Ombudsman Services - "All About The Eidence." (12)
To the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Secretary:
Ombudsman Services Case 510458: Part 3 Issue 1 - Asking Questions. (12)
12, Ombudsman Services - "All About The Evidence."
Dear Mr Clark,
These really are extraordinary times - extraordinary for, "silencing" a politician who has the audacity to suggest that decisions should be made on the basis of a careful examination of the evidence.
Something that, "farcical" ombudsmen seem to find incredibly hard to do.
Dr Lee, a Justice Minister is correct. It really is, "All about the evidence." We agree that it really is, "Time for evidence not dogma, to show the way."
It really is crucial that, "We must act for our country's best interest, not ideology and populism, or history will judge us harshly."
And most certainly, "Our country deserves no less."
Theresa May silences minister who questioned whether Brexit should be halted after leaked analysis
Phillip Lee ordered to 'air his views in private' after saying withdrawal from EU should be based on evidence not dogma
Theresa May has been rocked by the revelation in the secret Brexit analysis while away in China Reuters
A minister who questioned whether Brexit should be halted after a secret Government analysis exposed the predicted economic damage has been silenced by Theresa May. Phillip Lee was told to “air his views in private” after a meeting with the Conservative chief whip, but has escaped the sack, No 10 said. The disciplinary action raised fresh questions about Brexit minister Steve Baker, who has not been censored despite suggesting civil servants had drawn up the analysis behind the backs of ministers.
UK will be worse off in every possible scenario after Brexit, concludes leaked Government analysis
The Prime Minister’s spokesman was forced to deny that pro-EU civil servants were “working rogue” – insisting it was “entirely correct” for such studies to be prepared.
However, the spokesman said Mr Lee, a justice minister, should “recognise that the analysis was initial and not worth commenting on”. “He has been spoken to by the chief whip and been reminded that it is best to air views in private,” he added. In tweets last night, Dr Lee said he doubted whether Mrs May could “legitimately lead a country along a path that the evidence and rational consideration indicate would be damaging”.
The extraordinary intervention was an apparent response to Mr Baker’s statement to MPs that the analysis was worthless because forecasts drawn up by civil servants are “always wrong”. Dr Lee posted: “The next phase of Brexit has to be all about the evidence. We can’t just dismiss this and move on. If there is evidence to the contrary, we need to see and consider that too. “It’s time for evidence, not dogma, to show the way. We must act for our country’s best interests, not ideology & populism, or history will judge us harshly. Our country deserves no less.”
A leak of the analysis – which will now be published, after a Government cave-in – suggested a no-deal Brexit, leaving Britain trading with Europe on World Trade Organisation terms, would reduce growth by 8 per cent over 15 years.
Brexit: the deciders
European Union's chief Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier speaks to the media as he arrives at the Council of the European Union ahead of an EU Council meeting on April 29, 2017 in Brussels, Belgium. The 27 members of the European Union will meet in Brussels for a special European Council meeting to discuss the continuing Brexit negotiation
Leaving with a Canada-style free trade agreement would see growth cut by 5 per cent, while staying inside the single market would reduce growth by 2 per cent. The document also warned that the gains from free trade deals with other big countries would fail to make up for the losses – a boost of just 0.2 per cent over 15 years from a deal with the US, for example.
Donald Trump says "I would have negotiated Brexit differently"
Its leak has enraged Brexiteers, who accused the head of the civil service of conspiring with the Treasury to produce the devastating research without the knowledge of ministers in the Department for Exiting the European Union. On Tuesday, Mr Baker told the Commons: “Even the ministerial team in my department has only just been consulted on this paper in recent days and we've made it clear it requires significant further work.
Read more
“It is a selective interpretation of a preliminary analysis. It is an attempt to undermine our exit from the European Union.” The attack triggered a protest from the Whitehall trade union, which said it was an “insult” to dedicated professionals and suggested he should be sacked. Asked why Mr Lee had been disciplined over his remarks but not the Brexit Minister, a spokesman said Mr Baker's comments were made in a statement to the Commons, while Mr Lee had been “speculating” on leaked documents. Q. Mr Clark, we agree with Dr Lee - decisions should be made on a careful appraisal of the best available evidence - so why are politicians and civil servants ignoring the mounting evidence concerning, "farcical" ombudsmen, putting the dogma of the private market in ADR first, putting the ideology of, "light-touch" "self regulation" alongside it and waiting for the future to judge what should be known today - don't consumers deserve no less?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - Workstock Number 510458.
The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign is at: www.blogger.com and www.facebook.com
No comments:
Post a Comment