Best Of

Jeremy Corbyn fans please explain

An angrier response to Britain sending missiles to Ukraine than we got when Russia sent assassins to murder British citizens on British soil

Corbyn has Tweeted

The Prime Minister should make a statement to Parliament, immediately, to confirm whether UK missiles have been fired into Russia.

He must tell the British public if this means we are now at war with a nuclear power, what risk this poses to people in Britain, and why this action was taken without any approval from Parliament.

I have consistently condemned Russia for its invasion of Ukraine and called for a diplomatic solution to stop the endless bloodshed.

As we edge closer and closer to catastrophe, we should be doing everything in our power to bring about de-escalation and peace. Instead, our political leaders have added fuel to the fire and gambled with people’s lives for political gain.

Presidents and Prime Ministers must know that in the event of nuclear war, nobody wins.

I’m not interested in bombs. I’m interested in peace – and I will continue to campaign for peace in Ukraine, Gaza, Yemen, Sudan, the DRC and beyond.

https://x.com/BenKentish/status/1859309594729943266

He has never agreed that people should be able to fight back, or be helped to do so. He would deny it, but the only practical measure his views accept seems to be that people should just surrender, since that leads to peace the fastest. Whilst there are obviously serious issues to consider for world leaders around escalation, it's hard to see how this marks a severe example of that. If anything, given Russia has gone so far as to essentially hire North Korean state mercenaries as an escalation, the Ukrainian allies doing nothing additional in reaction would appear to be an acceptance of Russian escalation.

He’d support any group that was fighting the British or US, however.

https://x.com/haynesdeborah/status/1859240547371659384

BREAKING: The UK will scrap five warships, dozens of military helicopters and a fleet of drones to save money despite growing threats from Russia and a war raging in Europe.
John Healey, the defence secretary, announced the dramatic move in parliament on Wednesday, saying it would save up to half a billion pounds over the next five years. The defence secretary described the equipment being axed as “outdated” and said the “common sense” decision to retire them was long overdue.
He signalled the decision was part of a plan to restructure and modernise the armed forces, which have already been significantly reduced in size following decades of cost-saving cuts, with new capabilities due to come on line to replace the gaps.

We don't have five warships to scrap!

6 Attack Subs
4 Nuke Subs
2 Carriers
6 Destroyers
9 Frigates
2 Assault (Landing) ships
8 Offshore Patrol

total 37 major ships

Doesn't seem very many. I know they are damn expensive, but still.

And how many work as desired?

My dad was at the Coronation Fleet Review at Spithead, 1953. Was recently sorting out his photos and found the pic of him in his best in front of the gun turret taken that day. 197 RN ships there on the spot, though a few were depot ships, FPBs and the like.

This is my photo quota for today - quite interesting.

It's a junction in Nottingham City Centre being changed from a traffic island with traffic lights to a signalised T-junction.



You can see how the T-Junction running lanes have been added first, so that traffic flow is maintained. The increased landscaping, footways and mobility tracks will be built round it.

The junction is at one end of Maid Marian Way, which is a 4-6 lane dual carriageway built through Nottinghams ancient street pattern in the 1960s, splitting the city centre roughly 3/4:1/4 .

The traffic down Maid Marian way is 16k vehicles per day, down from 27k per day in approx 2003. One reason for that is that Nottingham built a tramway system in the early 2000s, which now carries around 50k passengers per day.

Source:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn4z811v18jo
Scheme:
https://www.transportnottingham.com/project/maid-marian-way-roundabout-improvements/

We don’t have the crews to man the scrapped ships, and Albion and Northumberland were unlikely to ever sail again. By the time we had the crews (if we started recruiting like mad) the newer ships we have ordered will be coming online. The impact on amphibious landing capability is a problem, but overall the decision makes sense. Watchkeeper is obsolete and barely worth discussing.

HOWEVER we should be massively ramping defence spending. This decision is probably right but the macro picture is very wrong.

And let’s not forget how much of this is the fault of the Tories too, who ran down defence. The worst of them were Cameron and Osborne who ran down defence whilst asking it to do more, risking lives.

This Government looks bad on defence, but it follows one with a dreadful record too. As a nation, we just don’t get it.

I feel like I'm in the minority here, in that I don't see why agricultural land should benefit from any special IHT rules compared to other family owned industries, e.g. engineering. Maybe there is a case that capital invested in productive capacity should be treated differently, but I can see difficulties in defining it and personally don't believe it should be treated any differently to money in the bank, or residential property.

There is a separate issue of land being transferred from being UK-family owned to foreign individuals or investment funds. Again, we haven't worried about it for any other industry and I don't see why agricultural land should be different. Actually I am worried about this, but my concern is across the board, not solely agriculture.

There is another issue that currently food production appears to be uneconomic in the country. Should we be concerned about food security? If we are then we should take steps to ensure that farmers get a fair return. But, again, why should we be more concerned about food than (say) energy, or steel production? There's no reason for farming to be singled out for special protection, in my view. However I would note (as an opponent of Brexit) that we now have an opportunity to do something about all those things except none of the pro-Brexit people appear to be proposing anything, which I find odd.

I feel like I'm in the minority here, in that I don't see why agricultural land should benefit from any special IHT rules compared to other family owned industries, e.g. engineering. Maybe there is a case that capital invested in productive capacity should be treated differently, but I can see difficulties in defining it and personally don't believe it should be treated any differently to money in the bank, or residential property.

There is a separate issue of land being transferred from being UK-family owned to foreign individuals or investment funds. Again, we haven't worried about it for any other industry and I don't see why agricultural land should be different. Actually I am worried about this, but my concern is across the board, not solely agriculture.

There is another issue that currently food production appears to be uneconomic in the country. Should we be concerned about food security? If we are then we should take steps to ensure that farmers get a fair return. But, again, why should we be more concerned about food than (say) energy, or steel production? There's no reason for farming to be singled out for special protection, in my view. However I would note (as an opponent of Brexit) that we now have an opportunity to do something about all those things except none of the pro-Brexit people appear to be proposing anything, which I find odd.

You are rather missing the point already made by a number if us that no genuine family businesses should be paying IHT. Farmers happen to be the main point of discussion but Cyclefree, JJ and myself have all spoken about other family firms as well.

The whole basis of the IHT tax raid on businesses is flawed and will lead to businesses going bust.

Why should a family firm or farm be exempt from the same taxes everyone else has to pay? You could, perhaps, make a case that IHT shouldn’t apply to anyone. But what’s the justification for carving out farmers as deserving of special privilege?

Farmers with significant land holdings are some of the wealthiest people in the country: One of them appeared on Good Morning Britain yesterday morning who had attended a £30k/year private school followed by a £40k/year sixth form. Why should her family be able to evade paying the taxes that practically every other family in the country has to?

Because inheriting a house, savings, quoted shareholdings artworks is essentially inheriting a windfall.

Inheriting business property is inheriting the assets needed to make the business work. And sure, you could just sell out to a bigger entity, but concentrating the ownership of businesses in fewer hands may be counterproductive,