Talk:Jeremy Heywood

Conflict of Interests re: Morgan Stanley-BAE takeover deal?

Should this be included? I'm a mere pleb, but feel it may become an interesting story later in the week: Daily Mail article below reads: The role of Britain’s top mandarin in promoting the controversial £28billion takeover of the defence giant BAE by a European rival was last night under the spotlight. Cabinet Secretary Sir Jeremy Heywood has helped persuade David Cameron to back the plans to join BAE Systems with EADS. But he faces questions about his own role – and whether it constitutes a conflict of interest because he worked for three years at merchant bank Morgan Stanley, which stands to gain tens of millions from brokering the merger.

<http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2207611/BAE-deal-Conflict-fears-David-Camerons-right-hand-mandarin-Sir-Jeremy-Heywood.html#ixzz27L2GFkz8> 212.139.111.220 (talk) 23:26, 23 September 2012 (UTC)pleb212.139.111.220 (talk) 23:26, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Asked to impartially investigate Andrew 'f#cking pleb' Mitchell's abuse of police officers

according to DM of 24/09/2012, he's been asked to investigate the matter <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2207371/Cabinet-Secretary-Sir-Jeremy-Heywood-asked-investigate-minister-Andrew-Mitchell-really-did-police-officers-plebs-told-bike.html> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.139.111.220 (talk) 23:46, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Jeremy Heywood. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100116001258/http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page14359 to http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page14359
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100705004000/http://download.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/organogram/co-organogram.pdf to http://download.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/organogram/co-organogram.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:36, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Whitehall

I suspect most readers will assume it's Whitehall. But the article says "Baron Heywood of Whitehall, of Glossop in the County of Derbyshire". But there is no article for Whitehall, Glossop. Should it be at least added to the "Places" section at Whitehall (disambiguation)? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:59, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

I don't think there's a place called Whitehall in Glossop. The territorial designation is "of Glossop in the County of Derbyshire", not "of Whitehall, of Glossop in the County of Derbyshire". "Baron Heywood of Whitehall" is the title, which I think it's safe to assume does refer to Whitehall, even though his territorial designation is elsewhere. Ralbegen (talk) 13:36, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

I see. I'm afraid I'm not very well up on how the titles for Baronies are constructed. It seems extremely confusing. So does Whitehall need to be linked somehow? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:53, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

I don't think Whitehall needs to be linked. There's a similar example with a different title and territorial designation in John Lee, Baron Lee of Trafford, where the territorial designation has links but the title doesn't. In other article, such as Adair Turner, Baron Turner of Ecchinswell, where the title and territorial designation are the same, it's written in the body as Baron Turner of Ecchinswell, of Ecchinswell in the Hampshire. Ralbegen (talk) 15:30, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Looking at Baron Lee's title it seems he was born in Bowdon, Greater Manchester (although the infobox does not say that). So it looks like the title always just describes birthplace? Sometimes the territorial designation corresponds to birthplace but sometimes, as with Heywood, it does't? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:11, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

My understanding is that both the title and the territorial designation are chosen by the peer, subject to the approval of the Garter Principal King of Arms. They're usually places that are important to them, which is why birthplaces are common. But not exclusively, so you have other exceptions like Angela Harris, Baroness Harris of Richmond or John Gummer. So my guess would be that Heywood chose his title "Baron Heywood of Whitehall" based on a place that's been so important to his career, and the territorial designation "of Glossop in the County of Derbyshire" for where he was born and presumably grew up. Ralbegen (talk) 20:11, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes, that all makes sense. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:22, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Brexit material

Earlier today, @Sandstein: removed the following passage, with the edit summary this is not about Heywood, but about Brexit:

Heywood said in a blog that the "civil service did its job" and was "scrupulous" during the referendum, producing work "as we should, at pace and with accuracy". It comes after officials were accused by Eurosceptics of promoting "Project Fear" during the EU referendum in a bid to keep Britain in the European Union. Iain Duncan Smith said: "There was huge pressure from Government and lines got blurred and broken. "But after purdah [which restricted civil servants] there was no question that the civil service was more comfortable being able to say no." Heywood also admitted that the civil service will have to "go up a gear or two" as it seeks to unwind decades worth of EU laws and regulations.

Later, @81.129.228.25: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jeremy_Heywood&diff=prev&oldid=867299515 restored the passage with the edit summary "restore sourced content, perfectly relevant, take to Talk page", which I'm doing now. My personal view is that whilst 81.129.228.25 is right that the material is sourced, Sandstein is right that it's about Brexit rather than Heywood; so I'm happy to be in a consensus against inclusion of the paragraph. Ralbegen (talk) 22:40, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Chief of Staff

I've started a discussion on Downing Street Chief of Staff concerning Lord Heywood. If you're interested, you can find it here. FollowTheTortoise (talk) 11:40, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

"Jeremy Heywood (Template)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Jeremy Heywood (Template) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 22 § Jeremy Heywood (Template) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:16, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

House of Lords

Was he the first Life Peer, who has never taken his seat? HulkNorris (talk) 19:41, 25 April 2023 (UTC)