Best Of

So how do Labour turn this around?

There are ways - an appearance of competence would be a good start - but I'm unsure SKS or his team have it in them.

Keir Starmer invokes Margaret Thatcher as he goes for growth

We must ‘cure the sickness of stagnation and decline’ in Britain, the PM says while taking aim at ‘overreach’ by watchdogs

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/keir-starmer-invokes-margaret-thatcher-as-he-goes-for-growth-kvp2fhbmg

yes, but he wont scrap them will he ? He'll make bleaty noises and then approve more laws and restrictions.

PB Right: the government should go for growth and deregulate.

Government: we should go for growth and deregulate.

PB Right: don’t believe them.

What is the point of this discourse? There is no analysis, no engagement, just blind opposition for the sake of it.

Because the government needs to be judged on actions not words. I will be the first to congratulate them if they actually get spades in the ground on national infrastructure and they institute fundamental reform to help unclog the bureaucracy around development. I genuinely will, because it was one of my big asks of this new government. I remain deeply skeptical, because this government has generally followed a pattern of talking big, but often governing in a contradictory way. It is early days, and maybe that will change, but I will take Starmer and Reeves’ pronouncements on these things with a healthy dose of salt for now.

Bloody hell the cost of Hinckley Point C is now estimated to be between £41.5bn and £46.5bn, what a mess.

Can someone explain to me why we're ploughing ahead with Sizewell C?! Give RR the contract for 5 SMRs and get moving. Let's own the next generation of nuclear energy, not spend another £60bn and 15 years building a reactor that probably won't ever turn on.

The problem with cancelling big projects like HS2/nuclear is that industry is going to take this systemic political uncertainty and apply it to the cost of infrastructure across the UK.

I'm told (friend) that the nuclear subs projects are actually a lot cheaper than they would be otherwise, hard as that is to believe, simply because it's much less likely that the government cancels them compared with other stuff like frigates.

We need the political/legal process of cancelling projects to be at least as onerous as approving them.

The British government fucks around for years delaying, rescoping, judically reviewing, and layering on extra requirements to projects, only to then cancel or cut them back when the folly of its actions make them unaffordable.

That's one reason why so few invest in them.

So how do Labour turn this around?

There are ways - an appearance of competence would be a good start - but I'm unsure SKS or his team have it in them.

Keir Starmer invokes Margaret Thatcher as he goes for growth

We must ‘cure the sickness of stagnation and decline’ in Britain, the PM says while taking aim at ‘overreach’ by watchdogs

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/keir-starmer-invokes-margaret-thatcher-as-he-goes-for-growth-kvp2fhbmg

yes, but he wont scrap them will he ? He'll make bleaty noises and then approve more laws and restrictions.

PB Right: the government should go for growth and deregulate.

Government: we should go for growth and deregulate.

PB Right: don’t believe them.

What is the point of this discourse? There is no analysis, no engagement, just blind opposition for the sake of it.

A

Recent Tory Home Secretary tells American audience that Britain may become first Islamist state with nuclear weapons. These people were in charge a year ago.

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/suella-braverman-says-the-uk-could-become-the-first-islamist-nation-with-nuclear-weapons_uk_67990ac6e4b0f8946ae28c4a

Braverman said: “Vice-president JD Vance said at the National Conservatism conference, at which I also spoke in the summer, that the UK was going to be the first Islamist nation with nuclear weapons. I don’t think he was joking.

“Is it an impossibility that 20 years from now it will be the UK, not China or Russia, that will emerge as the greatest strategic threat to the USA?

Regardless of whether one thinks that is a realistic outcome, which I do not, should we not have the courage to ask these questions?”

What a shithead.

Also, have none of these morons heard of Pakistan?

Only one country out of the UK and the US has any reasonable prospect of becoming a theocratic dictatorship armed with nuclear weapons. And it ain't us.

A

Recent Tory Home Secretary tells American audience that Britain may become first Islamist state with nuclear weapons. These people were in charge a year ago.

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/suella-braverman-says-the-uk-could-become-the-first-islamist-nation-with-nuclear-weapons_uk_67990ac6e4b0f8946ae28c4a

Braverman said: “Vice-president JD Vance said at the National Conservatism conference, at which I also spoke in the summer, that the UK was going to be the first Islamist nation with nuclear weapons. I don’t think he was joking.

“Is it an impossibility that 20 years from now it will be the UK, not China or Russia, that will emerge as the greatest strategic threat to the USA?

Regardless of whether one thinks that is a realistic outcome, which I do not, should we not have the courage to ask these questions?”

What a shithead.

Also, have none of these morons heard of Pakistan?