It looks like Gordon Brown might be finding it a bit hard to persuade people to serve in the Cabinet. But good news for him, there’s plenty of historical precedent of small Cabinets. George Grenville in the mid-eighteenth century had a Cabinet of just nine, whilst the Fox-North coalition of the late eighteenth century managed with only seven. So that’s Gordon, Ed Balls and er…
Subscribe
-
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
-
Like us on Facebook
-
Subscribe to our feed
-
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Most Read
Search
Op-eds
-
Keep the earnings link: don’t repeat the mistakes of the 80s (Chris Perry)
-
Where have we heard this one before? Labour and electoral reform (Jack Meredith)
-
A national care service – questions for Burnham (and us) (Ruth Bright)
-
Opportunity at the heart of our vision in local government (Callum Robertson)
-
Vince Cable writes: Drill, baby, drill…or not (Vince Cable)
-
Now We Are Severn released by Shrewsbury's Up Sewage Creek
-
The death of Dennis O'Neill and expertise in a narrow subject
-
Peer says his name should not be used in legal letter in island cafe dog snub row
-
A fair pension for every generation: a Liberal Democrat case for reform
-
So many questions over Burnham's agenda
-
The disturbing folklore behind Alan Garner's stories
-
The Burnhamites will not hurt them for they are tough as leather
-
The geography of Liberal Democrat potential (LDN#214)
-
The sun still shines on PM Burnham
-
The Joy of Six 1584
Recent Comments
David Allen
Governments have repeatedly tried and failed to solve the problem of unpredictable but potentially very high late-life social care costs. Burnham has come up w...
tony/Cumbria
I too am saddened that Christine will not be fighting the next general election. The way she was treated by the leadership in England and now, Scotland, I am no...
Peter Davies
@Paul Barbour as of 2024 less than 18% of the population was over 65. What is your definition of soon?...
Michael Bukola
Solidarity with you Ruth on this. We may only have one chance to eliminate private equity profiteering in England's adult social care sector. Reforms by the gov...
vince thurnell
I am 61 so just coming up to retirement and can honestly say that I would be happy to give up one part of the triple lock if it means me getting free care at ho...


5 Comments
Tee hee!
Methinks government had a bit less to do in those days, Mark!
Alan Sugar!!!
Terry has a point.
We could return to just four departments (Treasury; Foreign; Home; Defence) and be free of about 20 politicians and around 400,000 civil servants!
From Parkinson’s Law, the chapter named “Directors and Councils”: “Somewhere between the number of three (when a quorum is impossible to collect) and approximately twenty-one (when the whole organism begins to perish), there lies the golden number. The interesting theory has been propounded that this number must be eight. Why? Because it is the only number which all existing states [as of 1961] have agreed to avoid. Attractive as this theory may seem at first sight, it is open to one serious objection. Eight was the number preferred by King Charles I for his Committee of State. And look what happened to him!”
There were 5 members of the WW2 War Cabinet – Churchill, Atlee, Bevin and two others.
Darn my inability to remember political facts at 1am!