Is pomposity a prerequisite for the position of Home Secretary of the UK? I saw an article from the latest in a long line of puffed up middle aged men (Blunkett, Clarke etc) in which he announced he's 'not a quitter'. Which is the UK population's loss. But there again any successor would be the same.
2007-01-29
00:17:56
·
8 answers
·
asked by
whyteay
2
in
Politics & Government
➔ Other - Politics & Government
Thanks to Firpen for providing the actual job description, or as near as we will get, though I see no mention of the criteria I mentioned..that said I was a little disturbed by the final sentence where various former responsibilities (since Blunkett needless to say) '..have been reallocated to other departments to give the position a focus solely on law and order'....hmmm
2007-01-29
00:34:17 ·
update #1
The Secretary of State for the Home Department, commonly known as the Home Secretary, is the minister in charge of the United Kingdom Home Office and is responsible for internal affairs in England and Wales, and for immigration and citizenship for the whole United Kingdom (including Scotland and Northern Ireland). In certain other countries, such as Australia and India, the term Home Secretary refers to the Permanent Secretary, or the senior civil servant, at the Home Ministry of that country.
The remit of these ministries generally includes policing, national security, immigration, the criminal justice system, the prison service, and matters of citizenship.
The Home Secretary is currently responsible for:
police
crime
terrorism
citizenship
identity cards and passports
the Prison Service
The Home Secretary has no responsibility for the Courts of England and Wales. Unlike many other governments issues usually dealt with by a Department of Justice, the British government has three separate departments: The Home Office (as specified above), the Attorney General's Office and the Department for Constitutional Affairs, headed by the Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs, for legal, judicial and civil rights issues
The Home Office has also previously dealt with some social issues, including race equality, community cohesion, and policy on charities and the voluntary sector. social exclusion, equality and race relations. Responsibility for race equality and community cohesion is held since May 5th 2006 by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government. From the same date, responsibility for charities and the voluntary sector has been held by the Cabinet Office.
Because the Home Office was initially the primary government department with responsibility for domestic affairs, all subsequent domestic departments have effectively been created by taking responsibilities from the Home Office. Until 2001 this left a variety of miscellaneous tasks that sat apart from the law and order functions of the department, such as British Summer Time or wild birds in Scotland. However, on the appointment of David Blunkett as Home Secretary, these functions - and others such as responsibility for the Fire Brigade - have been reallocated to other departments to give the position a focus solely on law and order.
2007-01-29 00:28:25
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
1. Must be Scottish and an ex communist.
2. Must be able to spin his failures into successes.
3. Must be able to dodge criticism by wheeling out his junior ministers to take the flak.
4.Must be willing at all times to blame previous Home Secretaries for the fact that the Home Office is not fit for purpose.
2007-01-30 01:17:27
·
answer #2
·
answered by Beau Brummell 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, it's a scam. It's been widely publicized on Dr. Phil, Oprah, and the news... I received one of these, and called the local FBI Office, and they confirmed that it was a scam.. They send you a check, you're supposed to cash it, keep 10% and send the rest back to them via Western Union. Thing is, the checks are bad, so when the place you cashed it (or your bank) find out the check is bad, then you're responsible for paying the money back.....
2016-03-15 01:44:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is a sign that government his now just to big. Roll back the state and make government manageable again. I don't believe anyone can control such a large and diverse department.
2007-01-29 00:35:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
To be fair Labour is not capable of coming up with a better candidate than John Reid - he should not be removed. He is definately the best they can manage.
2007-01-29 11:52:50
·
answer #5
·
answered by LongJohns 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Must be able to take responsibility for the poor practises of previous post holders.
Must also be able to blame their poor performance on the practises of previous post holders.
Must also be fat, middle aged and boring
or just plain blind.
2007-01-29 02:03:03
·
answer #6
·
answered by speedball182 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Inept, clueless, brainless or braindead, arrogant, totally incompetent and helps if your also corrupt!!!!
2007-01-29 00:29:36
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
to sound and look like you know what your talking about-(the rule of most politicians)when in fact you dont know all the facts
2007-01-29 00:43:30
·
answer #8
·
answered by milly 2
·
0⤊
0⤋