The Sunday Times reports the the disheartening news that the disgraced ex Home Secretary David Blunkett, is now back in charge of the Home Office, at least temporarily whilst Charles Clarke is on holiday.
Why can't Hazel Blears, the junior Home Office Minister take charge during this period, as she seems, logically enough to have been given the role of supervising the day to day running of the department ?
David Blunkett should not have been returned as a Cabinet Minister in charge of the Department for Work and Pensions.
He proved himself unfit for any Cabinet Ministerial job back last December, it is a disgrace that he should be back in power tat the Home Office, even for a single day.
To have him back rubber stamping detention without trial Control Orders, electronic intercepts, deciding on extradition requests, and, presumably, again with the power to meddle in asylum and immigration affairs, is an insult, and is not acceptable.
Surely Charles Clarke should resign as Home Secretary, how is is position tenable ?
Who is in charge of the Department for Work and Pensions, whilst David Blunket goes back to meddling with our civil liberties, whilst failing to prevent terrorist attacks ?
UPDATE 1st August:
"The Home Office angrily denied reports that David Blunkett, now the Work and Pensions Secretary, has temporarily returned to his old job by covering for Mr Clarke."
These newspaper reports also make the obvious statement that UK Government Ministers are provided with "secure communications" back to London, wherever they happen to be in the world, whether on holiday or on Government business.
Is this incompetent or malicous spin ?
What is the truth ? Who is in charge of the Home Office today ?