Talk:Sunak ministry

David TC Davies MP
He is not a member of the privy council yet and so should be put down as just David TC Davies MP, not The Rt Hon David TC Davies MP.https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1584964259250782209 Tory202280 (talk) 17:57, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Resolved - was sworn into Privy Council on 27 October 2022. Ewantc (talk) 21:45, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Image is not free
I'm sure Skskwekjefbbffjske, the user who uploaded the infobox photo used here, did in fact not take the photo and thus, it is not his "own work". Thus, the picture should be removed from Wikicommons and from this article. 92.30.72.123 (talk) 15:04, 26 October 2022 (UTC)


 * @92.30.72.123 this is something to discuss on the photo's page on Wikimedia Commons. This article just used that photo. JacobTheRox (talk ) 07:00, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Official cabinet photo
An official photo of Sunak's cabinet has been posted; https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1585252192831049730

Can this be uploaded to Wikicommons and added to this article? It's in significantly better quality than the current photo. 92.30.72.123 (talk) 15:43, 27 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Very likely. The Cabinet Office has confirmed that the photo of Truss's cabinet in twitter is licensed under open government licence.(10th item) Sunak's one may also be the same case. --Mike Rohsopht (talk) 16:10, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:22, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Prime Minister Rishi Sunak chairing the first meeting of his Cabinet.jpg

Lords - Privy Councillors
Quite a few Lords, both on their actual pages and now have been put on here, that they are 'Rt Hon' or put PC after their name. This should only be done if they have actually been inducted into the Privy Council, which most Lords have not, even junior Ministers. PoliceSheep99 (talk) 10:30, 31 October 2022 (UTC)


 * All peers are entitled to the style "Rt. Hon." but only Privy Counsellors should have the PC suffix. From what I can see this has been followed correctly on this page. OGBC1992 (talk) 11:22, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Unpaid
Are Nadhim Zahawi and John Glen's positions really unpaid? Strikes me as unlikely. OGBC1992 (talk) 10:12, 26 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Yes - the chairman of the Conservative Party is a party-political role not a governmental role. The PM can appoint as many ministers without portfolio but they don't get paid unless they have a department to run x 82.41.12.175 (talk) 22:23, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Fair point on Zahawi, but John Glen, as Chief Secretary to the Treasury? Andrew Griffith as City Minister? Surely these must be salaried positions. OGBC1992 (talk) 09:42, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Ministerial Ranking
Accoriding to this Steve Barclay ranks above Jeremy Hunt! x 82.41.12.175 (talk) 22:23, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Lucy Frazer
Frazer was appointed Secretary of State for Culture, Media & Sport on February 7, 2023 and should be added to the ministry list. MWEditorial (talk) 20:01, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Departures from the Sunak ministry
In scenarios where this section is large enough to warrant a separate page i.e. List of departures from the second Johnson ministry, they specifically do not include ministers who resign/are dismissed during a reshuffle, as these departures are noted in the relevant reshuffle page. I feel this rule should apply here as well, thoughts? 1234567jack (talk) 16:51, 13 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I'd agree with that - perhaps just one line linking people to November 2023 British cabinet reshuffle? OGBC1992 (talk) 20:36, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

MP suffixes
I have reverted the edit by @Jdforrester, as this article records the members of the Sunak ministry, as was. As with other former cabinets, the page is laid out contemporaneously - we have not, for example, edited First Cameron ministry to reflect the changes to MPs’ electoral status since.

If the Conservatives win the election, there will be a new article, Second Sunak ministry, so this one should not really be updated further. The first Sunak ministry is now at an end. OGBC1992 (talk) 16:25, 31 May 2024 (UTC)


 * @OGBC1992: Hmm, has there been a discussion about this? I'm not sure your claim about the content being written "contemporaneously" aligns with our general content policies for Wikipedia (write for history, not for now), and also I'm not sure it serves the reader very well. James F. (talk) 10:17, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @James F., you've succinctly put that better than I was able to - we write for history, not for now! Therefore, we should retain the MP suffixes on an article about the Sunak ministry for those politicians that were MPs during the ministry; rather than updating them with every dissolution/death/defection etc. that occurs beyond the end of the ministry.
 * Apologies for the muddled wording in my original post but by the sounds of it you understand the point I'm trying to make! OGBC1992 (talk) 08:41, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @OGBC1992: No? I'm saying the reverse. For example, we don't generally list Winston Churchill as "Winston Churchill MP", but as "Winston Churchill", or often as "Sir Winston Churchill" even though his knighthood wasn't granted until 1953. James F. (talk) 21:04, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I think there's a difference between how we would write about individuals and about events/ministries. For instance, Churchill wouldn't be referred to in an article about the Gallipoli campaign as "Sir Winston Churchill" would he? An article about a ministry is a historic record of a specific point in time. At this point in time the MPs in the Cabinet were MPs, so should be listed as such - not lose the suffix come the subsequent dissolution. To do that would make no encyclopaedic sense and wouldn't be consistent with how we've recorded the many predecessor ministries. OGBC1992 (talk) 08:19, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
 * "An article about a ministry is a historic record of a specific point in time."
 * No. A record in an archive is a record. This is meant to be an encyclopædic article. Use of post-nominals to distinguish individuals (e.g. "this is the one with the MC", "she's the one with the Fellowship of the Royal Academy", etc.) is great, but spreading it around a hundred individuals where it's their qualifying, non-distinguishing attribute isn't serving readers very well, and using it to mislead readers (and mildly enter into contempt of Parliament) is particularly poor form. James F. (talk) 22:31, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
 * It distinguishes between ministers in the House of Commons and ministers in the Lords.
 * It’s not misleading anyone - unless you think that people might read the first Major ministry article and assume all of these ministers still sit in the House of Commons? To suggest contempt of Parliament is just absurd. OGBC1992 (talk) 06:05, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * It distinguishes between ministers in the House of Commons and ministers in the Lords.
 * And there was I foolishly thinking that people being called "John, Lord Smith" distinguished them. James F. (talk) 00:01, 15 June 2024 (UTC)


 * I'd say a compromise would be to restore the post-nominals after the election, while hiding them in the meantime. &#8209;&#8209;Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 20:44, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Neveselbert: Sure, happy to do that if that's what the consensus is in terms of serving readers well. James F. (talk) 00:11, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
 * That seems like a reasonable solution. Cambial — foliar❧ 13:37, 24 June 2024 (UTC)