Priti Patel | Vital Football

Priti Patel

jogills

Vital Football Hero
As Secretary of State for International Development Priti Patel made an undeclared visit to Israel and discussed using UK foreign aid to fund Israeli armed forces. She went without security and tried to deceive the press both about the visit and its purpose. A weakened Theresa May told her off.

She has now been found guilty of bullying in 3 separate government departments and has racked up a world beating number of transgressions against the ministerial code. Expect a mild telling off from her incompetent boss, who should never have appointed her in the first place.
 
My SiL is a senior civil servant at DWP and reckons she’s the worst she’s ever worked for.
 
My SiL is a senior civil servant at DWP and reckons she’s the worst she’s ever worked for.
I knew someone who had the misfortune to work for her. Vile and thick is a short summary. Screamed and shouted at people. Rated easily the worst person in Government to work for.

Mild slap on the wrist to come from Johnson.

What have we come to?

Carping at Civil Servants is easy meat and popular in the Tory press so she'll get away with it. I gather the full report is being supressed and a whitewash version is being put out with the usual excuse that the Civil Servants didn't do what she wanted all the time/straight away so they had it coming.
 
How has she got as far as she has? Does anyone have an explanation?

People in the Tory party who have worked with her say she is incredibly hard working and demands that her staff also work hard. Since those people are likely to be politically in general agreement with her instructions then they respect her and work hard to carry them out.

People not in the Tory party whose opinions are different from hers find her demands to work hard in following her orders to be problematic if she is instructing them to do something they don't politically agree with.

By all accounts she is normally quite calm and respectful when people are carrying out their jobs but can go all dominatrix (without the corset and whips) if staff are deliberately undermining her. I've seen numerous former civil servants down the years comment that it doesn't matter who the secretary of state is as the civil service will just get on with running the country and doing what is needed regardless. I do wonder if she is asking them to do things and they aren't following her orders.

I have no idea if her language was any way inappropriate when getting into arguments with her civil servants but I suspect there is politics at play.
 
Anecdotal is interesting and gossip worthy but one of our most senior government ministers has fallen foul of the ministerial code repeatedly. I'm not interested in sycophantic claptrap from junior MPs on the make.

If MPs and ministers find their own rules and regulations so unbearable then they should stop holding the rest of us to account. Any ordinary boss with her record would be gone, or perhaps a long run of humiliating apologies, appraisals and courses might have done the trick. What a cracking way to round of Anti Bullying Week 2020.
 
Last edited:
And now Sir Alex Allen the PMs advisor on the ministerial code has resigned. Apparently in response to Johnson's imminent decision that he is to back Priti Patel. No attempts to smear civil servants, or pretend she is just hardworking and demanding now work. Johnson's poor judgement strikes again wasting capital on a very ordinary performer while much better women and men languish on his back benches. He's not very good at making and keeping friends on his own side and it may bite him sooner than he thinks.
 
So desperate to keep a 'Yes' person on his cabinet, she, of course stays. Johnson's advisor on ministerial standards however, immediately resigns.
 
Always felt there was something very creapy about the woman. Ms Patel is Boris's lap dog she follows him around and you can see the way she operates.
 
People in the Tory party who have worked with her say she is incredibly hard working and demands that her staff also work hard. Since those people are likely to be politically in general agreement with her instructions then they respect her and work hard to carry them out.

People not in the Tory party whose opinions are different from hers find her demands to work hard in following her orders to be problematic if she is instructing them to do something they don't politically agree with.

By all accounts she is normally quite calm and respectful when people are carrying out their jobs but can go all dominatrix (without the corset and whips) if staff are deliberately undermining her. I've seen numerous former civil servants down the years comment that it doesn't matter who the secretary of state is as the civil service will just get on with running the country and doing what is needed regardless. I do wonder if she is asking them to do things and they aren't following her orders.

I have no idea if her language was any way inappropriate when getting into arguments with her civil servants but I suspect there is politics at play.
Hilarious and yet sad at the same time.

Trump needs you right now.
 
As Secretary of State for International Development Priti Patel made an undeclared visit to Israel and discussed using UK foreign aid to fund Israeli armed forces. She went without security and tried to deceive the press both about the visit and its purpose. A weakened Theresa May told her off.

She has now been found guilty of bullying in 3 separate government departments and has racked up a world beating number of transgressions against the ministerial code. Expect a mild telling off from her incompetent boss, who should never have appointed her in the first place.
"to fund Israeli armed forces" ???
What is your source for that ?

And perhaps more importantly, what is "funding xyz armed forces" intended to convey ?
Back door/ covert arming perhaps ?

The Times says:
"Priti Patel wanted to send British aid money to support an Israeli army programme treating wounded Syrian jihadists, including al-Qaeda fighters, in the occupied Golan Heights."

Now maybe that is a bit eye-brow raising.....
...but surely "treating wounded jihadists" might be considered "humanitarian" ...
...esp. to one's enemies ?

So what would be a fair account ?
 
My SiL is a senior civil servant at DWP and reckons she’s the worst she’s ever worked for.
For balance....
This morning, LBC had some callers who claim to have worked in the Home Office (one for 30 years).
They described, the Home Office as variously "disfunctional", "obstructive" ...and that poor (even bad) managers would be moved sideways rather than dismissed.

It was pointed out that both Labour and Conservative Home secretaries had been "moved on" after failures by Civil Servants.

Sounds like a lot of organisations ....:oops:
 
I knew someone who had the misfortune to work for her. Vile and thick is a short summary. Screamed and shouted at people. Rated easily the worst person in Government to work for.

Mild slap on the wrist to come from Johnson.

What have we come to?

Carping at Civil Servants is easy meat and popular in the Tory press so she'll get away with it. I gather the full report is being supressed and a whitewash version is being put out with the usual excuse that the Civil Servants didn't do what she wanted all the time/straight away so they had it coming.
"Vile and thick is a short summary"
Hmm. :unsure:
Sounds like the description by some Remainers of Leavers...
Wasn't Priti Patel a leading Leaver ?
 
Tarian plesase do your own research. Priti Patel's behaviour as Secretary of State for International Development is well documented. She travelled to another country without reference to her PrimeMinister, or the security services and spoke off the record to a foreign head of state amnd his military commanders. She gave the incorrect impression that British foreign policy had changed and was found to have broken the ministerial code. An all round failure of honesty and diplomacy.

Any excuse, concocted after the event, which suggests that any money improperly promised would be exclusively used to fund action against jihadists is the height of BS. That sort of hypothecation is pure fantasy and you would rightly ridicule it if the argument was employed by Labour.
 
Watching the lunchtime news was interesting.
Plenty of references to Patel's "behaviour" ...without ever spelling out the nature of that behaviour.
Plenty of political opponents "interpreting", i.e. stretching beyond what was actually reported.

One Conservative MP speculated that it might have been about shouting and swearing in frustration at work not done.
Name me a workplace where no-one ever swears in frustration.

IF, repeat IF there was a sweary outburst, surely it matters "who" was present?

From my experience in Local Government, senior Councillors would never swear at a junior official - but with a Department Head (on £100,000 plus), "robust exchanges" could take place ....in private.

Like anything with a legal angle, that Report was worded very carefully - yet the media and opposition spokesman chose to spin it into something seriosly bad.

The Report said (IRC).
"....behaviour that could be considered as bullying".
i.e. if you're on the receiving end of a sweary outburst you "could" think you've been bullied.
Meanwhile an independent observer "could" see the outburst as "of the moment not "bullying" (and maybe not even directed at the person).
As some have said... "bullying" is normally applied to repeat occurrences not one-offs.

(Reminds me so-called "hate crime" ...where a mere belief, combined with mind-reading can be enough to condemn someone.)
 
People in the Tory party who have worked with her say she is incredibly hard working and demands that her staff also work hard. Since those people are likely to be politically in general agreement with her instructions then they respect her and work hard to carry them out.

People not in the Tory party whose opinions are different from hers find her demands to work hard in following her orders to be problematic if she is instructing them to do something they don't politically agree with.

By all accounts she is normally quite calm and respectful when people are carrying out their jobs but can go all dominatrix (without the corset and whips) if staff are deliberately undermining her. I've seen numerous former civil servants down the years comment that it doesn't matter who the secretary of state is as the civil service will just get on with running the country and doing what is needed regardless. I do wonder if she is asking them to do things and they aren't following her orders.

I have no idea if her language was any way inappropriate when getting into arguments with her civil servants but I suspect there is politics at play.
So you dont beleive the independent enquiry that has investigated it? You just want to accept your own suspicions as fact. The bloke heading the enquiry has resigned, he feels that strongly about it.
 
And now Sir Alex Allen the PMs advisor on the ministerial code has resigned. Apparently in response to Johnson's imminent decision that he is to back Priti Patel. No attempts to smear civil servants, or pretend she is just hardworking and demanding now work. Johnson's poor judgement strikes again wasting capital on a very ordinary performer while much better women and men languish on his back benches. He's not very good at making and keeping friends on his own side and it may bite him sooner than he thinks.
So you completely dismiss all the people who have been interviewed today, saying that Patel is hard-working or even "demanding" (i.e. delivering) ?

This thread comes across as a personal crusade by someone determined to view matters political through a one-way lens - whether or not the poster has any evidence.

You have no more idea than I do about "He's not very good at making and keeping friends on his own side".
Westminster is full of tittle-tattle - by politicians, their opponents - egged on by an activist media.