Richard wrote: > Another way of looking at it is that the financial constraints of DEFRA > are largely self-imposed, i.e. by Mr Miliband, rather than externally > imposed by the Treasury. DEFRA didn't ask for any money to solve > the alleged £200m black hole but instead chose to make cuts in > its own budgets. (Confirmed several times, at the BW AGM by Robert > Lowson, and since at PWG and the London Show by Barry Gardiner.) > > So Mr Miliband is clearly trying to make a good impression on the > man from the Treasury... who'll be his boss in a few months' time.
I have long thought that Miliband is only interested in his career, he's young and touted as a future leader, so handling his portfolio without running to the Treasury for a financial top up will only do his career some good. That is doubly so, as Prudence looks for a deputy and Miliband's name is in the frame. > But if the bird flu outbreak is handled well, as it seems to be, then > perhaps the need to impress through "fiscal rectitude" will not be > so great. Heavens, DEFRA might even be rewarded for a job well > done. (Maybe not.) If Defra handle this well, and that has yet to be established, then his fiscal control and high-profile operation that could prevent a human epidemic can only do his career enormous good. Whether the outbreak in Norfolk will be enough to prevent the 'environmentalist' Miliband and his entourage from jetting off to yet another environmental conference in a foreign land remains to be seen. ;-) I have seen, in industry, many examples of managers who, in order to impress their seniors, restrict the budgets of their departments even more than is strictly required just to look good at financial control, and sod the consequences to the employees working for them. > > Real conspiracy theorists may like to ask exactly where this £200m > black hole came from; if it's so serious, why several of the ministers > involved have gone on to bigger and better things (e.g. Jim Knight > is Minister for Schools, Margaret Beckett is Foreign Secretary); > or, in fact, whether it was partly invented to make the ambitious Mr > Miliband look good. Now that really is a conspiracy theory. I would like to know why, when Avian Flu was first spoken about (last year sometime?) we were warned that it was a doomsday scenario, that it wouldn't take much for it to mutate into a deadly human form, that there would be tens of thousands of deaths, that it was uncontrollable...............the next plague...........and yet now that it's here we're all being told that there is nothing to worry about, that it is very difficult for it to mutate, that it only affects those working closely with birds (fowl). Hhmmm, something more to do with panic control this time, or something to do with giving us something else to worry about (and to justify expenditure) last time perhaps? ;-) Spin, what spin??? Roger
