ST. JOHN'S, N.L.

David Maher

The Telegram

Former Liberal MHA Neil King has accepted a temporary position with the Department of Transportation and Works without a job competition.

Conception Bay South Progressive Conservative MHA Barry Petten raised the hiring in the House of Assembly on Wednesday, after filing an access to information request.

On the form it says: recruit from a previous competition, which means there were people there that were interviewed, went through the proper process that could have been hired, just scored a bit lower. There were people ready to take this position. Instead, it was scratched out and it was: hire 13-week temporary employment, said Petten.

Obviously, this was done to avoid a job competition, which don't make sense because there's already someone there waiting to take the job.

Transportation and Works Minister Steve Crocker says the practice of hiring temporary employees to 13-week positions without competition is not rare within government.

He's referring to a former MHA who actually took a temporary assignment, a short-term assignment, a 13-week assignment on an as-needed basis, said Crocker.

We do this all the time, Mr. Speaker, as MHAs and people who represent people put forward names for positions that come forward.

Crocker says a competition for a full-time replacement has already begun.

The hiring of workers on temporary contracts is within the right of ministers, according to legislation.

Clause 5.01 cc of the Newfoundland and Labrador Association of Public and Private Employees' collective agreement, for example, specifies an employee can be put into a higher or lower position for up to 13 weeks without any competition.

Petten says the issue isnt the legislation, but putting a Liberal insider into the job when others had been interviewed.

We're talking about a former Liberal MHA being put in a public-service job, bargaining unit job, that someone is more qualified to do, he said.

They will show you the person that should have got called for that job. They never got called. Instead, their friend, the former MHA, got called. That's our issue. Simple.

Crocker denied the charge of cronyism.

If he wants to talk about cronyism, how about the 2015 appointment of a former minister to the chair of the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation, he said, referring to the appointment by the Tory administration of former cabinet minister John Ottenheimer.

Let's think about what he's saying over there today.

david.maher@thetelegram.com

@DavidMaherNL

Link:
Former Liberal MHA given government job without competition: Petten - The Telegram

Boris Johnson, the UK prime minister, has reshuffled his cabinet. But among all the sackings and appointments, the big news of the day was Sajid Javids resignation as chancellor of the exchequer. Javid was reportedly told by the prime minister that he had to fire all his special advisers and replace them with No 10 special advisers to make it one team, which he refused to do, instead choosing to resign. He has been replaced by his deputy, Rishi Sunak.

This is a very swift promotion for Sunak and is a role that will immediately come with a lot of work given the budget is only four weeks away. This replacement is seen by many as the prime ministers move to take more control of economic policy. And, by replacing a chancellor who had, at times, different views to him, Johnson now has someone with limited political and cabinet experience at No 11 a move that has caused former Tory MP David Gauke to take to Twitter to warn Whitehall to remember the importance of its independence. He said: the chancellor and the Treasury has to be strong enough to say No to the PM or anyone else.

Research further supports the importance of a strong chancellor. In cross-country studies that have looked at the role of finance ministers, it has been found that strong ministers keep lower levels of debt and deficit and are able to block rises in social welfare spending.

Why the reshuffle?

Typically, prime ministers reshuffle when their popularity goes down and when they cannot effectively control their cabinet or their backbench. So the timing of this reshuffle may seem unusual as it comes only two months after the formation of a new government from a prime minister who enjoys high approval ratings and a large parliamentary majority.

Yet its not as abnormal as it seems given that the prime minister kept his team of ministers after Decembers election so this is effectively his first opportunity for a post-electoral reshuffle.

The profile of cabinet ministers reflects the PMs policy priorities. Johnsons July 2019 cabinet sent a very clear message: he was determined to deliver Brexit, and accordingly he appointed ministers with strong pro-Brexit stances. Now that the UK has technically left the European Union, it was expected that he would want to replace some of these ministers with ministers who share his policy vision beyond Brexit. Nonetheless, it appears Brexit is still a prominent issue for Johnson as a lot of high-profile appointments include vocal supporters of Brexit.

MPs policy expertise, professional background, political experience and past performance are all factors that matter when deciding who to appoint.

Indeed, Theresa Villiers is out as environment secretary, replaced by George Eustice MP for Camborne and Redruth in Cornwall. This appointment could have significant consequences for the countrys environmental policy as evidence suggests that the people that prime ministers appoint to ministerial portfolios matter for policy outcomes. Although Eustice has policy experience as a former minister for agriculture, his public profile speaks louder of his opposition to the EUs agricultural policy than of his environmental record.

Friends with political goals

Johnson is faced with a very different party and country than in July 2019. He has a large parliamentary majority and a parliamentary group that is more unified than before the December elections. This allows him to appoint ministers who are ideologically close to him without worrying too much about satisfying party factions.

Policy objectives, however, are not the sole or the primary reason for reshuffles. Prime ministers seek to balance a number of important goals when they decide who to appoint to cabinet. And prime ministers often use cabinet appointments to reward their friends and those loyal to them.

Johnson clearly wants to send a strong signal that he values loyalty above everything else. Anne-Marie Trevelyan, for example, has been rewarded with a more senior appointment from minister for the armed forces to secretary of state for international development. Similarly Oliver Dowden has been promoted to culture secretary. Geoffrey Cox on the other hand has lost his job as attorney general for openly disagreeing with the PM over the parliaments prorogation.

Reshuffles are also the only way to fire ministers who have drifted from the prime ministers agenda or who openly disagree with the prime minister. Indeed, probably most of those whove been sacked were ministers who had stood up to the prime minister in cabinet meetings.

And of course, not all ministers are high performers. Its the prime ministers responsibility to replace low-performing ministers particularly in high-priority portfolios and reshuffles offer than opportunity.

So of the ministers would have remained in post, such as international trade secretary Liz Truss, education secretary Gavin Williamson and health secretary Matt Hancock, its safe to say they have either performed sufficiently well and have avoided scandals. Or it could simply be theyve been kept where they are because the prime minister considers their areas to be low priority where policy stability is expected time will only tell.

Despina Alexiadou, Chancellors Fellow at the School of Government and Public Policy, University of Strathclyde

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Image: Reuters

Here is the original post:
British Politics Primer: Who's Who in Johnson's Reshuffled Cabinet? - The National Interest Online

Boris Johnson, the UK prime minister, has reshuffled his cabinet. But among all the sackings and appointments, the big news of the day was Sajid Javids resignation as chancellor of the exchequer. Javid was reportedly told by the prime minister that he had to fire all his special advisers and replace them with No 10 special advisers to make it one team, which he refused to do, instead choosing to resign. He has been replaced by his deputy, Rishi Sunak.

This is a very swift promotion for Sunak and is a role that will immediately come with a lot of work given the budget is only four weeks away. This replacement is seen by many as the prime ministers move to take more control of economic policy. And, by replacing a chancellor who had, at times, different views to him, Johnson now has someone with limited political and cabinet experience at No 11 a move that has caused former Tory MP David Gauke to take to Twitter to warn Whitehall to remember the importance of its independence. He said: the chancellor and the Treasury has to be strong enough to say No to the PM or anyone else.

Research further supports the importance of a strong chancellor. In cross-country studies that have looked at the role of finance ministers, it has been found that strong ministers keep lower levels of debt and deficit and are able to block rises in social welfare spending.

Typically, prime ministers reshuffle when their popularity goes down and when they cannot effectively control their cabinet or their backbench. So the timing of this reshuffle may seem unusual as it comes only two months after the formation of a new government from a prime minister who enjoys high approval ratings and a large parliamentary majority.

Yet its not as abnormal as it seems given that the prime minister kept his team of ministers after Decembers election so this is effectively his first opportunity for a post-electoral reshuffle.

The profile of cabinet ministers reflects the PMs policy priorities. Johnsons July 2019 cabinet sent a very clear message: he was determined to deliver Brexit, and accordingly he appointed ministers with strong pro-Brexit stances. Now that the UK has technically left the European Union, it was expected that he would want to replace some of these ministers with ministers who share his policy vision beyond Brexit. Nonetheless, it appears Brexit is still a prominent issue for Johnson as a lot of high-profile appointments include vocal supporters of Brexit.

MPs policy expertise, professional background, political experience and past performance are all factors that matter when deciding who to appoint.

Indeed, Theresa Villiers is out as environment secretary, replaced by George Eustice MP for Camborne and Redruth in Cornwall. This appointment could have significant consequences for the countrys environmental policy as evidence suggests that the people that prime ministers appoint to ministerial portfolios matter for policy outcomes. Although Eustice has policy experience as a former minister for agriculture, his public profile speaks louder of his opposition to the EUs agricultural policy than of his environmental record.

Johnson is faced with a very different party and country than in July 2019. He has a large parliamentary majority and a parliamentary group that is more unified than before the December elections. This allows him to appoint ministers who are ideologically close to him without worrying too much about satisfying party factions.

Policy objectives, however, are not the sole or the primary reason for reshuffles. Prime ministers seek to balance a number of important goals when they decide who to appoint to cabinet. And prime ministers often use cabinet appointments to reward their friends and those loyal to them.

Johnson clearly wants to send a strong signal that he values loyalty above everything else. Anne-Marie Trevelyan, for example, has been rewarded with a more senior appointment from minister for the armed forces to secretary of state for international development. Similarly Oliver Dowden has been promoted to culture secretary. Geoffrey Cox on the other hand has lost his job as attorney general for openly disagreeing with the PM over the parliaments prorogation.

Reshuffles are also the only way to fire ministers who have drifted from the prime ministers agenda or who openly disagree with the prime minister. Indeed, probably most of those whove been sacked were ministers who had stood up to the prime minister in cabinet meetings.

And of course, not all ministers are high performers. Its the prime ministers responsibility to replace low-performing ministers particularly in high-priority portfolios and reshuffles offer than opportunity.

So of the ministers would have remained in post, such as international trade secretary Liz Truss, education secretary Gavin Williamson and health secretary Matt Hancock, its safe to say they have either performed sufficiently well and have avoided scandals. Or it could simply be theyve been kept where they are because the prime minister considers their areas to be low priority where policy stability is expected time will only tell.

More here:
Boris Johnson's cabinet reshuffle: what you need to know - The Conversation UK

Former BBC producer Patrick Howse speaks to those inside the Corporation about the threats facing it at the hands of Boris Johnson and Dominic Cummings.

Boris Johnson may be intent on making his Cabinet behave, but he appears not to be content with meek colleagues and subservient newspapers. He and his favourite unelected, unaccountable bureaucrat Dominic Cummings have decided to go after the BBC.

John Whittingdale was not in the room as the new reshuffled Cabinet bleated its obedience to its leader, but the newly appointed Minister of State at the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) was presumably lurking somewhere in Whitehalls corridors of power. He is a former Culture Secretary, who has been brought back to the same department in a more junior role an appointment that raises a few questions.

An article in this weekends Sunday Times made it clear that the BBC is in for it. The article quoted a senior source from No. 10 as saying we are not bluffing on the licence fee. We are having a consultation and we will whack it. It has to be a subscription model. The source told the newspaper that the public service broadcaster will have to become smaller because theyve got hundreds of radio stations, theyve got all these TV stations and a massive website. The whole thing needs massive pruning back.

The comments have drawn criticism from Conservative MPs including Damian Green who tweeted that destroying the BBC wasnt in our manifesto and would be cultural vandalism.

But these attacks come at a time when the BBC feels unsure of where its going. The Director General Lord Hall is leaving and a replacement is yet to be appointed. Some alarming names including Rupert Murdochs daughter Elisabeth have been floated as possible replacements. It adds up to a climate of fear for the national broadcaster.

This is real boot on the throat stuff its all about making the BBC compliant and docile, says Meirion Jones, a former BBC journalist who was instrumental in breaking the Jimmy Savile abuse story the row over which led to his departure from the Corporation.

The BBC is set to lose the licence fee in 2027 and its now been put on notice that that can be brought forward at any time, he told me. Its direct, obvious pressure anything they do now will be immediately punished. One mis-step and that could be it. Anything controversial has to go up to the Director General, as editor-in-chief. With a threat like this hanging over them theyre not going to do anything to rock the boat.

It is worth restating that the BBC does much more than news and politics. It is a massively important cultural institution which has helped shape Britain for almost a century. It is also a global brand that has enabled this country to punch way above its weight. From local radio to the natural history Unit, from CBeebies to Test Match Special, it serves its listeners, viewers and readers with unforgettable programming across every platform.

The BBC still inspires love from its audiences and from the people who work for it, many of whom continue to be willing to risk their lives for it. And thats partly why the likes of Cummings and Boris Johnson fear and hate it because, at its best, it is brave, brilliant and out of their control.

However, the BBCs headquarters are in London, not Heaven, which means that its not perfect. I have written about its failings over Brexit and related issues and Im not alone in recognising those very serious shortcomings. It is already too slow to rock the boat and has lost the support of many who would have once supported it.

Despite all this, former BBC current affairs journalist John Sweeney is one of many who have been quick to support the Corporation. My timeline on Twitter is crowded with people ripping great lumps out of me for defending the BBC, he told me. He left the organisation last year over a row about a Panorama documentary, which has not yet been broadcast, about the far-right rabble-rouser known as Tommy Robinson, but he still believes passionately in the BBC. It is a noble thing. I am worried that Boris, Dom and Co are out to smash it to pieces by a thousand cuts. To take away the licence fee would be the biggest blow.

There must be serious doubts that Tony Halls successor as Director General is going to have the guts to properly hold such a Government to account. One very experienced investigative journalist, who still works for the BBC, told me that the news department has too many layers of timid management and needs a shake-up.

No decision can ever be made quickly and too many people are covering their arses rather than making the ethically, morally, or editorially correct decision, the journalist said. But and its a big but it seems as if people like Johnson, Cummings and Whittingdale are not interested in making a strong, healthy press but want to neutralise any potentially strong critical voices, a la Trump.

Some in the BBC see the weekends events as clumsy bluster. I think its mostly c*ck-waving for the Sunday Times to be honest, one former colleague told me. Theyll never sell English local radio, its too strong a public service and MPs like appearing on it. Plus the commercial sector is all about rationalising into a national network at the moment. However, in the longer term, I dont see a future for a public BBC post-2027, he said, reflecting a growing sense of pessimism among many BBC staff.

It is clear that the senior No. 10 source who spoke to the Sunday Times clearly doesnt fully grasp the meaning of consultation, having already made up his mind before anyone else has told the Government what they think. And we may be excused for being confused about which sense of the word whack he intended did he mean a Chicago gangster whack, as in a hit, or did he mean chastisement?

Which brings me back to John Whittingdale. When he was appointed Culture Secretary by David Cameron in 2015, the journalist Peter Oborne wrote that his views on the BBC repay inspection. The new Culture Secretary is the spokesman for a very powerful body of right-wing opinion which has long been determined to weaken and even to destroy the BBC as a national institution, and clearly sees its opportunity in the wake of the 2015 General Election victory, Oborne wrote in openDemocracy.

Whittingdale didnt survive long in his post. In April 2016, newspapers reported that he had been involved in a six-month relationship with a female sex worker he said he had been unaware of his girlfriends true occupation after meeting her online. He survived, but was sacked when Theresa May took office later that year.

That very powerful body of right wing opinion Peter Oborne wrote about is now in power, unchallenged and ravening and, behind it, are media organisations desperate to get their teeth into the BBCs dismembered carcass. They all hate the ideal of public service broadcasting that reaches into every home in the country and which is funded by what they present as a regressive tax.

John Sweeney views Whittingdales appointment as both silly and dark, all at the same time.

He was disgraced after he hid a freebie he took with a sex worker from the House of Commons register of interests, he told me. As an MP, he took far too many freebies thanks to a British-Ukrainian friendship group funded by pro-Kremlin oligarch Dmytro Firtash, who is now a fugitive from the FBI. Whittingdale is one of the Kremlins useful idiots.

He is also a politician who might have something to gain from a compliant, docile media.

See the original post:
'Real Boot on the Throat Stuff': Why the BBC is Facing the Fight of its Life - Byline Times

CalMac breakdowns increased by over a third in 2019, according to figures obtained under freedom of information by Scottish Greens transport spokesperson John Finnie.

There were 1,069 cancellations of CalMac sailings because of technical failures last year compared to 780 in 2018, an increase of 289 or 37 per cent.

In light of the figures, Highlands and Islands MSP Finnie called for the Scottish Government to urgently review its vessel deployment and replacement plan.

John Finnie MSP said: CalMac is entrusted to deliver lifeline services to remote and island communities up and down the west coast, so it is particularly concerning that the number of cancellations as a result of technical breakdowns has greatly increased in the last year.

Behind these cancellations are people unable to attend hospital appointments on the mainland, missed job interviews, small businesses unable to send and receive goods, and a loss of important tourism revenue.

We know that the bulk of the fleet needs renewed.

The average age of the CalMac fleet is 23 years, and the Scottish Governments own ferry plan for 2013-2022 highlighted that the majority of the vessels needed to be replaced.

This hasnt happened and were left with the situation where we have an ageing fleet which requires longer periods of maintenance and repair.

The Cabinet Secretary for Transport must urgently review the vessels deployment and replacement plan, ensuring community representatives and trade unions are at the heart of the procurement process, in order to deliver a fleet that communities served by the Clyde and Hebrides services deserve.

Here is the original post:
CalMac ferry breakdowns increase by over a third in a year - Holyrood

Suffolk County Council is looking to reduce its carbon footprint by investing 9.8m in street lighting, if an LED street lighting replacement project is given the go ahead next week.

The council recognises the importance of climate change, the need to reduce the effects of this and its role in protecting the environment.

Following a review of its street lighting policy in 2010, and with energy prices set to increase at between 8 per cent and 12 per cent a year, the council has decided the high energy consumption of its existing lanterns is costing too much.

The council owns and maintains over 60,000 street lights. Back in 2010, the county council took numerous steps to help reduce both the energy costs and carbon footprint of its lighting stock.

This included the introduction of part-night lighting arrangements and conversion to LED for those lighting units that were consuming the highest level of energy.

The proposal to convert the remaining street lighting stock to LED will help to reduce both Suffolks energy consumption (cutting about 60 per cent of its energy bill) and carbon footprint (which would reduce by about 80 per cent), whilst providing crisper illumination of the streets for residents. The project will also ensure that Suffolk remains resilient to any future energy price increases.

Recommendations put forward by Councillor Andrew Reid, Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Rural Affairs, will be considered at Suffolk County Councils Cabinet meeting on Tuesday, February 25.

Cabinet will consider:

n capital investment of 9.822m to enable all existing street lighting units to become LED with the capability for dimming;

n the setting of a dimming regime to all LED street lighting equivalent to an average power throughput level not exceeding 50 per cent;

n the delegation of authority to the Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Rural Affairs and the Assistant Director of Operational Highways for determining specific levels of dimming that should apply.

Cllr Andrew Reid, Suffolk County Councils Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Rural Affairs, said: We recognise the importance of our environment in Suffolk and the impacts of climate change.

Where possible, we want to ensure that we protect and enhance the natural environment, decrease carbon emissions and reduce the use of scarce resources, for the well-being of future generations and the natural world.

Initiatives such as this are important in helping us to achieve that aim.

We will be replacing almost 43,000 lights with new energy saving LED lanterns.

This will save approximately 60 per cent of our current energy bill which can invested elsewhere.

We will be able to reduce our carbon usage by around 80 per cent, benefitting residents throughout Suffolk.

If Suffolk County Councils Cabinet agrees to the recommendations, the project will be completed in the autumn of 2022.

Full details of the committee paper for the Cabinet meeting on Tuesday, January 28 is available on Suffolk County Councils website under the item 25-02-2020, The Cabinet.

Follow this link:
Changes to street lighting would cut bills by 60% - Haverhill Echo

Ive been trying hard to ignore the Dominic Cummings thing. Partly, this is because whenever Margaret Thatchers press secretary Bernard Ingham popped up on TV to slag me off when I was in Downing Street, I would say to my kids: If that is ever me, doing that whole wouldnt have happened in my day thing, promise you will put me down.

But when my own daughter starts to talk about Cummings in her stand-up comedy show, perhaps it is time to realise I am swimming against an impossible tide, that you cannot credibly talk about the workings of the Johnson government without trying to understand the wirings of Cummings mind.

You get the flavour of my daughter Graces show by its title, Why I am Never Going into Politics, suggesting that a life growing up in it she was a young baby when I started working for Tony Blair in 1994 has put her off following in parental footsteps.

She describes Cummings as being to Boris Johnson what my Dad was to Tony Blair. As for Cummings studied scruffiness, which screams out please photograph me every time he walks up Downing Street with his takeaway coffee and his arse hanging out of his trousers, Grace says he reminds her of posh kids at university who spend ages in front of the mirror working out how to dress in a way that disguises the fact that their parents are absolutely loaded.

Whatever similarities between then and now, me and Cummings whom I barely know, so it is hard to judge there are some very significant differences between Johnson and Blair. TB had a very clear agenda, knew what he wanted to do, and his team knew it too. Most of it flowed from the manifestos on which he was elected, and even when dealing with the unexpected, we were always trying to fit it all to the broader strategy of modernisation. With Johnson, it has long been clear what he wants to be Prime Minister but less clear what he wants to do. He is executive chairman, not CEO. That opens a gap for others to set an agenda including, dare I say, unelected advisers like Cummings.

Anyone who has read my diaries will know there were times I might have disagreed with TB, but on the broad agenda his I was totally signed up, and it was my job to help him communicate and deliver it, across government and in the eyes of the public.

The second big difference between Johnson and Blair is that TB was into detail. As with Bill Clinton, because they were both good communicators, who could explain complex things simply, often the media thought communication was their strong point. But they were both detail people, and with a work-rate to match. Johnson is intellectually lazy, glib, still in many ways more of a journalist than he is a politician and he skates over detail. This too opens the door to Cummings, assuming he does have an agenda separate from his boss.

The third big difference is that TB wanted strong characters around him, both in his inner circle and Cabinet, where I was but one of several who were encouraged privately to challenge, cajole and often criticise him. I am hardly breaking State secrets in saying that there were tensions between Number 10 and the Treasury in our time too, and Tony often toyed with the idea of sacking Gordon Brown. But when push came to shove, he saw the exceptional talent in GB, and knew the government as a whole would be weaker without it. John Prescott could be a nightmare. Robin Cook could be a nightmare. Mo Mowlam could be a nightmare. But they were big talents offering different qualities to the team that government has to be.

Sajid Javid is no Gordon Brown, but the circumstances of his removal as Chancellor, and replacement by Rishi Sunak, suggests Johnson wants ciphers, middle managers, not leaders of huge departments of state. The removal of Julian Smith from the Northern Ireland Office the first Tory Secretary of State since 2010 to win the backing and respect of most local politicians, and who actually achieved something his predecessors had not in getting the political process moving again underlined that Johnsons Cabinet is no meritocracy. The juvenile chanting around the Cabinet table, of the lies he had told about new hospitals, nurses and police numbers during the election, underlined it further.

Campaigning is hard. Governing is harder. That Johnson and Cummings have earned their spurs as campaigners is beyond doubt. The 2016 referendum, and the 2019 general election, have seen to that, though in both cases they were hugely helped by their opponents. But slogans, whether written on the side of buses, or reduced to three words from a focus group, eventually get tested against broader economic and political realities. It is not happening yet. But it will.

Thanks to their campaigning skills, a broadly supine media and a largely absent Opposition, with its seemingly endless leadership election, have succeeded in getting get Brexit done done. By this I mean that Brexit continues to have the potential to damage both country and government, and it is not clear that either Johnson or Cummings has a plan to avoid it.

It also means that another, possibly more important slogan from the election campaign is going to become more central to the debate and to peoples lives. This one is just two words . . . levelling up.

It begs an awful lot of questions, none of which have yet begun to be given answers. The Budget, drafted by one multi-millionaire investment banker, now being rewritten to be presented by another, will need to provide some of them.

Successful slogans raise expectations. They will be dashed once it becomes clear how far we are from a trade deal with the EU and how we will need the extension that Johnson promised would never happen. The seats won over by the slogans in the North will be expecting to see a reversal of the public spending cuts to local government, health, education, social care and support for poorer families.

As the impact will not be felt for some time, the only way to judge them will be by comparison with better off regions of the UK. But even the best off regions have huge levels of poverty, and are struggling with the fallout from a decade of austerity. Can they level up without levelling down? Given that they have promised not to raise the main taxes, that growth forecasts are pretty dismal, the fiscal position is weak, productivity remains a problem, and even their own assessments are showing that Brexit will leave a hole that will not be easily filled, Sunak is going to have to find not just a magic money tree, but a whole forest of them.

When he doesnt, Johnson and Cummings are going to need friends beyond those newspapers that have turned themselves into fanzines. They will discover that real change and reform require a strong centre which empowers strong ministers, and strong leaders in public services. The centre can lead, organise and strategise. But it cannot deliver without goodwill across the civil service and beyond. Which is why it strikes me as profoundly stupid constantly to communicate a message that most people in the civil service, the NHS, schools and the police, are useless, and that they need to be shaken up by weirdos and misfits with a penchant for racism and eugenics.

As Kenneth Clarke reminded Johnson shortly before, ludicrously, he was kicked out of the Tory Party, he has finally got a serious job. It is time he started doing it, and understanding that as well as coming up with snazzy one-liners, it means helping people whose homes are flooded; it means being part of events like the Munich Security Conference when all the big players of security and diplomacy are present; it means inspiring, not abusing, those who work for you; it means getting a grip of the people who represent you to others, and it means making sure they understand that it is all very well to make enemies, but there will come a time when a government and a Prime Minister need friends.

See more here:
What Johnson and Cummings don't understand about government - TheArticle

Dwight Ball couldn't seem to stop scoring on his own goal.

Throughout last fall he had to defend moving former senior Liberal staffer Carla Foote into a position at The Rooms, the provincial museum and archives, sans competition.

Instead of a fresh start in the new year, he faced a new controversy: a fat contract for a deputy minister-turned-oil and gas consultant.

Behind the scenes, multiple sources say cabinet and caucus members were frustrated with the premier's performance and his inability to handle scandals of his own making.

"Every leader has an expiration date. Dwight Ball just reached his," one cabinet minister told CBCNews after Ball announced Monday evening that he was stepping down as premier.

Just last week, when Ball made his big announcement on keeping electricity rates low, there was another sign of waning support: only a few cabinet ministers showed up, with some of the heavy hitters Transportation MinisterSteve Crocker, Health Minister John Haggie, Tourism, Culture, Industry and Innovation Minister Bernard Davis, and Municipal Affairs and Environment Minister Derek Bragg all absent.

Ball is expected to speak with media in one-on-one interviews Tuesday afternoon.

Rumours of Ball's resignation aren't new; they started early inhis tenure as premier.

He underestimated the backlash from his first budget that hiked taxes and feesand cut libraries. Some in the public would never forgive him.

Every day he had to drive by posters calling for his resignation. He faced large, angry protests.

Multiple sources inside his own caucus say Ball never really regained the public trust. Less than a year ago the public returned him to power, but with his wings clipped atop a minority government. After that, he kept stumbling from scandal to scandal.

Ball acknowledged the loss of trust from the public in a subtle way in his video address.

"I have always understood that every MHA serves at your pleasure," he said, before saying his time had come to step back and spend more time with his family a line as old as politics itself.

Leaving now saves Ball from facing a June leadership review one he knew would be tough. Caucus and cabinet members were not-so-quietly expressing their desire for him to leave. Liberal executive members loyal to Ball tried to get the party to delay the vote, to give Ball more time, but they failed.

Ball had a choice: fight a battle or leave on his own terms. He chose the latter.

The Liberal party is expected to lay out the process today, but the unofficial race has already started.

Some inside the cabinet have already ruled it out, with Natural Resources MinisterSiobhan Coady and Minister of Fisheries and Land Resources Gerry Byrne insisting they won't run.

One name is already seen as a front-runner: Andrew Furey,an orthopedic surgeon better known for his philanthropy. He founded Team Broken Earth, which helps provide medical care to developing countries.

Furey has never held elected office but comes from a political family. His father, George Furey, iscurrently speaker of the Senate.

Insiders say he also has the backing of former premier Brian Tobin, who was helping him get ready for a run even before Monday's resignation. Furey told CBC news on Tuesday morning he is interested in throwing his hat in the ring, but would not speak further to the matter, adding he needed to discuss the issue with family and colleagues.

From inside the party, Minister of Justice and Public SafetyAndrew Parsons is well-liked, but is dealing with serious family health issues that sidelined him from the House of Assembly last fall and will keep him from running for the top job.

"My family continues to deal with a medical issue andI simply cannot devote my time to a leadership run," Parsons tweeted Tuesday morning.

The now outgoing premier wants his replacement to be chosen soon.

In his address, he said he wants a new leader to put a stamp on a spring budget, due out in only two months.

That will mean a quick race or a delayed budget.

Under a law brought in by the PC government under Danny Williams, an election will have to happen within a year of a new premier taking office.

Even if the budget passes this spring not a guarantee for a minority government an election is coming.

Read more from CBC Newfoundland and Labrador

Read the rest here:
The fall of Dwight Ball: An embattled premier with waning caucus support - CBC.ca

13 Feb 2020, 11:11

Tatton MP Esther McVey has been sacked as housing minister her successor will be the tenth person to have held the post in as many years.

McVey said: I wish my successor the very best and every success.

The Liverpool-born former work and pensions secretary returned to parliament when she took George Osbornes old seat in 2017, having lost her Wirral West seat in 2015.

Her replacement is MP for Tamworth, Christopher Pincher, who has worked as minister for Europe and Amercias and is a former deputy chief whip.

Other business and property-related ministers sacked in Boris Johnsons reshuffle on Thursday include:

Chancellor of the Exchequer Sajid Javid has resigned as part of the reshuffle. It is reported that he was offered to keep his role if he fired his advisers, to which he refused and subsequently resigned. The new chancellor faces a budget in four weeks.

Melanie Leech, chief executive, British Property Federation, said:Itll come as a shock to many to lose Sajid Javid as Chancellor of the Exchequer with only four weeks to go to this years Budget but Rishi Sunak was already a senior member of the Treasury team and we stand ready to work with him to ensure fiscal policy drives forward much-needed investment across the UK.

We also welcome Alok Sharma as the new Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, and Christopher Pincher as the new Minister of State for Housing. A new government with a strong mandate is a big opportunity to ensure stability in key roles including housing, something which has been missing in recent years and has got in the way of delivery.

Paresh Raja, CEO of national bridging loan provider Market Financial Solutions, said: A new parliament, a new housing minister. One has to think whether this cabinet position holds any real relevance anymore it has become something of a merry-go-round, with Esther McVeys successor becoming the tenth person to hold this position in as many years.

Given the challenges facing the UK property market, the lack of consistent leadership from the Government in this space is extremely frustrating. We will never be in a position to properly address issues like the housing crisis, not to mention the obstacles preventing people from jumping on and moving up the property ladder, until Westminster gives the position of housing minister more respect and consideration.

One can only hope that with a majority government now in place, this will be the last cabinet reshuffle we see for some time. But I for one believe too many MPs see the position as little more than stepping-stone.

Flicie Krikler, director at London-based Assael Architecture, said: There is a total incompatibility between the political cycles and the long-term aspects of housing. Appointing the tenth housing minister in the last 10 years makes a complete mockery of the role. The industry needs stability to make progress on the housing front and bring forward policies that clarify questions over design, quality and delivery methods concerning the homes we build.

Understanding and addressing the issues troubling the market takes time and effort, and while another minister gets to grips with the role, we have high streets in need of reform and high-quality homes in need of building. I hope whoever steps in to fill McVeys place will be able to quickly adapt and contribute to the UKs housing needs.

See the original post here:
McVey replaced as housing minister - Place North West

349 Stevens Ave., Portland $494,900

Prices on multi-units prove Portland values are operating in a different tier than other Maine cities. This week, during a low inventory season, 2-units were the only multi-families under $500,000. Theres cheaper, but this Deering Center home gets a price boost for having 2- and 3- bedroom apartments and a fenced in yard. Click here to see the full listing.

5 Glenwood St., Augusta $125,000

Located near the Kennebec River Trail and within walking distance to Water St. businesses, this homes units are both 2-bedrooms. One of the current tenants has lived there for over 10 years. It has an expansive back yard and deck as well as a newly installed Pensotti furnace and roof and window updates. Click here to see the full listing.

119 S. Maine St., Auburn $165,000

The units in this 1920 home are both 3-bedrooms with fresh paint, recently refinished hardwood, and newer laminate flooring and carpet. The first-floor apartment just got a countertop and cabinet replacement and has 1 full and 1 half bath. Bonus: 2-car garage and an attic for storage. Situated in the quiet New Auburn neighborhood. Click here to see the full listing.

Previous

Original post:
For Your Money: Simple Income from 2-Units in Urban Areas - Press Herald