there are 426,500 civil servants employed in Government and if you really 'think' close on half a million people get hired and fired every five years after every election, then it just goes to show that you have absolutely no knowledge or understanding about how things actually work in the CS.  

Civil servants are permanent employees, in career grades who are politically impartial.  It is they that remain as the various political parties come and go depending on the election results.

I don't need to base any knowledge on Yes Minister or anything else because I actually worked in public sector government for over 30 years!!!

How much experience have you got of the public sector and Civil Service in particular other than maybe some contract work from them?

Let me guess - absolutely NONE.

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/civil-service-staff-numbers

You've clearly haven't troubled to better inform yourself by reading the links I provided in my post above, one of which provides you with the transcript of the PAC questioning of all those overall responsible for the procurement of the PPE's and who have ultimate responsibility - indeed that was actually stated as such - ALL of those involved were CIVIL SERVANTS.  No sign of ANY politicians or political cronyism anywhere!

Just as I've been saying all along.

I put all the facts in front of you but yet again you couldn't be bothered to concern yourself with them because you obviously believe you know better.

You don't.

As for Anderson and trolling, I raised the name of Anderson as an example of where many people have judged him on the basis of the financial running of the club that they know nothing about.  I used the example because it is one familiar to all of us.

How can that be trolling on my part, I was stating a fact?!!

I'm still waiting for your explanation as to how Anderson could have better run an insolvent company to make more profit for himself as you claimed though - I see you've failed to do that, so I'll ask you again.

After all you're clearly much more cleverer than Bob and I who have spent our professional careers dealing with such things.

I won't hold my breath for your reply though, you never can back up what you say, can you?

Lusty hasn't a clue, Sluffy, but the truth is that none of them have a clue. If they weren't so clueless they might have a clue how clueless they are.

I am afraid its the kind of collective mindlessness that leads to mindless mobs comprised of people predisposed to mindlessness and it doesn't take much to attract them like flies to a cowpat.

Keep taking the tablets nine bob it may enable you to string together a coherent sentence eventually.

@Norpig wrote:Keep taking the tablets nine bob it may enable you to string together a coherent sentence eventually.

I don't know why Lily lets you out on your own, Walter. No good will come of it.

@Ten Bobsworth wrote:
I don't know why Lily lets you out on your own, Walter. No good will come of it.

At least i'm allowed out nine bob, unless of course you've managed to learn the door code for your secure unit again. 
Remind me how far you got last time before you got confused again?

@Norpig wrote:
At least i'm allowed out nine bob, unless of course you've managed to learn the door code for your secure unit again. 
Remind me how far you got last time before you got confused again?

This guy works in the NHS for heavens sake. He could even be at work right now.

I could do and then again i may not, who knows on here eh? 

We are all pretending a bit on here surely? You pretend to be intelligent but you're not fooling me nine bob

Originally, the idea behind the thread I started was to gently query whether it is possible to accurately determine people's intelligence from simply looking at faces. (Ooh, shoot me down!.....two split infinitives in one sentence!) The US rioters mostly looked to me to be lacking in the brains department.

My prejudice was confirmed by their actions and subsequent interviews, and by the fact that most failed to wear masks, so risking Covid and arrest.

The thread has gone off at a tangent, as some Nutters have chosen to switch to their favourite hobby-horses and resurrect old battles. I don't read anything Bob writes, but I expect he stirred the pot too..
Tedious and sad! I certainly wasn't intending to feed the troll......

Sorry Okocha my fault as well. I did try to mention that it had gone off topic but i've been just as bad.

I wasn't meaning you, Norpig.

@Norpig wrote:Sorry Okocha my fault as well. I did try to mention that it had gone off topic but i've been just as bad.

You need to throw some Lancashire dialect in there Mr Pig. You're not grasping it.

@boltonbonce wrote:
You need to throw some Lancashire dialect in there Mr Pig. You're not grasping it.

Nowt to do wi' dialect, Boncey. The porcine pea-brain est un peu idiot as one might say in Bowton le Moors.

@Ten Bobsworth wrote:

@boltonbonce wrote:
You need to throw some Lancashire dialect in there Mr Pig. You're not grasping it.

Nowt to do wi' dialect, Boncey. The porcine pea-brain est un peu idiot as one might say in Bowton le Moors.

Have a day off!

@Ten Bobsworth wrote:Lusty hasn't a clue, Sluffy, but the truth is that none of them have a clue. If they weren't so clueless they might have a clue how clueless they are.

I am afraid its the kind of collective mindlessness that leads to mindless mobs comprised of people predisposed to mindlessness and it doesn't take much to attract them like flies to a cowpat.

Sadly that is how society is now Bob.

Probably it's always been like that - P T Barnum once said "there's one born every minute" but with the advent of instant social media over the last decade or so it seems to me at least that people seem to collectively believe what's put on there irrespective if it's true or not - very few seem to question what they read, it becomes an almost instant mob mentality based often on nothing more than fake news.

Would Trump have got 70m votes and people storming the Capitol to 'stop the steal' without him whipping them up via social media?  Would everyone and his dog believe all this Tory cronyism over PPE contracts without Maugham's personal social media campaign?  Would almost everyone believe Anderson raped and pillaged the club for his own pocket - which was actually impossible to do as the club was over £200m in debt, running at a huge annual losses and was already insolvent - without reading utter bollocks from the likes of Iles and Wanderlust on social media and forums like ours?

Back in the day stuff like this would have been called 'propaganda' and at least some would be wary of it but now it seems if some social media 'influencer' says something then all their followers, like sheep appropriately enough, accept it to be so without a second thought.

Very few seem to 'question' what they are being 'fed', even those people with high IQ's?

I don't know what it is, whether people are scared to not be seen to be part of the crowd or they are just too lazy to check out what's being said for themselves but clearly you find people you know and who have decent jobs and careers believing the most ridiculous of things because they read it on social media.

It is what it is though, you aren't going to change it on here and I guess over time people will begin to see they were mistaken to take the likes of Trump, Maugham and even Wanderlust at their word because there was never any truth in what they had said - it was all fake and done deliberately to play/manipulate people for their own agendas or to make themselves look self important.

People don't like to be told they are wrong or stupid even when they are.

That's always be true though!

@Sluffy wrote:

Dear God, they say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

I've said before wikipedia is a good entry point for people looking to find out things but when you're talking about a professional service you really need to know where to look for facts rather than how you may think the service works, to this end I refer you to the Institute for Government.

In the following link the Institute states there are 426,500 civil servants employed in Government and if you really 'think' close on half a million people get hired and fired every five years after every election, then it just goes to show that you have absolutely no knowledge or understanding about how things actually work in the CS.  

Civil servants are permanent employees, in career grades who are politically impartial.  It is they that remain as the various political parties come and go depending on the election results.

I don't need to base any knowledge on Yes Minister or anything else because I actually worked in public sector government for over 30 years!!!

How much experience have you got of the public sector and Civil Service in particular other than maybe some contract work from them?

Let me guess - absolutely NONE.

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/civil-service-staff-numbers

You've clearly haven't troubled to better inform yourself by reading the links I provided in my post above, one of which provides you with the transcript of the PAC questioning of all those overall responsible for the procurement of the PPE's and who have ultimate responsibility - indeed that was actually stated as such - ALL of those involved were CIVIL SERVANTS.  No sign of ANY politicians or political cronyism anywhere!

Just as I've been saying all along.

I put all the facts in front of you but yet again you couldn't be bothered to concern yourself with them because you obviously believe you know better.

You don't.

As for Anderson and trolling, I raised the name of Anderson as an example of where many people have judged him on the basis of the financial running of the club that they know nothing about.  I used the example because it is one familiar to all of us.

How can that be trolling on my part, I was stating a fact?!!

I'm still waiting for your explanation as to how Anderson could have better run an insolvent company to make more profit for himself as you claimed though - I see you've failed to do that, so I'll ask you again.

After all you're clearly much more cleverer than Bob and I who have spent our professional careers dealing with such things.

I won't hold my breath for your reply though, you never can back up what you say, can you?

There you go again speculating about my experience and getting it so incredibly wrong. As it happens I was working with the DTI on various partnerships for years, later BERR and was COO of a national NGO partnership between Govt and Industry for a few years although the bulk of my government experience is regional and local, predominantly counties which are somewhat different and tend to reflect local politics. You can choose to believe what you like but I know from bitter personal experience about new brooms in government. And no they don't sack everyone - usually they set up new committees and sub departments, install their stooges, close programs down and TUPE anyone they want to keep out of the action. It's the leadership and the programmes they shuffle, not the secretaries and bookkeepers, all political decisions which pen pushers like you never see or get involved in.

I thought  I would come back to see how things were going. I had to check the date to see if the posts of the same old rubbish were old. Sadly, they were posted in the last few minutes. 
Nothing has changed. 

Nice to see you back Glos and yes things haven't really changed much. Sluffy is still obsessed with Lusty and nine bob still talks bollocks although most people choose to just ignore him now.

Please stick around and help us get this site back to normal please!

@Norpig wrote:Nice to see you back Glos and yes things haven't really changed much. Sluffy is still obsessed with Lusty and nine bob still talks bollocks although most people choose to just ignore him now.

Please stick around and help us get this site back to normal please!

Yes, do stick around ,Glos
Bob's quite funny when you get past his insults. He's also started throwing in some Lancashire and Cumbrian dialect.
Unfortunately, I can still understand him, but we live in an imperfect world. I've found he can take a joke though, so get stuck in.

@boltonbonce wrote:
Yes, do stick around ,Glos
Bob's quite funny when you get past his insults. He's also started throwing in some Lancashire and Cumbrian dialect.
Unfortunately, I can still understand him, but we live in an imperfect world. I've found he can take a joke though, so get stuck in.

I think you are the only one on this site who finds him funny bonce but you have always been a kind hearted soul.

I'm glad that the old-timers, Sluffy and Bob, have identified each other as soul-mates. Good for them!

I'd be even more glad if they now confined their "we know best" posts to just between themselves.

Then members like Glos might return.....

PS:- Wanderlust is not in the same league when it comes to unjustified superior sneering from on high, Bob.

@xmiles wrote:

I think you are the only one on this site who finds him funny bonce but you have always been a kind hearted soul.

He's lost in the wilderness.

I hope.

@gloswhite wrote:I thought  I would come back to see how things were going. I had to check the date to see if the posts of the same old rubbish were old. Sadly, they were posted in the last few minutes. 
Nothing has changed. 

Good to see you back Glos. Ignore the Bob/Sluffy double act, them talking to themselves about how intelligent they are is far more entertaining.

@wanderlust wrote:There you go again speculating about my experience and getting it so incredibly wrong. As it happens I was working with the DTI on various partnerships for years, later BERR and was COO of a national NGO partnership between Govt and Industry for a few years although the bulk of my government experience is regional and local, predominantly counties which are somewhat different and tend to reflect local politics. You can choose to believe what you like but I know from bitter personal experience about new brooms in government. And no they don't sack everyone - usually they set up new committees and sub departments, install their stooges, close programs down and TUPE anyone they want to keep out of the action. It's the leadership and the programmes they shuffle, not the secretaries and bookkeepers, all political decisions which pen pushers like you never see or get involved in.

Just as I expected, absolutely no experience of public sector working from the inside whatsoever.

The question I asked was this...

@Sluffy wrote:How much experience have you got of the public sector and Civil Service in particular other than maybe some contract work from them?

Let me guess - absolutely NONE.

...and your answer - no matter how much you have tried to make it look otherwise - confirms that you have NONE and have worked solely as an external contractor to the public sector.

Let me decode some of what you've said so it makes clearer reading to those who may wish to know what you said.

You start off by saying you were working 'with' the Department of Trade and Industry (note NOT working 'for' them as a employee).  The DTI was established in 1970 and disbanded in June 2007 - so it had seen many changes of changes of Government from Edward Heath's time to Tony Blair.

It existed for 37 YEARS so seems to make a mockery of your claim of 'out with the old, in with the new' at ever change of government doesn't it?

It was replaced by the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform under Gordon Brown - so NOT from a new government changing things they didn't like but by the EXISTING government of the day.

The Department was replaced a year into the coalition government.

From this line you state above " I know from bitter personal experience about new brooms in government", I'm guessing that was the time they terminated your consultancy contract - threw you off the gravy train did they - and it seems you've been bitter about it ever since!

Now you go on to my favourite bit, which did indeed make me laugh out loud when I read it, the bit about your time at the NGO.

Well what's funny about that some may think, but an NGO is a NON GOVERNMENT Organisation - the clue is in the title don't you think!?!

How can you claim to know about how Government functions from your time in a NON GOVERNMENT organisation - they are basically just pressure groups to 'try' to influence government policy - that's all!

A few examples of NGO's include Amnesty International, Save the Children, and Doctors without Boarders (Medecins Sans Frontiers).

All worthy causes but hardly inside government is it?

Finally let me throw some of your words back at you...

@wanderlust wrote:There you go again speculating about my experience and getting it so incredibly wrong.

I dealt with numerous MP's, Council leaders, opposition leaders and all their various political advisors (the Dominic Cummings equivalents), daily for years.  I was one of those telling them what they could and couldn't do legally to put into practice their desired policies and how they could amend things so they could do so legally.

I've dealt with political party members across the board from the Communist Party to the BNP (albeit they were never elected in my time at the authorities I worked for) and have even actively refused to be photographed with nationally recognised politicians on more than one occasion (for the local newspaper) to preserve any future allegations of possible partiality to one political party or another.

Not that I particularly wanted my photo taken with any MP anyway, but that's beside the point I was trying to make.

I've probably forgotten more about politics (both party politics and office politics) than you've ever known.

I've seen politics up close and personal from the inside.

You quite clearly haven't.

Not bad for just a simple 'pen pusher' who apparently never gets to see or be involved with 'real politics' is it?

@Norpig wrote:Nice to see you back Glos and yes things haven't really changed much. Sluffy is still obsessed with Lusty and nine bob still talks bollocks although most people choose to just ignore him now.

Please stick around and help us get this site back to normal please!

You really think I'm obsessed with Wanderlust?

I guess you must do as you've said it.

Nah, I'm not obsessed with Wanderlust or anyone else or in fact anything, all I'm trying to do is call out fake news and utter bullshit when I see it and even then I really only limit it to the arc of knowledge, training and experience I have, which is basically how companies and public bodies run and how the public sector works.

I've been in that game for over forty years now although I've effectively retired before I reached fifty and only worked to help out old colleagues or give myself something to occupy my time with.

If anyone is obsessed then I suggest it is the person posting utter nonsense then going to extraordinary lengths NOT to admit he got it wrong/didn't know what he was talking about.

Seeing we are on the internet, none of us know each other and it's all pretty meaningless anyway, one wonders (well I do) why he has the need to do that?

Clearly it matters to him not to be seen to be wrong I guess and that's why we end up playing these stupid games.

If he wants to continue to post fake news in respect of the areas I know about, then I'll continue to correct him so the readers on here won't be misled.

Wouldn't you correct someone if they said something bollocks about pharmacy on here?  I think you would.

So if they then said 'they' were an 'expert' in the field and it was you who didn't know what you were talking about, wouldn't you reply back with the facts and links to shoot him down?

That's all I've ever been doing.

Wouldn't everyone do the same?

Just seems the right and obvious thing to do to me.

I do think you're obsessed as you bring him into almost every post you make these days. You engineer ways to have a go at him just like in this very thread right at the start with your other obsession KA.

I'm not saying Lusty is whiter than white, he knows how to wind you up and you fall for it every time. Call him out at the time of him posting if you need to but this constant returning to the same old arguments is what is killing this site.

Anyone know why Bob got canned?

Ye i was wondering the same, must have been something on chatbox as there's nothing unusual in posts in yesterday (not unusual for Bob that is).

@T.R.O.Y. wrote:Ye i was wondering the same, must have been something on chatbox as there's nothing unusual in posts in yesterday (not unusual for Bob that is).

I didn't see him in chatbox last night. Mind you, I arrived 25 minutes late after falling asleep in the bath.

He doesn't come on the chatbox but BTID said on there he had been banned. I suspect it was KP as one of his posts said something something about have a break?

@karlypants wrote:

Have a day off!

Think this is code for you're banned