Talk:Labour Government 2007-2010

Politics of the United Kingdom Mid‑importance

	This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
Mid	This redirect has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Advocate General for Scotland

Is the Advocate General for Scotland a Cabinet member? Therequiembellishere 03:42, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. That is a junior minister in the Sec. State for Scotland's office.

James F. (talk) 22:00, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusions

This list obviously includes a lot of people who are not at all members of the Cabinet: see the official list. --Pylambert 12:06, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

6 ministers who attend but do not vote, and the PM's two PPSes. I've split this out so that it's obvious.

James F. (talk) 22:00, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Junior ministers

Why doesn't this list include junior ministers? This would be the reasonable place to put such a list. -Rrius (talk) 04:25, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lords Chief Whip

Does anyone know yet who will replace Baroness Blaisdon as Government Chief Whip in the Lords? -Rrius (talk) 03:00, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Titles

I think all the titles should be full titles, i.e. "Secretary of State for X" instead of "X Secretary". To mix and match just looks confusing. Comments? ninety:one 21:04, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In what way is it confusing? "Foreign Secretary" and "Home Secretary" are so much better known than the full titles that it would place pedantry above accessibility. I will change "Justice Secretary", though. -Rrius (talk) 05:25, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, "SoS for the Home Department" and "SoS for F&CA" aren't used at all (save in statute). I'm happy with it how it is now. ninety:one 22:11, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here we go

Cabinet in full. Therequiembellishere (talk) 17:24, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Though it's only true at the broadest sense (e.g. Mandelson's job has changed significantly, but he's shown as "staying put", which is also correct).

James F. (talk) 17:33, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New format

What does anyone think of the page I've set up here? I modelled it after the Blair Ministry page, although I haven't entered much text since then. I used this page, Template:Brown Cabinet, Cabinet of the United Kingdom#Current cabinet and the links in their respective talk pages and reference section to create it. Each new cabinet table was made by looking at the revision right before the reshuffle, by their tenure at the time. Therequiembellishere (talk) 00:22, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. Perhaps we could have both? They serve different purposes (state at a particular time, vs. how it has changed).

James F. (talk) 22:32, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't understand. Could you dumb it down for me? :-) Therequiembellishere (talk) 04:29, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is anything going on here? Therequiembellishere (talk) 17:13, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The graphic is useful in a who's gone where context and the more detailed table is more encyclopedic. leaky_caldron (talk) 10:09, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The page I have is as near as I can get it with the resources I have available. The remaining problem I have is the I can't find any working links from before 3 October 2008 to fix the "Also attending Cabinet meetings when their Ministerial responsibilities are on the agenda" sections in the two tables before then. If anyone can give me links that will tell me those, I should think the page could (finally) be put here. Therequiembellishere (talk) 17:52, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Junior ministers

We seem to have no page which lists junior ministers in the Labour governments since 1997. For the period before 1997, going back into the early nineteenth century, we have pages which list the whole of the government in the format Conservative Government 1979-1997 or Liberal Government 1892-1895. But somehow, for the last twelve years, we don't seem to list junior ministers anywhere. We have this page and Blair Ministry, both of which only cover the cabinet. This goes to a broader point, which is that we have articles like "Blair Ministry" or "First Pitt ministry" - these were largely split off from the articles on the individual PMs, and list only cabinet members. Then we have the "Labour Government 1924" or "Conservative Government 1886-1892" type articles, which list all members of the government, and were created as individual articles. We ought, at any rate, to have an article that talks about junior ministers. john k (talk) 16:22, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's going to be difficult to find junior ministers over the last twelve years. The government damn near archives everything every twelve hours. Therequiembellishere (talk) 18:17, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If we have junior ministers for the whole period up to 1997, it surely shouldn't be too difficult to find them for the last twelve years? john k (talk) 01:25, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. It's beyond me how they were found. Therequiembellishere (talk) 04:36, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are references books with lists of ministers going back to 1830 which were used for most of them. This edition seems to be complete through the 2005 election, and ends with the ministers appointed in the reshuffle which followed the election. So that'd get us most of Blair's government. If somebody had been keeping track of who the current government of the UK was since wikipedia started, we'd then be home free, but somehow we don't seem to have an article which lists current members of the government, rather astonishingly. john k (talk) 05:01, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a list just prior to the reshuffle. The Cabinet Office has a link here that says the10y're still updating. Therequiembellishere (talk) 17:49, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unemployment

What is unreasonable about previous edits in regard to unemployment?Jkl678 (talk) 20:49, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For one thing your source does not appear to support the phrase "Alongside every other Labour government in history". For a second, you appear to basing your comparison on raw data of over 16s in or out of economic employment; one possible explanation for a drop in employment within that group is that more people are going into further education beyond the age of 16.

Also, as you are quoting raw data sets you may be interpreting the data in a way that breaches the no original research policy. Do you have a reliable, secondary source that supports your statements? Road Wizard (talk) 21:05, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]