Best Of

There will be no justice in this case.

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/crime/article/police-inquiry-post-office-horizon-3rl23psql

"Police inquiry into Post Office and Horizon may run out of cash
Officers have told victims there will have to be ‘tough decisions’ on Operation Olympos despite the number of criminal suspects doubling to eight"

There never is. The British state is like an abuser who gets away with years of abuse but is never held properly accountable: it is untrustworthy, incompetent, malicious and unwilling / incapable of change, no matter what promises it makes or how many apologies are dragged out of it. We have a Potemkin justice system. And the inquiry reports lead to little more than a lot of bad headlines for a few days but no real change.

There is absolutely no point any more to any of it.

This is one of the better critiques of the COVID enquiry that I have read.

https://jameswphillips.substack.com/p/all-i-want-for-christmas-is-a-functional
.. During COVID, the bureaucracy performed as though hierarchical job title implied capability. It didn’t then, and it doesn’t now.

People with titles and ranks often contributed little to the actual response or actively harmed it; people far down the hierarchy frequently shaped outcomes decisively. Yet the inquiry has structured itself around the former, not the latter. Witnesses have been called almost entirely on the basis of job title, not on the basis of what they actually did or knew. This is repeating the mistake that happened during the pandemic, where people were asked for opinions simply due to their job titles, not whether they knew anything about the topic...
... To my knowledge, only one of the scientists inside the No.10 building during the COVID crisis has even been asked to submit a witness statement. Importantly, these were the very people Cummings backed and supported strongly, ensuring their voices were heard - in direct opposition to a core conclusion of the report. Many of the people who were absolutely essential to the progression of testing, procurement, data, logistics, vaccines, and operational decision-making have been entirely absent from the record. Too many of those fixing the dysfunction have been omitted. Given their junior status & that they have not consented (nor have I asked), it is not appropriate for them to list their names here.

This is not a trivial procedural flaw. It goes to the heart of the matter: a late-Victorian, hierarchy-obsessed model of government combined with a legal-permanent bureaucratic state laid on top is fundamentally misaligned with the complexity and speed of 21st-century crises. The inquiry has simply replayed that model.

My dominant recollection of that crisis is that people (usually officials), often in their twenties and thirties, with relevant technical skills and/or can-do spirit, often saw a senior collection of people who happened to be in their roles at the time the crisis hit, failing badly. And they self-organised to fix it. It was almost (not literally) at the point where there were two parallel systems - the one actually getting on with stuff who had the capability to do so, and a potemkin veneer laid on top where those with the job titles gathered in formal meetings to read off scripts. I give a concrete example below. The inquiry has focussed almost entirely on the latter. It has almost entirely ignored the system that grew to initiate and build things like the realisation that a serious error had occurred in March with respect to core strategy, rapid testing, wastewater monitoring, the vaccines task force (Vallance was key to this), and the 10 Data Science Unit...

Russia's 2026 budget has 40% of all spending for the military: https://theukrainianreview.info/russia-approves-2026-budget-40-of-spending-goes-to-military-ccd/

A very marked increase. They are also running a deficit although, to be fair, it is considerably smaller than ours at 1.6% of GDP.

Putin very clearly has absolutely no intention whatsoever of stopping this war.

Russia started the war with essentially zero national debt, and it's currently able to borrow quite a lot from it's own population.

However I think it's also experimenting with issuing Yuan-denominated debt, so that it can tap into funds from China (which isn't so keen on anything denominated in roubles).

There's a lot of financial road left for Russia, even if Ukraine succeed in wrecking Russia's oil exports. Britain borrowed about 25-30% of GDP for each full year of WWI and WWII.

The only quick end for the war is to lose it. If we want to avoid losing we have to get serious about winning.

The last sentence is certainly true.

And -ultimately- this requires Europe to grow a spine, and accept that DJT is not going to be happy, but he'll get over it.

Did anyone listen to the Starmer speech (beyond my capacity to endure, I admit) ?

I see from reports of it that he did mention nuclear regulation, but did he really go this far ?
(I am sceptical.)

The Prime Minister spoke about the Taskforce on Nuclear Energy today:

"Exactly a week ago, John Fingleton reported on our nuclear industry. He found that pointless gold plating, unnecessary red tape, well intentioned but fundamentally misguided environmental regulations, and, I quote – it's quite a stark quote, he said – "a mindset that favours process over outcome" has all made Britain the most expensive place to build nuclear power.

"Now, I agree with him. In fact, I would go further. Because the truth is we see that story repeated again and again right across our economy. For years Britain did not have a proper industrial strategy. For years it cut public investment. For years it did not have a planning framework or frankly a government that would quickly approve new railways, new tramlines, data centres, laboratories, power stations, wind farms, even whole towns.

"So, guided by a simple truth, that rooting out excessive costs in every corner of our economy is an essential step to cutting the cost of living, and creating more dynamic markets for business, we will also clear the path for British business.

"And therefore, in addition to accepting the Fingleton recommendations, I'm asking the Business Secretary to apply these lessons across the entire industrial strategy."

The point about process over outcome is key. Our report is about achieving better outcomes for safety and the environment, which can be done at much lower cost if we get the regulatory framework right.

I would like to thank my fellow Taskforce members and the hard-working team of civil servants who supported us in this review.

I am also grateful to all those who responded very positively to our recommendations. There is a huge appetite for change. Implementation will require tough decisions and hard-work, so it is good to know that there a huge public appetite for change.

For those who have not seen it, the report is available below.

https://gov.uk/government/publications/nuclear-regulatory-taskforce...
https://x.com/JohnFingleton1/status/1995456872053166099

Now, were they actually to adopt every recommendation in the report, it would make a very large difference to costs and timescales. Applied more broadly, and applied effectively, it might even make a significant difference to UK competitiveness.

As I said, I am extremely sceptical.

The PM reads my headers, it seems.

https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2024/02/04/the-state-of-process-the-process-state/

The problem is that it's swimming in mud (Where's @JosiasJessop when you need him?), to try and change things.

The UK system, from top to bottom is in love with Process. Not outcomes.

And they will deploy the Deadly Argument at every step - that reducing Process is an attack on Human Rights! Security implications! Foreign powers, national interests. We have to consult our allies, top brass. NATO, SEATO, Moscow!

I came across the actual clip.
It's under two minutes, for those who suffer from Starmer-phonophobia:
https://x.com/s8mb/status/1995463242315858193
Huge from the PM.

Starmer accepts the Fingleton Review *and* pledges to extend it to other infrastructure: data centres, railways, tramways, towns, labs, and more.

Massive, and a big shift from the Treasury's equivocation. Implementation will be a big battle, but we can win.

(It was an excellent header, btw.)

Just to be clear, this is the best thing Starmer has done as PM, by a long way.

It should be welcomed; he should be praised for it: and watched like a hawk to make sure he delivers.

I really welcome this and he now needs to deliver, and do something about the Aarhus convention too which allows multiple vexatious complaints with the complainants free of the financial consequence.

But this is a fantastic move if he delivers. It’s a big ‘if’ as they’ve spent 16 months talking the talk. They have yet to walk the walk.

Meanwhile https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/risk-averse-infrastructure-fish-disco-p8gjhncml

Integrity is what you do when you know no-one else is watching.

Damn. I thought that was masturbation.

Lord John Whorfin: History is-a made at night. Character is what you are in the dark.

Who I am in the dark is stubbing my toe on the fan heater, then hopping to bed whilst trying not to scream "OH, FUCK THAT HURT" before collapsing on the bed.

Not as heroic as I wanted, but you take what you get.

I once broke my little toe (it was pointing out at 45-60 degrees) by cracking it against a kitchen cupboard while walking about without slippers. Queue a very, very long wait at A&E.

Once I was let behind the curtain I was ushered into a cubical and left to wait. Meanwhile I could hear a lot of fuss from the cubicle next to me. Eventually a nurse popped her head in and said "We don't treat that - just wear tight socks. Bye.".

As I was hobbling out - I noticed the next-door cubicle patient was a very handsome Australian blond-haired surfer dude with a little toe injury being 'treated' by about fifty nurses.

Lessons learned : 1) wear slippers. 2) become a very handsome surfer dude.

So far I have achieved 1) with some aplomb.