-
Welcome to Stafford Forum. Please or sign-up and start posting!
I.D.S Has resigned!
- Thread starter Gadget
- Start date
Gramaisc
Forum O. G.
He's just posturing - if he really didn't believe in it, he could have gone ages ago.Rejoice with me, my people. The Evil Oppressor is gone.
Beware his replacement however, they could be worse.....
For tonight though, REJOICE!!!!!!
Tequila all round
He remains an evil little shite - possibly pinning his hopes on being in Boris's first cabinet.
Home Secretary...?
Gramaisc
Forum O. G.
Letter to Cameron.
"I am incredibly proud of the welfare reforms that the government has delivered over the last five years. Those reforms have helped to generate record rates of employment and in particular a substantial reduction in workless households.
As you know, the advancement of social justice was my driving reason for becoming part of your ministerial team and I continue to be grateful to you for giving me the opportunity to serve. You have appointed good colleagues to my department who I have enjoyed working with. It has been a particular privilege to work with with excellent civil servants and the outstanding Lord Freud and other ministers including my present team, throughout all of my time at the Department of Work and Pensions.
I truly believe that we have made changes that will greatly improve the life chances of the most disadvantaged people in this country and increase their opportunities to thrive. A nation's commitment to the least advantaged should include the provision of a generous safety-net but it should also include incentive structures and practical assistance programmes to help them live independently of the state. Together, we've made enormous strides towards building a system of social security that gets the balance right between state help and self help.
Throughout these years, because of the perilous public finances we inherited from the last Labour administration, difficult cuts have been necessary. I have found some of these cuts easier to justify than others but aware of the economic situation and determined to be a team player I have accepted their necessity.
You are aware that I believe the cuts would have been even fairer to younger families and people of working age if we had been willing to reduce some of the benefits given to better-off pensioners but I have attempted to work within the constraints that you and the chancellor set.
I have for some time and rather reluctantly come to believe that the latest changes to benefits to the disabled and the context in which they've been made are, a compromise too far. While they are defensible in narrow terms, given the continuing deficit, they are not defensible in the way they were placed within a Budget that benefits higher earning taxpayers. They should have instead been part of a wider process to engage others in finding the best way to better focus resources on those most in need.
I am unable to watch passively whilst certain policies are enacted in order to meet the fiscal self imposed restraints that I believe are more and more perceived as distinctly political rather than in the national economic interest.
Too often my team and I have been pressured in the immediate run up to a budget or fiscal event to deliver yet more reductions to the working age benefit bill. There has been too much emphasis on money saving exercises and not enough awareness from the Treasury, in particular, that the government's vision of a new welfare-to-work system could not be repeatedly salami-sliced.
It is therefore with enormous regret that I have decided to resign. You should be very proud of what this government has done on deficit reduction, corporate competitiveness, education reforms and devolution of power. I hope as the government goes forward you can look again, however, at the balance of the cuts you have insisted upon and wonder if enough has been done to ensure "we are all in this together".
"I am incredibly proud of the welfare reforms that the government has delivered over the last five years. Those reforms have helped to generate record rates of employment and in particular a substantial reduction in workless households.
As you know, the advancement of social justice was my driving reason for becoming part of your ministerial team and I continue to be grateful to you for giving me the opportunity to serve. You have appointed good colleagues to my department who I have enjoyed working with. It has been a particular privilege to work with with excellent civil servants and the outstanding Lord Freud and other ministers including my present team, throughout all of my time at the Department of Work and Pensions.
I truly believe that we have made changes that will greatly improve the life chances of the most disadvantaged people in this country and increase their opportunities to thrive. A nation's commitment to the least advantaged should include the provision of a generous safety-net but it should also include incentive structures and practical assistance programmes to help them live independently of the state. Together, we've made enormous strides towards building a system of social security that gets the balance right between state help and self help.
Throughout these years, because of the perilous public finances we inherited from the last Labour administration, difficult cuts have been necessary. I have found some of these cuts easier to justify than others but aware of the economic situation and determined to be a team player I have accepted their necessity.
You are aware that I believe the cuts would have been even fairer to younger families and people of working age if we had been willing to reduce some of the benefits given to better-off pensioners but I have attempted to work within the constraints that you and the chancellor set.
I have for some time and rather reluctantly come to believe that the latest changes to benefits to the disabled and the context in which they've been made are, a compromise too far. While they are defensible in narrow terms, given the continuing deficit, they are not defensible in the way they were placed within a Budget that benefits higher earning taxpayers. They should have instead been part of a wider process to engage others in finding the best way to better focus resources on those most in need.
I am unable to watch passively whilst certain policies are enacted in order to meet the fiscal self imposed restraints that I believe are more and more perceived as distinctly political rather than in the national economic interest.
Too often my team and I have been pressured in the immediate run up to a budget or fiscal event to deliver yet more reductions to the working age benefit bill. There has been too much emphasis on money saving exercises and not enough awareness from the Treasury, in particular, that the government's vision of a new welfare-to-work system could not be repeatedly salami-sliced.
It is therefore with enormous regret that I have decided to resign. You should be very proud of what this government has done on deficit reduction, corporate competitiveness, education reforms and devolution of power. I hope as the government goes forward you can look again, however, at the balance of the cuts you have insisted upon and wonder if enough has been done to ensure "we are all in this together".
Mikinton
Well-Known Forumite
Me too.
I've got a few quid on Osborne not being Chancellor going into 2017 at 10/1.
Perrier
Banned
Im just waiting for the usual discrediting that the Tory scum are so good at.
IDS will have everything thrown at him to make it look like hes the devils spawn. ( although the general public already know this).
I mean , if someone who plays with
can turn the general public into believing the disabled in this country are nothing but a drain on society , IDS will be easy meat.
IDS will have everything thrown at him to make it look like hes the devils spawn. ( although the general public already know this).
I mean , if someone who plays with
can turn the general public into believing the disabled in this country are nothing but a drain on society , IDS will be easy meat.
Jonah
Spouting nonsense since the day I learned to talk
tek-monkey
wanna see my snake?
Nothing to do with documents finally getting released under FOI proving he'd been lying for years about DWP issues?
Gramaisc
Forum O. G.
Beware of the "chilling effect"...
Laurie61
Well-Known Forumite
Strange there was a move to limit F.O.I requests, or not.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32723791
joshua
Well-Known Forumite
What's amusing is that the Tory Party is tearing itself apart on two or three big issues but the Labour Party is still not a credible alternative.
David Owen and Shirley Williams must be wishing they were 20 years younger. Hell, some people are probably wishing Screaming Lord Sutch was still alive - he could clean up.
David Owen and Shirley Williams must be wishing they were 20 years younger. Hell, some people are probably wishing Screaming Lord Sutch was still alive - he could clean up.
tek-monkey
wanna see my snake?
I'd disagree, if they can remove some more of Blair's cronies the Labour party would be credible again. Basically all those who refused to vote against the benefits cuts to the disabled need to either explain themselves or go. Its not just the tories that look bad on this one.
As for the chilling effects argument, that means IDS admits that his department can't do the job they are paid to do if anyone is allowed to know the things they do?
He doesn't belive public servants can act in the best interests of the public if the public know what they do?