Should the office of Deputy Prime Minister remain under Gordon Brown, I do hope the answers that he or she provides to Parliament in relation to their responsibilities are more substantial than John Prescott's have been.Yesterday he was asked a pretty straightforward question of "how many occasions in the last 12 months he has chaired meetings to consider issues relating to the future of the Post Office network." The answer? "I meet regularly with colleagues to discuss a range of issues."
That's just crap. This guy is, according to him at least, chairing committees to justify his salary. It is neither an unreasonable nor unacceptable question to ask him how many committee meetings he has chaired over a period. Unless of course the answer might be zero?
2 comments:
I just cant be bothered to say any more that good riddance
If the post of DPM is simply that of a party liaison officer funded by the taxpayer, it should be scapped. If, however, the occupant principally has distinct policy responsibilities and is also the stand-in for the PM, let's keep it. But we should not be paying for apparatchiks in Cabinet - not good for the trust agenda, Mr Brown.
Post a Comment