£120m cost of the scheme. Even at 10x the cost it's good value.
The idea that we could fund a UK based immigration inspection team to go and check the immigration status of workers in businesses for £120m is laughable. That's a £2-3bn per year cost of expanding the border agency with thousands of agents needing to be recruited in a very tight labour market.
Just in case RP is looking for the costs.
Trivial to make it self funding and self prosecuting. No government involvement required.
100K fine per undocumented worker.
50% goes to the undocumented worker. Providing they give evidence and there is a conviction that is upheld on appeal.
That's essentially just Operation Papyrus from Switzerland, but offering money rather than a work permit.
Interesting - hell, throw in a 5 year work permit with the 50K.
There wouldn't be an undocumented employee in the country within 20 minutes of the law going into force, though.
And since you'd have to make the prosecution start point the implementation of the law (otherwise a lot of businesses sued out of existence), probably no prosecutions, either.
It has been incredibly efficient in the Canton of Geneva: illegal domestic staff basically disappeared overnight.
Russian drivers will be very nervous crossing bridges in Ukraine.
https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1514515908928192512/photo/4 🇺🇦Group of the Special Operations Forces blew up a bridge with 🇷🇺vehicles which were heading for Izyum, Kharkiv Oblast, where the Russian troops have been trying to break through the Ukrainian defenses to capture the area of Slovyansk, Donetsk Obl.
I've been wondering for a while whether Ukrainian Special Forces would/could do the same with the Crimea/Russia bridge. That would be stunning and helpful on several levels.
Agree, but it's quite a big bridge - actually with separate road and rail decks on total spacing of nearly 100m side to side in toto
Heaven knows how much explosive it would need to take it out; they might need to take a ship.
Hmmm - you're right. I suppose the USN could dock an Arleigh Burke in Romania, have all the crew go on shore-leave for a night and carelessly leave the keys in the ignition with weapons systems armed and ready to go. Ukrainian Forces then nick it and take it on a joy-ride for a bit on a GTA5 demolition spree.....
Just dreaming. Would be good though.
Perhaps a suicide trawler (or two) with a long-range Zodiac on board for escape. Or similar.
See Campbeltown, after which one of our new frigates is named IIRC.
That blew up the lockgates in St Nazaire with a 4.5 ton haul of explosives.
Which is very roughly the same as 20 Exocets or 10 Tomahawks in the same place at the same time.
£120m cost of the scheme. Even at 10x the cost it's good value.
The idea that we could fund a UK based immigration inspection team to go and check the immigration status of workers in businesses for £120m is laughable. That's a £2-3bn per year cost of expanding the border agency with thousands of agents needing to be recruited in a very tight labour market.
Just in case RP is looking for the costs.
Trivial to make it self funding and self prosecuting. No government involvement required.
100K fine per undocumented worker.
50% goes to the undocumented worker. Providing they give evidence and there is a conviction that is upheld on appeal.
That's essentially just Operation Papyrus from Switzerland, but offering money rather than a work permit.
Interesting - hell, throw in a 5 year work permit with the 50K.
There wouldn't be an undocumented employee in the country within 20 minutes of the law going into force, though.
And since you'd have to make the prosecution start point the implementation of the law (otherwise a lot of businesses sued out of existence), probably no prosecutions, either.
It has been incredibly efficient in the Canton of Geneva: illegal domestic staff basically disappeared overnight.
Yup. Create a massive incentive and the overnight everyone moves. In this case, every illegal employee would see their employer as a massive payday. Given they are usually treated like shit.....
This is the sort of self-delusion Russia is suffering from:
“Everything that we’ve seen during our visit to Vostochny, all successes in space exploration achieved in recent years prove that our country retains its leadership in space industry, is one of the leaders in this area,” President Vladimir Putin said.
They were a leader in the space industry, decades ago. Since then, they have relied on old rocket designs that were reliable. They have very little that is *new*. Their commercial launches came because they were cheap and reliable - even Arianespace used a Soyuz for some launches.
But their offerings are being left behind. Not just with SpaceX in the US, but companies like RocketLab and others. And other states who might once have booked rides have their own space programs.
The real killer for their program is the invasion. Few commercial companies will continue to go with a Russian launcher after the problems OneWeb and others have been caused.
I fully expect Russia's 'leadership' in space to vanish, and for them to be left with one or two military launches of their own each year. So much for 'leadership'.
The Russian international space program is dead. Apart from NASA swapping seats no one is going to fly astronauts with the Russians. SpaceX is cheaper and better, now.
For the unmanned stuff - no-one is going to fly Russian rockets anymore. The question is how ESA pivots. The block buy from Bezos has given some life to Ariane 6 - is that enough to kill off the planned move of the "cheap" launches away from the Russians (contracted through ESA) to a reusable European rocket?
An interesting point within this was that OneWeb got SpaceX rides very rapidly - negotiations took 72 hours, according to OneWeb.
SpaceX and OneWeb was a win-win.
The Americans got the cash for the launches, as well as a good defence against accusations of monopoly for Starlink. The Brits got their satellites launched cheaply and quickly, and managed to get away from having to rely on the Russians.
The big remaining issue is the ISS, and the hope that Russia doesn’t bring the project to an early end. It’s been one of the best things humans have ever done, certainly one of the most expensive, and has survived more than three decades of political trouble up to now.
Someone needs to pull their finger out and build a competitor to SpaceX.
Ariane 6 may have won some orders from Bezos, but it is very much the best 1990s rocket.
ISS is nearly past it's sell buy date. Thermal cycling twice each orbit and all that.
The future is NASA as anchor tenant for a mixed public/private station - see Axiom and their plans.
There will be plenty of competitors, even in the US. Blue Origin on the large side, and whatever ULA is allowed to make after Vulcan/Centaur. On the small side, Rocketlab, firefly, Astra, VO, etc, etc. Then there will be the international rivals (can Rocketlab be classed as American?)
The real question is whether SpaceX's SH/SS combination works. The jury is very much out on that. I'd give it an 90% chance of being made to work, but only 10% chance of meeting the performance objectives Musk has set it.
But those figures have been plucked out of my backside.
The commercial launch space is very interesting, with a dozen competitors to SpaceX having sprung up, all with interesting technological angles, all competing to lower costs.
The big, pseudo public sector approach of NASA, the ESA and the Russians is completely doomed.
You probably already follow Eric Berger at Ars Technica... But if you don't, he's very good on the the business of space.
Brilliant news. Great secure jobs for people in Rwanda; eliminates the issue of economic migrants coming to the UK to claim asylum.
'Eliminates'
Now you've to fly them to fucking Rwanda. House them in Rwanda, Care for them in Rwanda, Fly them back from Rwanda whatever the result of their application. Its fucking mad. The channel is 20miles wide. They're coming over no matter what you do. The prospect of 3 years+ in a red wall bedsit didn't deter them..
When the inevitable happens, the lawsuits start piling up and the Mail's pissing and moaning about migrants on private flights worth more than your Gran's yearly pension it will be quietly mothballed.
The idea is that the asylum processing centres are no longer in the UK. They are situated near the actual places that they are needed. Claims can be processed there, then the successful claimants can be transferred to the UK. Nobody will claim asylum falsely and then disappear, as what would be the point in Rwanda? It will also provide secure jobs there for the people. They should put the European one in Romania, and have an Indian subcontinent one too.
By the way, I suggested this multiple times on PB, so I'm delighted that someone seems to be reading.
Russian drivers will be very nervous crossing bridges in Ukraine.
https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1514515908928192512/photo/4 🇺🇦Group of the Special Operations Forces blew up a bridge with 🇷🇺vehicles which were heading for Izyum, Kharkiv Oblast, where the Russian troops have been trying to break through the Ukrainian defenses to capture the area of Slovyansk, Donetsk Obl.
I've been wondering for a while whether Ukrainian Special Forces would/could do the same with the Crimea/Russia bridge. That would be stunning and helpful on several levels.
Agree, but it's quite a big bridge - actually with separate road and rail decks on total spacing of nearly 100m side to side in toto
Heaven knows how much explosive it would need to take it out; they might need to take a ship.
Hmmm - you're right. I suppose the USN could dock an Arleigh Burke in Romania, have all the crew go on shore-leave for a night and carelessly leave the keys in the ignition with weapons systems armed and ready to go. Ukrainian Forces then nick it and take it on a joy-ride for a bit on a GTA5 demolition spree.....
Just dreaming. Would be good though.
I'd go for a suicide trawler with a long-range Zodiac on board. Or similar.
See Campeltown, after which one of our new frigates is named IIRC.
That blew up the lockgates in St Nazaire with a 4.5 ton haul of explosives.
Which is very roughly the same as 20 Exocets or 10 Tomahawks in the same place at the same time.
Hmmmm
And these days, you wouldn't need an heroic types on board.
Russian drivers will be very nervous crossing bridges in Ukraine.
https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1514515908928192512/photo/4 🇺🇦Group of the Special Operations Forces blew up a bridge with 🇷🇺vehicles which were heading for Izyum, Kharkiv Oblast, where the Russian troops have been trying to break through the Ukrainian defenses to capture the area of Slovyansk, Donetsk Obl.
I've been wondering for a while whether Ukrainian Special Forces would/could do the same with the Crimea/Russia bridge. That would be stunning and helpful on several levels.
Agree, but it's quite a big bridge - actually with separate road and rail decks on total spacing of nearly 100m side to side in toto
Heaven knows how much explosive it would need to take it out; they might need to take a ship.
Hmmm - you're right. I suppose the USN could dock an Arleigh Burke in Romania, have all the crew go on shore-leave for a night and carelessly leave the keys in the ignition with weapons systems armed and ready to go. Ukrainian Forces then nick it and take it on a joy-ride for a bit on a GTA5 demolition spree.....
Just dreaming. Would be good though.
I'd go for a suicide trawler with a long-range Zodiac on board. Or similar.
See Campeltown, after which one of our new frigates is named IIRC.
That blew up the lockgates in St Nazaire with a 4.5 ton haul of explosives.
Which is very roughly the same as 20 Exocets or 10 Tomahawks in the same place at the same time.
I would have thought that the sea would be perfect for loitering munitions. Submersible drones that could be directed from shore.
Excellent article from Cyclefree, as always. But it overlooks the voter's dilemma in 2019. I am fairly sure that several million people voted Tory in 2019 believing that they had an unsatisfactory leader in the ways Cyclefree lists. I was one of them. And in the same circumstances I would do so again.
The other choice for government was a Labour party with a deranged and bipolar approach to the crisis of Brexit, and with a leader who, to this day, we have no idea where he would stand in relation to defending the west and who has subsequently been denounced by the current moderate Labour leadership. We would have entered the Ukraine crisis with a cabinet full of MPs supporting STW.
What, Cyclefree, should the loyal, centrist, moderate, liberal democratic voter have done between those choices for government?
And BTW I would vote Labour (for the first time in decades) if there were a GE now; as I shall on 5th May.
Good to hear (last para) and definitely the right call. Johnson is crapping all over us but the Tory Party refuse to do the necessary, so it's down to the public come the GE, which means to people like you who voted for him in 2019.
True Blues and Hard Core Leavers will stick with him, as will the Shallow Apoliticals who still think he's a bit of a laugh and either can't see or don't care about the damage he's doing, however that's not enough for him to win. To get another term he needs those GE19 Con voters who *can* see he's a disgrace to the office he holds, and *do* care about it, to nevertheless vote Tory again, and I'm confident most of them will not oblige.
We are not a nation of nihilistic numbskulls - therefore we'll be kicking out Boris Johnson soon as we get the chance.
This is the sort of self-delusion Russia is suffering from:
“Everything that we’ve seen during our visit to Vostochny, all successes in space exploration achieved in recent years prove that our country retains its leadership in space industry, is one of the leaders in this area,” President Vladimir Putin said.
They were a leader in the space industry, decades ago. Since then, they have relied on old rocket designs that were reliable. They have very little that is *new*. Their commercial launches came because they were cheap and reliable - even Arianespace used a Soyuz for some launches.
But their offerings are being left behind. Not just with SpaceX in the US, but companies like RocketLab and others. And other states who might once have booked rides have their own space programs.
The real killer for their program is the invasion. Few commercial companies will continue to go with a Russian launcher after the problems OneWeb and others have been caused.
I fully expect Russia's 'leadership' in space to vanish, and for them to be left with one or two military launches of their own each year. So much for 'leadership'.
The Russian international space program is dead. Apart from NASA swapping seats no one is going to fly astronauts with the Russians. SpaceX is cheaper and better, now.
For the unmanned stuff - no-one is going to fly Russian rockets anymore. The question is how ESA pivots. The block buy from Bezos has given some life to Ariane 6 - is that enough to kill off the planned move of the "cheap" launches away from the Russians (contracted through ESA) to a reusable European rocket?
An interesting point within this was that OneWeb got SpaceX rides very rapidly - negotiations took 72 hours, according to OneWeb.
SpaceX and OneWeb was a win-win.
The Americans got the cash for the launches, as well as a good defence against accusations of monopoly for Starlink. The Brits got their satellites launched cheaply and quickly, and managed to get away from having to rely on the Russians.
The big remaining issue is the ISS, and the hope that Russia doesn’t bring the project to an early end. It’s been one of the best things humans have ever done, certainly one of the most expensive, and has survived more than three decades of political trouble up to now.
Someone needs to pull their finger out and build a competitor to SpaceX.
Ariane 6 may have won some orders from Bezos, but it is very much the best 1990s rocket.
ISS is nearly past it's sell buy date. Thermal cycling twice each orbit and all that.
The future is NASA as anchor tenant for a mixed public/private station - see Axiom and their plans.
There will be plenty of competitors, even in the US. Blue Origin on the large side, and whatever ULA is allowed to make after Vulcan/Centaur. On the small side, Rocketlab, firefly, Astra, VO, etc, etc. Then there will be the international rivals (can Rocketlab be classed as American?)
The real question is whether SpaceX's SH/SS combination works. The jury is very much out on that. I'd give it an 90% chance of being made to work, but only 10% chance of meeting the performance objectives Musk has set it.
But those figures have been plucked out of my backside.
The commercial launch space is very interesting, with a dozen competitors to SpaceX having sprung up, all with interesting technological angles, all competing to lower costs.
The big, pseudo public sector approach of NASA, the ESA and the Russians is completely doomed.
You probably already follow Eric Berger at Ars Technica... But if you don't, he's very good on the the business of space.
Most of the competitors to SpaceX seem to be doomed before birth.
Unless you have a unique service (rapid small launch to a particular orbit, say), simply saying that you will be second cheapest after SS?SH doesn't seem much of a business plan.
My view on this is not popular, but what the hell. I will preface that I want Johnson to go asap, if not before. He is a disgrace, unsuited to running a whelk stall. He is a liar, a cheat, a serial love rat, clearly only interested in Boris Johnson.
However, in the case the the 'parties' I can genuinely see how he became convinced that it was within guidelines. Take the one he has already been fined for. For a start it was in the cabinet room where he was working. Secondly the people there were also working in No 10 too. And it was for a very short amount of time (under the mythical, and forgotten 15 minutes). In no sense was this a party, yet the name has been attached to it. If thats the only type of parties you ever attend then you have lived a dull life.
We don't yet know the other occasions he is likely to be fined for. It may be the infamous garden one - where the photo clearly shows people outside and socially distanced. Again, he may have been convinced this was within the guidelines.
So did he lie in the house? If he genuinely believed the events as described above were in the guideines then no. The Met have chosen to interpret the law otherwise. I note it is unlikely to be challenged in court, even though those receiving the FPNs have the right to contest it. We have seen consistently that many many challenged fines were revoked, usually because the police didn't understand what they were enforcing.
While its tempting to blame the police, I actually blame those who created the laws. They were always a nonsense. And the messaging was also confused. Most people seem to think it was the law that you could leave the house once a day for exercise and for not more than 1 hour. That was never the law - it was a suggested sensible approach.
And so at heart, the reasons Johnson should go are many and various, but I am happy to believe he did not knowingly lie in the house.
Interesting, who are these people who created the laws? Perhaps Sue Gray may be able to tell us if we give her six months?
Yes - I agree with you - it was the same people.
The laws were probably impossible to draft. You have two extremes - either strong recommendation to people how to behave to minimise risks (WFH, no indoor contacts etc) or complete legally enforced with the army on the street lockdown. The economy needed some stuff kept going - food, energy etc. So the mistake was to prepare laws to try to set out what was and wasn't allowed, because Barrack Room Lawyer country we are, twats everywhere will immediately start looking for loopholes and edge cases. As indeed happened. See for example 'substantial meal'. Clearly the intention was that socialising stopped. Yet if people were working together in an office all day, its not much of a leap to see how a coffee break at 3 becomes a glass of wine at 7. They were undoubtedly working under high stress and pressure.* It wasn't right, they should not have done it. The laws were difficult, and not well set out or explained. But the vase majority of the country did their best. Those in No 10 did not, and the price is being extracted now. I hope for the Grey report next week. That may be the moment. Or it may be after the locals as the Tory MP's in the marginal seats realise that there is only two years to go to turn things around.
*A lot of people were working under high stress and pressure, not least in hospitals. Some of the stories were amazing - people living away from home to avoid bringing covid home. Many staff changing cloths in porches before going into their homes. And if some of them shared a drink after a shift I couldn't give a shit.
I think there's also a factor (and the one that is behind Michael Fabricant's tone-deaf spewings) where some in the Westminster bubble (and I think there could be a journalism bubble similar to this) assumes that no-one really follows the rules, so it's hypocritical of others to criticise politicians when they're caught breaking the rules.
Because almost everyone they know (in the political bubble they follow) breaks the rules.
I know of lots of teachers who are furious with Fabricant's claim that they were likely boozing in staff rooms after work. One who I know pointed out that the staff-room was permanently closed, the boiler was off, and he brought in a thermos to drink from every day. Half the class-rooms were used as class rooms, the other half as break-rooms for each class-room so the bubbles mixed as little as possible.
I think Fabricant would be staggered to learn that actually lots and lots of people did comply with the rules and that's why they're angry - and furious with him.
Russian drivers will be very nervous crossing bridges in Ukraine.
https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1514515908928192512/photo/4 🇺🇦Group of the Special Operations Forces blew up a bridge with 🇷🇺vehicles which were heading for Izyum, Kharkiv Oblast, where the Russian troops have been trying to break through the Ukrainian defenses to capture the area of Slovyansk, Donetsk Obl.
I've been wondering for a while whether Ukrainian Special Forces would/could do the same with the Crimea/Russia bridge. That would be stunning and helpful on several levels.
Agree, but it's quite a big bridge - actually with separate road and rail decks on total spacing of nearly 100m side to side in toto
Heaven knows how much explosive it would need to take it out; they might need to take a ship.
Hmmm - you're right. I suppose the USN could dock an Arleigh Burke in Romania, have all the crew go on shore-leave for a night and carelessly leave the keys in the ignition with weapons systems armed and ready to go. Ukrainian Forces then nick it and take it on a joy-ride for a bit on a GTA5 demolition spree.....
Just dreaming. Would be good though.
I'd go for a suicide trawler with a long-range Zodiac on board. Or similar.
See Campeltown, after which one of our new frigates is named IIRC.
That blew up the lockgates in St Nazaire with a 4.5 ton haul of explosives.
Which is very roughly the same as 20 Exocets or 10 Tomahawks in the same place at the same time.
I would have thought that the sea would be perfect for loitering munitions. Submersible drones that could be directed from shore.
There has been a lot of work on that in western navies - from full sub launched unmanned vehicles to converting/modifying torpedos to have long range/slow modes to act as disposable one way drones.
Boris announces the Navy is to take charge of channel crossing with effect from today
I'm pretty sure that this has been announced at least three times before.
And three times before the Admiralty have laughed and said "with what"?
There are plenty of P2000/Archer in the **** Fleet that could be used but the question is what exactly can the RN do (which is both safe and legal) that the Border Force cutters can't?
Any ideas, tories? Because I can't think of anything.
A bit of pb heresy coming up......Sunak is back to being value to back as next PM or leader. 14 is too big a price.
Boris is not going, and does not sack anyone. By the time the next leader is decided the scandals discussed in April 22 may well be forgotten, and Sunak has the highest profile cabinet role. Oh, and the rest of them are all problematic as well, it is just his are more in the news this month.
My core assumption now (for trading the next Tory leader market) is they'll be making the choice in summer 2024 after losing power. So it'll have to be a person who is up for a period of leading in opposition.
Russian drivers will be very nervous crossing bridges in Ukraine.
https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1514515908928192512/photo/4 🇺🇦Group of the Special Operations Forces blew up a bridge with 🇷🇺vehicles which were heading for Izyum, Kharkiv Oblast, where the Russian troops have been trying to break through the Ukrainian defenses to capture the area of Slovyansk, Donetsk Obl.
I've been wondering for a while whether Ukrainian Special Forces would/could do the same with the Crimea/Russia bridge. That would be stunning and helpful on several levels.
Agree, but it's quite a big bridge - actually with separate road and rail decks on total spacing of nearly 100m side to side in toto
Heaven knows how much explosive it would need to take it out; they might need to take a ship.
Hmmm - you're right. I suppose the USN could dock an Arleigh Burke in Romania, have all the crew go on shore-leave for a night and carelessly leave the keys in the ignition with weapons systems armed and ready to go. Ukrainian Forces then nick it and take it on a joy-ride for a bit on a GTA5 demolition spree.....
Just dreaming. Would be good though.
I'd go for a suicide trawler with a long-range Zodiac on board. Or similar.
See Campeltown, after which one of our new frigates is named IIRC.
That blew up the lockgates in St Nazaire with a 4.5 ton haul of explosives.
Which is very roughly the same as 20 Exocets or 10 Tomahawks in the same place at the same time.
I would have thought that the sea would be perfect for loitering munitions. Submersible drones that could be directed from shore.
Four things:
1 - Depth of water is only 30ft at max. 2 - The amount of explosives. No idea how much would be required to cripple or destroy modern bridge pylons. Checking for vague comparisons, Dambuster bombs were 2 tons each, and the mines put under the Tirpitz by X-craft, which crippled it, were 2 tons each and they placed 4 of them. 3 - Getting it there. 4 - Nobody else's submarines in the Black Sea under the Montreux Convention except for countries with coastlines.
A TIR bomb could be tried on the roaddeck, perhaps. Do I remember the IRA wrenching the M1 Junction 0 tarffic island off its axis with a 1 ton truck bomb?
Boris announces the Navy is to take charge of channel crossing with effect from today
I'm pretty sure that this has been announced at least three times before.
And three times before the Admiralty have laughed and said "with what"?
There are plenty of P2000/Archer in the **** Fleet that could be used but the question is what exactly can the RN do (which is both safe and legal) that the Border Force cutters can't?
Any ideas, tories? Because I can't think of anything.
Better photo ops for FLSOJ surely?
The old RN attitude to any people breaking the (any UK) law in boats was to round them up and press them into the Navy. Never mind where they came from. Though that went out of date, for the RN, in 1815. Do you think the Tories are modern enough to have gone beyond that stage in their thinking?
Boris announces the Navy is to take charge of channel crossing with effect from today
I'm pretty sure that this has been announced at least three times before.
And three times before the Admiralty have laughed and said "with what"?
There are plenty of P2000/Archer in the **** Fleet that could be used but the question is what exactly can the RN do (which is both safe and legal) that the Border Force cutters can't?
Any ideas, tories? Because I can't think of anything.
Boris announces the Navy is to take charge of channel crossing with effect from today
I'm pretty sure that this has been announced at least three times before.
And three times before the Admiralty have laughed and said "with what"?
There are plenty of P2000/Archer in the **** Fleet that could be used but the question is what exactly can the RN do (which is both safe and legal) that the Border Force cutters can't?
Any ideas, tories? Because I can't think of anything.
Better photo ops for FLSOJ surely?
The old RN attitude to any people breaking the (any UK) law in boats was to round them up and press them into the Navy. Never mind where they came from. Though that went out of date, for the RN, in 1815. Do you think the Tories are modern enough to have gone beyond that stage in their thinking?
'Ok lads, it's Rwanda or the Andrew. We've stopped rum and the lash in the latter, but..'
A bit of pb heresy coming up......Sunak is back to being value to back as next PM or leader. 14 is too big a price.
Boris is not going, and does not sack anyone. By the time the next leader is decided the scandals discussed in April 22 may well be forgotten, and Sunak has the highest profile cabinet role. Oh, and the rest of them are all problematic as well, it is just his are more in the news this month.
My core assumption now (for trading the next Tory leader market) is they'll be making the choice in summer 2024 after losing power. So it'll have to be a person who is up for a period of leading in opposition.
Core assumptions important at odds of perhaps <8, plausible paths are fine once getting odds of 14.
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
Boris announces the Navy is to take charge of channel crossing with effect from today
I'm pretty sure that this has been announced at least three times before.
And three times before the Admiralty have laughed and said "with what"?
There are plenty of P2000/Archer in the **** Fleet that could be used but the question is what exactly can the RN do (which is both safe and legal) that the Border Force cutters can't?
Any ideas, tories? Because I can't think of anything.
Better photo ops for FLSOJ surely?
The old RN attitude to any people breaking the (any UK) law in boats was to round them up and press them into the Navy. Never mind where they came from. Though that went out of date, for the RN, in 1815. Do you think the Tories are modern enough to have gone beyond that stage in their thinking?
'Ok lads, it's Rwanda or the Andrew. We've stopped rum and the lash in the latter, but..'
"No documents? Fine. You're now Sebastian Codpiece and since he was navigating the boat, he's Able Seaman Staines."
Excellent article from Cyclefree, as always. But it overlooks the voter's dilemma in 2019. I am fairly sure that several million people voted Tory in 2019 believing that they had an unsatisfactory leader in the ways Cyclefree lists. I was one of them. And in the same circumstances I would do so again.
The other choice for government was a Labour party with a deranged and bipolar approach to the crisis of Brexit, and with a leader who, to this day, we have no idea where he would stand in relation to defending the west and who has subsequently been denounced by the current moderate Labour leadership. We would have entered the Ukraine crisis with a cabinet full of MPs supporting STW.
What, Cyclefree, should the loyal, centrist, moderate, liberal democratic voter have done between those choices for government?
And BTW I would vote Labour (for the first time in decades) if there were a GE now; as I shall on 5th May.
Good to hear (last para) and definitely the right call. Johnson is crapping all over us but the Tory Party refuse to do the necessary, so it's down to the public come the GE, which means to people like you who voted for him in 2019.
True Blues and Hard Core Leavers will stick with him, as will the Shallow Apoliticals who still think he's a bit of a laugh and either can't see or don't care about the damage he's doing, however that's not enough for him to win. To get another term he needs those GE19 Con voters who *can* see he's a disgrace to the office he holds, and *do* care about it, to nevertheless vote Tory again, and I'm confident most of them will not oblige.
We are not a nation of nihilistic numbskulls - therefore we'll be kicking out Boris Johnson soon as we get the chance.
Thanks, but the chances of the various GE outcomes remain, IMHO, just about unchanged. There are too many variables and unknowns to see further. Of the three possibles, (and ignoring any outsiders running) : Tory government, Labour outright, Labour led government I reckon the chances to be about 45%, 5-10%, 45% respectively.
Two years plus is an immense stretch of time at the moment.
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
An interesting one is coming up - if Sweden and Finland apply to join NATO, the vote must be unanimous to accept them.
What price Orban vetoing it? Or Le Pen coming out against it?
Ailbhe Rea of the Staggers has a morning email on the migrant matter:
"The ethical and legal concerns are obvious. But a debate about a “cruel”, “hard-line” policy on migrants crossing the Channel is exactly the one the government, and Patel in particular, wants to have. (That it at least partially drowns out the Partygate fines is another bonus.) The number of people crossing the Channel in small boats has soared under Patel, despite her tough rhetoric.
[...]
The government is quite comfortable projecting a hard-line attitude to immigration, seeing it as a wedge issue that makes Labour uncomfortable. What it is less comfortable with is being challenged on its own terms, over whether a gratuitously expensive, cruel immigration approach will reduce the number of Channel crossings.
While many people may react viscerally to the human cost of the Rwandan offshoring policy, the most politically effective approach may be to point out its absurdity."
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
French politics getting to be as bad as American politics - can’t there be a way of voting for none of the above?
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
French politics getting to be as bad as American politics - can’t there be a way of voting for none of the above?
Macron is a centrist politician with a few minor issues. Le Pen is Bad - worse than Trump in a way. Since if she gets in, it will be to normalise her kind of politics - post-fascism. See Fini in Italy....
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
France has sent 100 million euros worth of arms! that is about half of the amount that Estonia has sent and a fraction of what the UK has sent,
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
An interesting one is coming up - if Sweden and Finland apply to join NATO, the vote must be unanimous to accept them.
What price Orban vetoing it? Or Le Pen coming out against it?
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
An interesting one is coming up - if Sweden and Finland apply to join NATO, the vote must be unanimous to accept them.
What price Orban vetoing it? Or Le Pen coming out against it?
I don't know what the Odds of Orban vetoing it would be, but is there a meconium to expel Hungary if it does?
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
An interesting one is coming up - if Sweden and Finland apply to join NATO, the vote must be unanimous to accept them.
What price Orban vetoing it? Or Le Pen coming out against it?
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
An interesting one is coming up - if Sweden and Finland apply to join NATO, the vote must be unanimous to accept them.
What price Orban vetoing it? Or Le Pen coming out against it?
I don't know what the Odds of Orban vetoing it would be, but is there a meconium to expel Hungary if it does?
I don't think expelling Hungary for simply vetoing expansion would be on the cards. There's no obligation to accept new members.
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
French politics getting to be as bad as American politics - can’t there be a way of voting for none of the above?
Yes. Makes one proud to be British, where our last election was a choice between two statesmen in the form of [checks notes]...
How does that rating compare with Cameron in 2008 ?
From October 2008, as its all I can find the raw data.
Con +10 lead
Do you think David Cameron is doing well or badly as Conservative leader? Very well 10 Fairly well 48 Fairly badly 21 Very badly 11 Don't know 11 TOTAL WELL: 58 % TOTAL BADLY: 32 %
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
French politics getting to be as bad as American politics - can’t there be a way of voting for none of the above?
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
French politics getting to be as bad as American politics - can’t there be a way of voting for none of the above?
Yes. Makes one proud to be British, where our last election was a choice between two statesmen in the form of [checks notes]...
Yes, there is a malaise across many western democracies. Hopefully temporary because if it isn't ...
Who votes on Musk's offer. As he wants 100% can someone with a single share scupper it all ? Or is it 50.001% of shareholders or a special class of shareholders or the board or what ?
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
French politics getting to be as bad as American politics - can’t there be a way of voting for none of the above?
It's called voting for none of the above.
I've long advocated a from of election where
1) RON Is always a candidate 2) Anyone registered to vote, but not voting is assumed too have voted for RON 3) In the event RON wins, new election held. All existing candidates ineligible.
That way, sitting at home shouting at the TV, rather than voting, is actually a positive democratic choice.
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
French politics getting to be as bad as American politics - can’t there be a way of voting for none of the above?
Yes. Makes one proud to be British, where our last election was a choice between two statesmen in the form of [checks notes]...
Yes, there is a malaise across many western democracies. Hopefully temporary because if it isn't ...
Excellent article from Cyclefree, as always. But it overlooks the voter's dilemma in 2019. I am fairly sure that several million people voted Tory in 2019 believing that they had an unsatisfactory leader in the ways Cyclefree lists. I was one of them. And in the same circumstances I would do so again.
The other choice for government was a Labour party with a deranged and bipolar approach to the crisis of Brexit, and with a leader who, to this day, we have no idea where he would stand in relation to defending the west and who has subsequently been denounced by the current moderate Labour leadership. We would have entered the Ukraine crisis with a cabinet full of MPs supporting STW.
What, Cyclefree, should the loyal, centrist, moderate, liberal democratic voter have done between those choices for government?
And BTW I would vote Labour (for the first time in decades) if there were a GE now; as I shall on 5th May.
Good to hear (last para) and definitely the right call. Johnson is crapping all over us but the Tory Party refuse to do the necessary, so it's down to the public come the GE, which means to people like you who voted for him in 2019.
True Blues and Hard Core Leavers will stick with him, as will the Shallow Apoliticals who still think he's a bit of a laugh and either can't see or don't care about the damage he's doing, however that's not enough for him to win. To get another term he needs those GE19 Con voters who *can* see he's a disgrace to the office he holds, and *do* care about it, to nevertheless vote Tory again, and I'm confident most of them will not oblige.
We are not a nation of nihilistic numbskulls - therefore we'll be kicking out Boris Johnson soon as we get the chance.
Thanks, but the chances of the various GE outcomes remain, IMHO, just about unchanged. There are too many variables and unknowns to see further. Of the three possibles, (and ignoring any outsiders running) : Tory government, Labour outright, Labour led government I reckon the chances to be about 45%, 5-10%, 45% respectively.
Two years plus is an immense stretch of time at the moment.
It is a long time, with significant events every week or two. But I remember a sense in both 1995-7 and 2008-10 that the Government was exhausted and were just playing out time, so even quite sensible new policies were greeted with a weary sigh. The current Government just doesn't look like a body poised for another 7 years in office, and I'm not sure that even HYUFD would argue that it does, for all that I'm sure he'll do his best for them.
I suspect that quite a few voters who are basically Tory will vote Labour in May not as a firm commitment but as a final message to the Government to sort themselves out or leave. Few people are really that bothered who their borough councillor is, so for many it will be a chance to give a final warning.
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
An interesting one is coming up - if Sweden and Finland apply to join NATO, the vote must be unanimous to accept them.
What price Orban vetoing it? Or Le Pen coming out against it?
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
An interesting one is coming up - if Sweden and Finland apply to join NATO, the vote must be unanimous to accept them.
What price Orban vetoing it? Or Le Pen coming out against it?
I don't know what the Odds of Orban vetoing it would be, but is there a meconium to expel Hungary if it does?
I don't think expelling Hungary for simply vetoing expansion would be on the cards. There's no obligation to accept new members.
no, expelling for vetoing expansion should not be enough, but a) blocking help to Ukraine by closing its airspace to NATO members, and b) corrupting the democratic proses at home. are more 2 other reasons.
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
French politics getting to be as bad as American politics - can’t there be a way of voting for none of the above?
Yes. Makes one proud to be British, where our last election was a choice between two statesmen in the form of [checks notes]...
Yes, there is a malaise across many western democracies. Hopefully temporary because if it isn't ...
Perhaps a Elon run Twitter will sort it out?
Then everybody can call everybody else paedos and then edit the tweet once it has enough outraged replies.
1) RON Is always a candidate 2) Anyone registered to vote, but not voting is assumed too have voted for RON 3) In the event RON wins, new election held. All existing candidates ineligible.
That way, sitting at home shouting at the TV, rather than voting, is actually a positive democratic choice.
I dunno, I think that people who can't be arsed to vote should recognise that they are delegating the choice to others. I've met voters who say exactly that - "I don't follow politics, so I'll leave it to those who do and accept whoever they decide on". Not convinced that we should effectively give them a veto. And what if RON won the re-run as well?
"I suspect that quite a few voters who are basically Tory will vote Labour in May not as a firm commitment but as a final message to the Government to sort themselves out or leave. Few people are really that bothered who their borough councillor is, so for many it will be a chance to give a final warning."
This is always broadly true of all council elections. Local matters do play a role and its a relatively risk-free way of sending a message.
Also the results on the day depend massively on where is electing, what they are electing and, bluntly, the order the results come in.
Re the earlier SpaceX discussion, Bezos is going to give Blue Origin a fighting chance of building a commercial business. He and Amazon have deep enough pockets to shelter it from direct competition for some time. And taking a long view, it probably makes commercial sense for them not to abandon the market to Musk. It will also further drive development of launch technology.
On April 5, the company announced it signed with three launch service providers — Blue Origin, Arianespace and United Launch Alliance — for 83 missions to space for its highly-anticipated high-speed internet constellation, providing worldwide coverage with a network of 3,236 satellites in low Earth orbit.
The breakdown of the contracts distributed for the tech giant for what is being called the biggest rocket deal in commercial space, and its more than $10 billion investment, are as follows: 38 launches with United Launch Alliance — a joint venture with Boeing and Lockheed Martin, 18 launches with Arianespace — a European launch service provider, and 12 launches with Blue Origin with an option for 15 more with the private space company owned by Jeff Bezos.
Project Kuiper, Amazon’s satellite program for its internet constellation, plans to test a prototype pair — KuiperSat-1 and KuiperSat-2 — launching in late 2022 with ABL Space Systems on that company’s RS1 vehicle before flying operational satellites, totaling billions of dollars, according to Amazon.
“KuiperSat-1 and KuiperSat-2 will include much of technology and sub-systems that power the production version of our satellite design — phased array and parabolic antennas, power and propulsion systems, custom-designed modems and more,” Amazon said in a blog post.
Amazon plans to team up with Verizon to implement its high-speed internet as the Project Kuiper team — 750 employees and growing according to CNBC in November 2021 — plans to add hundreds more working out of the company’s 219,000 square foot facility in Redmond, Washington....
Re the earlier SpaceX discussion, Bezos is going to give Blue Origin a fighting chance of building a commercial business. He and Amazon have deep enough pockets to shelter it from direct competition for some time. And taking a long view, it probably makes commercial sense for them not to abandon the market to Musk. It will also further drive development of launch technology.
On April 5, the company announced it signed with three launch service providers — Blue Origin, Arianespace and United Launch Alliance — for 83 missions to space for its highly-anticipated high-speed internet constellation, providing worldwide coverage with a network of 3,236 satellites in low Earth orbit.
The breakdown of the contracts distributed for the tech giant for what is being called the biggest rocket deal in commercial space, and its more than $10 billion investment, are as follows: 38 launches with United Launch Alliance — a joint venture with Boeing and Lockheed Martin, 18 launches with Arianespace — a European launch service provider, and 12 launches with Blue Origin with an option for 15 more with the private space company owned by Jeff Bezos.
Project Kuiper, Amazon’s satellite program for its internet constellation, plans to test a prototype pair — KuiperSat-1 and KuiperSat-2 — launching in late 2022 with ABL Space Systems on that company’s RS1 vehicle before flying operational satellites, totaling billions of dollars, according to Amazon.
“KuiperSat-1 and KuiperSat-2 will include much of technology and sub-systems that power the production version of our satellite design — phased array and parabolic antennas, power and propulsion systems, custom-designed modems and more,” Amazon said in a blog post.
Amazon plans to team up with Verizon to implement its high-speed internet as the Project Kuiper team — 750 employees and growing according to CNBC in November 2021 — plans to add hundreds more working out of the company’s 219,000 square foot facility in Redmond, Washington....
He's bought the market of pretty much all non-SpaceX launches for the next five years.
At massive extra cost, compared to what SpaceX is doing. Mostly on unblown rockets, as well.
So his system will cost billions more than SpaceX. Just in terms of launch costs....
EDIT: apart from buying launches from Sue Origin, all the other buys are for legacy systems that are pretty much dead in the price war with SpaceX's approach. So not much investment in the future of launch, there.
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
An interesting one is coming up - if Sweden and Finland apply to join NATO, the vote must be unanimous to accept them.
What price Orban vetoing it? Or Le Pen coming out against it?
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
An interesting one is coming up - if Sweden and Finland apply to join NATO, the vote must be unanimous to accept them.
What price Orban vetoing it? Or Le Pen coming out against it?
I don't know what the Odds of Orban vetoing it would be, but is there a meconium to expel Hungary if it does?
I don't think expelling Hungary for simply vetoing expansion would be on the cards. There's no obligation to accept new members.
Would they need to ?
There are already arguable grounds (and a mechanism) for suspending Hungary's voting rights, without expelling them. Their previous allies like Poland who would before have prevented such a thing might well consider going along with the threat.
Excellent article from Cyclefree, as always. But it overlooks the voter's dilemma in 2019. I am fairly sure that several million people voted Tory in 2019 believing that they had an unsatisfactory leader in the ways Cyclefree lists. I was one of them. And in the same circumstances I would do so again.
The other choice for government was a Labour party with a deranged and bipolar approach to the crisis of Brexit, and with a leader who, to this day, we have no idea where he would stand in relation to defending the west and who has subsequently been denounced by the current moderate Labour leadership. We would have entered the Ukraine crisis with a cabinet full of MPs supporting STW.
What, Cyclefree, should the loyal, centrist, moderate, liberal democratic voter have done between those choices for government?
And BTW I would vote Labour (for the first time in decades) if there were a GE now; as I shall on 5th May.
Good to hear (last para) and definitely the right call. Johnson is crapping all over us but the Tory Party refuse to do the necessary, so it's down to the public come the GE, which means to people like you who voted for him in 2019.
True Blues and Hard Core Leavers will stick with him, as will the Shallow Apoliticals who still think he's a bit of a laugh and either can't see or don't care about the damage he's doing, however that's not enough for him to win. To get another term he needs those GE19 Con voters who *can* see he's a disgrace to the office he holds, and *do* care about it, to nevertheless vote Tory again, and I'm confident most of them will not oblige.
We are not a nation of nihilistic numbskulls - therefore we'll be kicking out Boris Johnson soon as we get the chance.
Thanks, but the chances of the various GE outcomes remain, IMHO, just about unchanged. There are too many variables and unknowns to see further. Of the three possibles, (and ignoring any outsiders running) : Tory government, Labour outright, Labour led government I reckon the chances to be about 45%, 5-10%, 45% respectively.
Two years plus is an immense stretch of time at the moment.
Ok. So we have diverged a bit. For me, Starmer PM in 24 is now a 66% chance.
On which subject I really do hope my old mukka 'Enoch was right and so was Paul Weller' Isam comes back - my bet with him on that outcome @ 3/1 is looking very good.
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
French politics getting to be as bad as American politics - can’t there be a way of voting for none of the above?
It's called voting for none of the above.
I've long advocated a from of election where
1) RON Is always a candidate 2) Anyone registered to vote, but not voting is assumed too have voted for RON 3) In the event RON wins, new election held. All existing candidates ineligible.
That way, sitting at home shouting at the TV, rather than voting, is actually a positive democratic choice.
I don't understand why sitting at home should be regarded as a positive democratic choice. It seems like a negative choice to me.
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
France has sent 100 million euros worth of arms! that is about half of the amount that Estonia has sent and a fraction of what the UK has sent,
Indeed. But maintaining the coalition against Putin is a matter of huge importance for European security; Le Pen threatens that.
“ The Prime Minister and Chancellor have both apologised after being awarded Fixed Penalty Notices and I understand that both have now paid. I completely understand the frustrations and anger amongst people in Solihull right now. Solihull followed the rules diligently throughout the pandemic and it is important that those in public office set the right example.
That said, on the other side of the continent, Putin and his barbaric regime have illegally invaded Ukraine. Thousands of innocent Ukrainians, including children, have been murdered. And, the UK Government is now investigating whether Putin’s regime has used chemical weapons against innocent civilians in Mariupol.
The UK is leading the west’s efforts to support Ukraine, in particular, President Zelensky has openly praised the Prime Minister for his efforts in supporting Ukraine during this fractious period for Europe. Given the crucial point in Europe’s history right now, it is not the right time to change the leadership of the country. It’s time to move on.”
1) RON Is always a candidate 2) Anyone registered to vote, but not voting is assumed too have voted for RON 3) In the event RON wins, new election held. All existing candidates ineligible.
That way, sitting at home shouting at the TV, rather than voting, is actually a positive democratic choice.
I dunno, I think that people who can't be arsed to vote should recognise that they are delegating the choice to others. I've met voters who say exactly that - "I don't follow politics, so I'll leave it to those who do and accept whoever they decide on". Not convinced that we should effectively give them a veto. And what if RON won the re-run as well?
I agree, but did you see the dissent I got when I suggested that here last week (I think it was)?
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
French politics getting to be as bad as American politics - can’t there be a way of voting for none of the above?
It's called voting for none of the above.
I've long advocated a from of election where
1) RON Is always a candidate 2) Anyone registered to vote, but not voting is assumed too have voted for RON 3) In the event RON wins, new election held. All existing candidates ineligible.
That way, sitting at home shouting at the TV, rather than voting, is actually a positive democratic choice.
I suspect that way that many (perhaps most) electoral offices will not be filled.
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
An interesting one is coming up - if Sweden and Finland apply to join NATO, the vote must be unanimous to accept them.
What price Orban vetoing it? Or Le Pen coming out against it?
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
An interesting one is coming up - if Sweden and Finland apply to join NATO, the vote must be unanimous to accept them.
What price Orban vetoing it? Or Le Pen coming out against it?
I don't know what the Odds of Orban vetoing it would be, but is there a meconium to expel Hungary if it does?
I don't think expelling Hungary for simply vetoing expansion would be on the cards. There's no obligation to accept new members.
Would they need to ?
There are already arguable grounds (and a mechanism) for suspending Hungary's voting rights, without expelling them. Their previous allies like Poland who would before have prevented such a thing might well consider going along with the threat.
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
French politics getting to be as bad as American politics - can’t there be a way of voting for none of the above?
It's called voting for none of the above.
I've long advocated a from of election where
1) RON Is always a candidate 2) Anyone registered to vote, but not voting is assumed too have voted for RON 3) In the event RON wins, new election held. All existing candidates ineligible.
That way, sitting at home shouting at the TV, rather than voting, is actually a positive democratic choice.
I suspect that way that many (perhaps most) electoral offices will not be filled.
Re the earlier SpaceX discussion, Bezos is going to give Blue Origin a fighting chance of building a commercial business. He and Amazon have deep enough pockets to shelter it from direct competition for some time. And taking a long view, it probably makes commercial sense for them not to abandon the market to Musk. It will also further drive development of launch technology.
On April 5, the company announced it signed with three launch service providers — Blue Origin, Arianespace and United Launch Alliance — for 83 missions to space for its highly-anticipated high-speed internet constellation, providing worldwide coverage with a network of 3,236 satellites in low Earth orbit.
The breakdown of the contracts distributed for the tech giant for what is being called the biggest rocket deal in commercial space, and its more than $10 billion investment, are as follows: 38 launches with United Launch Alliance — a joint venture with Boeing and Lockheed Martin, 18 launches with Arianespace — a European launch service provider, and 12 launches with Blue Origin with an option for 15 more with the private space company owned by Jeff Bezos.
Project Kuiper, Amazon’s satellite program for its internet constellation, plans to test a prototype pair — KuiperSat-1 and KuiperSat-2 — launching in late 2022 with ABL Space Systems on that company’s RS1 vehicle before flying operational satellites, totaling billions of dollars, according to Amazon.
“KuiperSat-1 and KuiperSat-2 will include much of technology and sub-systems that power the production version of our satellite design — phased array and parabolic antennas, power and propulsion systems, custom-designed modems and more,” Amazon said in a blog post.
Amazon plans to team up with Verizon to implement its high-speed internet as the Project Kuiper team — 750 employees and growing according to CNBC in November 2021 — plans to add hundreds more working out of the company’s 219,000 square foot facility in Redmond, Washington....
He's bought the market of pretty much all non-SpaceX launches for the next five years.
At massive extra cost, compared to what SpaceX is doing. Mostly on unblown rockets, as well.
So his system will cost billions more than SpaceX. Just in terms of launch costs....
EDIT: apart from buying launches from Sue Origin, all the other buys are for legacy systems that are pretty much dead in the price war with SpaceX's approach. So not much investment in the future of launch, there.
All of which, for him, is secondary to establishing a competitor to Musk. And he has for now cash flow that Musk doesn't.
It's a very expensive way to stay in the game, and it might fail, but I wouldn't automatically assume that it will. And should he succeed, the investment is possibly worth it.
Excellent article from Cyclefree, as always. But it overlooks the voter's dilemma in 2019. I am fairly sure that several million people voted Tory in 2019 believing that they had an unsatisfactory leader in the ways Cyclefree lists. I was one of them. And in the same circumstances I would do so again.
The other choice for government was a Labour party with a deranged and bipolar approach to the crisis of Brexit, and with a leader who, to this day, we have no idea where he would stand in relation to defending the west and who has subsequently been denounced by the current moderate Labour leadership. We would have entered the Ukraine crisis with a cabinet full of MPs supporting STW.
What, Cyclefree, should the loyal, centrist, moderate, liberal democratic voter have done between those choices for government?
And BTW I would vote Labour (for the first time in decades) if there were a GE now; as I shall on 5th May.
Good to hear (last para) and definitely the right call. Johnson is crapping all over us but the Tory Party refuse to do the necessary, so it's down to the public come the GE, which means to people like you who voted for him in 2019.
True Blues and Hard Core Leavers will stick with him, as will the Shallow Apoliticals who still think he's a bit of a laugh and either can't see or don't care about the damage he's doing, however that's not enough for him to win. To get another term he needs those GE19 Con voters who *can* see he's a disgrace to the office he holds, and *do* care about it, to nevertheless vote Tory again, and I'm confident most of them will not oblige.
We are not a nation of nihilistic numbskulls - therefore we'll be kicking out Boris Johnson soon as we get the chance.
Thanks, but the chances of the various GE outcomes remain, IMHO, just about unchanged. There are too many variables and unknowns to see further. Of the three possibles, (and ignoring any outsiders running) : Tory government, Labour outright, Labour led government I reckon the chances to be about 45%, 5-10%, 45% respectively.
Two years plus is an immense stretch of time at the moment.
It is a long time, with significant events every week or two. But I remember a sense in both 1995-7 and 2008-10 that the Government was exhausted and were just playing out time, so even quite sensible new policies were greeted with a weary sigh. The current Government just doesn't look like a body poised for another 7 years in office, and I'm not sure that even HYUFD would argue that it does, for all that I'm sure he'll do his best for them.
I suspect that quite a few voters who are basically Tory will vote Labour in May not as a firm commitment but as a final message to the Government to sort themselves out or leave. Few people are really that bothered who their borough councillor is, so for many it will be a chance to give a final warning.
Excellent article from Cyclefree, as always. But it overlooks the voter's dilemma in 2019. I am fairly sure that several million people voted Tory in 2019 believing that they had an unsatisfactory leader in the ways Cyclefree lists. I was one of them. And in the same circumstances I would do so again.
The other choice for government was a Labour party with a deranged and bipolar approach to the crisis of Brexit, and with a leader who, to this day, we have no idea where he would stand in relation to defending the west and who has subsequently been denounced by the current moderate Labour leadership. We would have entered the Ukraine crisis with a cabinet full of MPs supporting STW.
What, Cyclefree, should the loyal, centrist, moderate, liberal democratic voter have done between those choices for government?
And BTW I would vote Labour (for the first time in decades) if there were a GE now; as I shall on 5th May.
Good to hear (last para) and definitely the right call. Johnson is crapping all over us but the Tory Party refuse to do the necessary, so it's down to the public come the GE, which means to people like you who voted for him in 2019.
True Blues and Hard Core Leavers will stick with him, as will the Shallow Apoliticals who still think he's a bit of a laugh and either can't see or don't care about the damage he's doing, however that's not enough for him to win. To get another term he needs those GE19 Con voters who *can* see he's a disgrace to the office he holds, and *do* care about it, to nevertheless vote Tory again, and I'm confident most of them will not oblige.
We are not a nation of nihilistic numbskulls - therefore we'll be kicking out Boris Johnson soon as we get the chance.
Thanks, but the chances of the various GE outcomes remain, IMHO, just about unchanged. There are too many variables and unknowns to see further. Of the three possibles, (and ignoring any outsiders running) : Tory government, Labour outright, Labour led government I reckon the chances to be about 45%, 5-10%, 45% respectively.
Two years plus is an immense stretch of time at the moment.
It is a long time, with significant events every week or two. But I remember a sense in both 1995-7 and 2008-10 that the Government was exhausted and were just playing out time, so even quite sensible new policies were greeted with a weary sigh. The current Government just doesn't look like a body poised for another 7 years in office, and I'm not sure that even HYUFD would argue that it does, for all that I'm sure he'll do his best for them.
I suspect that quite a few voters who are basically Tory will vote Labour in May not as a firm commitment but as a final message to the Government to sort themselves out or leave. Few people are really that bothered who their borough councillor is, so for many it will be a chance to give a final warning.
Fairly much agree. But a couple of factors are in play. There remains a decent chance that the Tories will reconstruct themselves, and (to me) obviously with a new leader not currently in the government. It's between Hunt, Tugendhat and a couple of others. If they do the vision looks completely changed. A proper one nation cabinet for a short time would work wonders.
Secondly the capacity of Labour to forget how to win elections is the stuff of legend and song. Only Wilson and Blair have done it in the last 72 years. You have to go back to George VI times.
Pidcock, Burgon, Abbott and McDonnell without any outside help could lose it for them in a couple of weeks without breaking sweat.
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
French politics getting to be as bad as American politics - can’t there be a way of voting for none of the above?
It's called voting for none of the above.
I've long advocated a from of election where
1) RON Is always a candidate 2) Anyone registered to vote, but not voting is assumed too have voted for RON 3) In the event RON wins, new election held. All existing candidates ineligible.
That way, sitting at home shouting at the TV, rather than voting, is actually a positive democratic choice.
I suspect that way that many (perhaps most) electoral offices will not be filled.
Or the quality of candidates might just rise.
There's optimism, and then there's wide-eyed optimism...
Who votes on Musk's offer. As he wants 100% can someone with a single share scupper it all ? Or is it 50.001% of shareholders or a special class of shareholders or the board or what ?
It’ll be a ballot of all shareholders, on the offer made to delist the company and take it private.
The exact percentage required will depend on the constitution of the company and the market (NYSE) where it’s currently listed, it’ll likely be around two thirds required in favour.
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
French politics getting to be as bad as American politics - can’t there be a way of voting for none of the above?
It's called voting for none of the above.
I've long advocated a from of election where
1) RON Is always a candidate 2) Anyone registered to vote, but not voting is assumed too have voted for RON 3) In the event RON wins, new election held. All existing candidates ineligible.
That way, sitting at home shouting at the TV, rather than voting, is actually a positive democratic choice.
I suspect that way that many (perhaps most) electoral offices will not be filled.
Or the quality of candidates might just rise.
Or our tolerance for poor quality candidates might rise.
I'm unclear why the added prospect of losing to a dummy might encourage better candidates into the ring?
Re the earlier SpaceX discussion, Bezos is going to give Blue Origin a fighting chance of building a commercial business. He and Amazon have deep enough pockets to shelter it from direct competition for some time. And taking a long view, it probably makes commercial sense for them not to abandon the market to Musk. It will also further drive development of launch technology.
On April 5, the company announced it signed with three launch service providers — Blue Origin, Arianespace and United Launch Alliance — for 83 missions to space for its highly-anticipated high-speed internet constellation, providing worldwide coverage with a network of 3,236 satellites in low Earth orbit.
The breakdown of the contracts distributed for the tech giant for what is being called the biggest rocket deal in commercial space, and its more than $10 billion investment, are as follows: 38 launches with United Launch Alliance — a joint venture with Boeing and Lockheed Martin, 18 launches with Arianespace — a European launch service provider, and 12 launches with Blue Origin with an option for 15 more with the private space company owned by Jeff Bezos.
Project Kuiper, Amazon’s satellite program for its internet constellation, plans to test a prototype pair — KuiperSat-1 and KuiperSat-2 — launching in late 2022 with ABL Space Systems on that company’s RS1 vehicle before flying operational satellites, totaling billions of dollars, according to Amazon.
“KuiperSat-1 and KuiperSat-2 will include much of technology and sub-systems that power the production version of our satellite design — phased array and parabolic antennas, power and propulsion systems, custom-designed modems and more,” Amazon said in a blog post.
Amazon plans to team up with Verizon to implement its high-speed internet as the Project Kuiper team — 750 employees and growing according to CNBC in November 2021 — plans to add hundreds more working out of the company’s 219,000 square foot facility in Redmond, Washington....
He's bought the market of pretty much all non-SpaceX launches for the next five years.
At massive extra cost, compared to what SpaceX is doing. Mostly on unblown rockets, as well.
So his system will cost billions more than SpaceX. Just in terms of launch costs....
EDIT: apart from buying launches from Sue Origin, all the other buys are for legacy systems that are pretty much dead in the price war with SpaceX's approach. So not much investment in the future of launch, there.
All of which, for him, is secondary to establishing a competitor to Musk. And he has for now cash flow that Musk doesn't.
It's a very expensive way to stay in the game, and it might fail, but I wouldn't automatically assume that it will. And should he succeed, the investment is possibly worth it.
Amazon she holders may or may not get restive about the torrent of their money he is throwing into this. Alternative strategies exist....
An interesting article but let me put a counterpoint. Let's imagine two scenarios:
Scenario A - All rules are followed to the letter but the outcome is bad Scenario B - There is a great outcome but some rules were broken.
If you ask the public, which scenario they prefer I suspect most will say the second scenario is better. If you ask people in Westminster and many on here then they will prefer the first scenario
The problem is that our political class and media often focus on whether or not someone broke the rules rather than asking if the rules were any good.
Look at the event Boris and Rishi were fined for - we have created a scenario where someone was punished for eating a slice of cake. It's ridiculous. Of course, Boris can't say this as he made the stupid rules himself.
Cyclefree's argument seems to be that the law should never be broken but I would argue that some laws matter more than others. The root problems here are:
1) There are too many laws and regulations in this country, especially with the tendency towards performative lawmaking (e.g. the conversion therapy ban) 2) Many rules and laws are badly written and unclear (e.g. whether pubs could sell scotch eggs during COVID) 3) Often the rules become a shield to exonerate people when the outcomes are bad (e.g. expenses troughers who were "following the rules"
My concern if Boris goes is that he is one of the few politicians who is prepared to think out of the political box (e.g. vaccine taskforce). We could easily end up with another Theresa May who will be conventional and fail conventionally.
If you look at the last 10 years, there has been a trend towards outsider causes or candidates- Sindy, Brexit, Trump, Boris, Corbyn, Le Pen. Even Macron initially ran as an outsider.
This says to me that the real problem is that for too many the system isn't working and outcomes are bad.
When was the last time anyone was sacked for bad outcomes? Cressida Dick was pushed out, not because of how her force dealt with crime but because of concerns about racism.
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
An interesting one is coming up - if Sweden and Finland apply to join NATO, the vote must be unanimous to accept them.
What price Orban vetoing it? Or Le Pen coming out against it?
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
An interesting one is coming up - if Sweden and Finland apply to join NATO, the vote must be unanimous to accept them.
What price Orban vetoing it? Or Le Pen coming out against it?
I don't know what the Odds of Orban vetoing it would be, but is there a meconium to expel Hungary if it does?
I don't think expelling Hungary for simply vetoing expansion would be on the cards. There's no obligation to accept new members.
Would they need to ?
There are already arguable grounds (and a mechanism) for suspending Hungary's voting rights, without expelling them. Their previous allies like Poland who would before have prevented such a thing might well consider going along with the threat.
That's the EU, not NATO.
True - I jumped into a discussion before reading the whole thing. Apologies. But I'm not sure that the implied threat might not still apply.
If Orban threatens European security, his former Visegrad allies, who are the very strongest supporters of Ukraine for what they see as existential reasons, will be allies no longer.
The Rwanda scheme is expected to be very expensive.
The cost quoted so far by the government is pretty much just a set up to a set up cost.
Yes, but it'll be worth every penny to save the lives of those poor migrants drowning in the Channel.
That's what I object to most - the sheer chutzpah of pretending that the Rwandan policy is designed to save the lives of migrants, whereas in reality most of those in favour of the policy couldn't give a damn how many migrants drown in the Channel.
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
French politics getting to be as bad as American politics - can’t there be a way of voting for none of the above?
It's called voting for none of the above.
I've long advocated a from of election where
1) RON Is always a candidate 2) Anyone registered to vote, but not voting is assumed too have voted for RON 3) In the event RON wins, new election held. All existing candidates ineligible.
That way, sitting at home shouting at the TV, rather than voting, is actually a positive democratic choice.
I don't understand why sitting at home should be regarded as a positive democratic choice. It seems like a negative choice to me.
Not if you consider all the candidates to be unfit for office and by sitting at home you ensure they are all eliminated, which is what Malmesbury is advocating. I think its a great idea.
Excellent article from Cyclefree, as always. But it overlooks the voter's dilemma in 2019. I am fairly sure that several million people voted Tory in 2019 believing that they had an unsatisfactory leader in the ways Cyclefree lists. I was one of them. And in the same circumstances I would do so again.
The other choice for government was a Labour party with a deranged and bipolar approach to the crisis of Brexit, and with a leader who, to this day, we have no idea where he would stand in relation to defending the west and who has subsequently been denounced by the current moderate Labour leadership. We would have entered the Ukraine crisis with a cabinet full of MPs supporting STW.
What, Cyclefree, should the loyal, centrist, moderate, liberal democratic voter have done between those choices for government?
And BTW I would vote Labour (for the first time in decades) if there were a GE now; as I shall on 5th May.
Good to hear (last para) and definitely the right call. Johnson is crapping all over us but the Tory Party refuse to do the necessary, so it's down to the public come the GE, which means to people like you who voted for him in 2019.
True Blues and Hard Core Leavers will stick with him, as will the Shallow Apoliticals who still think he's a bit of a laugh and either can't see or don't care about the damage he's doing, however that's not enough for him to win. To get another term he needs those GE19 Con voters who *can* see he's a disgrace to the office he holds, and *do* care about it, to nevertheless vote Tory again, and I'm confident most of them will not oblige.
We are not a nation of nihilistic numbskulls - therefore we'll be kicking out Boris Johnson soon as we get the chance.
Thanks, but the chances of the various GE outcomes remain, IMHO, just about unchanged. There are too many variables and unknowns to see further. Of the three possibles, (and ignoring any outsiders running) : Tory government, Labour outright, Labour led government I reckon the chances to be about 45%, 5-10%, 45% respectively.
Two years plus is an immense stretch of time at the moment.
Ok. So we have diverged a bit. For me, Starmer PM in 24 is now a 66% chance.
On which subject I really do hope my old mukka 'Enoch was right and so was Paul Weller' Isam comes back - my bet with him on that outcome @ 3/1 is looking very good.
Betfair could do with a market along the lines of PM following next GE. The next PM market is too dominated by a potential Boris exit.
An interesting article but let me put a counterpoint. Let's imagine two scenarios:
Scenario A - All rules are followed to the letter but the outcome is bad Scenario B - There is a great outcome but some rules were broken.
If you ask the public, which scenario they prefer I suspect most will say the second scenario is better. If you ask people in Westminster and many on here then they will prefer the first scenario
The problem is that our political class and media often focus on whether or not someone broke the rules rather than asking if the rules were any good.
Look at the event Boris and Rishi were fined for - we have created a scenario where someone was punished for eating a slice of cake. It's ridiculous. Of course, Boris can't say this as he made the stupid rules himself.
Cyclefree's argument seems to be that the law should never be broken but I would argue that some laws matter more than others. The root problems here are:
1) There are too many laws and regulations in this country, especially with the tendency towards performative lawmaking (e.g. the conversion therapy ban) 2) Many rules and laws are badly written and unclear (e.g. whether pubs could sell scotch eggs during COVID) 3) Often the rules become a shield to exonerate people when the outcomes are bad (e.g. expenses troughers who were "following the rules"
My concern if Boris goes is that he is one of the few politicians who is prepared to think out of the political box (e.g. vaccine taskforce). We could easily end up with another Theresa May who will be conventional and fail conventionally.
If you look at the last 10 years, there has been a trend towards outsider causes or candidates- Sindy, Brexit, Trump, Boris, Corbyn, Le Pen. Even Macron initially ran as an outsider.
This says to me that the real problem is that for too many the system isn't working and outcomes are bad.
When was the last time anyone was sacked for bad outcomes? Cressida Dick was pushed out, not because of how her force dealt with crime but because of concerns about racism.
Your last point is very good one. We have to avoid the trap of New Labour targetitis but senior public servants need real accountability on performance.
How does that rating compare with Cameron in 2008 ?
From October 2008, as its all I can find the raw data.
Con +10 lead
Do you think David Cameron is doing well or badly as Conservative leader? Very well 10 Fairly well 48 Fairly badly 21 Very badly 11 Don't know 11 TOTAL WELL: 58 % TOTAL BADLY: 32 %
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
French politics getting to be as bad as American politics - can’t there be a way of voting for none of the above?
It's called voting for none of the above.
I've long advocated a from of election where
1) RON Is always a candidate 2) Anyone registered to vote, but not voting is assumed too have voted for RON 3) In the event RON wins, new election held. All existing candidates ineligible.
That way, sitting at home shouting at the TV, rather than voting, is actually a positive democratic choice.
I don't understand why sitting at home should be regarded as a positive democratic choice. It seems like a negative choice to me.
Not if you consider all the candidates to be unfit for office and by sitting at home you ensure they are all eliminated, which is what Malmesbury is advocating. I think its a great idea.
Of course, when I am unDictator, the eliminated candidates will be providing shade for the populace, along the Appian Way (M4 renamed).
An interesting article but let me put a counterpoint. Let's imagine two scenarios:
Scenario A - All rules are followed to the letter but the outcome is bad Scenario B - There is a great outcome but some rules were broken.
If you ask the public, which scenario they prefer I suspect most will say the second scenario is better. If you ask people in Westminster and many on here then they will prefer the first scenario
The problem is that our political class and media often focus on whether or not someone broke the rules rather than asking if the rules were any good.
Look at the event Boris and Rishi were fined for - we have created a scenario where someone was punished for eating a slice of cake. It's ridiculous. Of course, Boris can't say this as he made the stupid rules himself.
Cyclefree's argument seems to be that the law should never be broken but I would argue that some laws matter more than others. The root problems here are:
1) There are too many laws and regulations in this country, especially with the tendency towards performative lawmaking (e.g. the conversion therapy ban) 2) Many rules and laws are badly written and unclear (e.g. whether pubs could sell scotch eggs during COVID) 3) Often the rules become a shield to exonerate people when the outcomes are bad (e.g. expenses troughers who were "following the rules"
My concern if Boris goes is that he is one of the few politicians who is prepared to think out of the political box (e.g. vaccine taskforce). We could easily end up with another Theresa May who will be conventional and fail conventionally.
If you look at the last 10 years, there has been a trend towards outsider causes or candidates- Sindy, Brexit, Trump, Boris, Corbyn, Le Pen. Even Macron initially ran as an outsider.
This says to me that the real problem is that for too many the system isn't working and outcomes are bad.
When was the last time anyone was sacked for bad outcomes? Cressida Dick was pushed out, not because of how her force dealt with crime but because of concerns about racism.
Your point would have some validity were it not for the fact that the very people who broke the laws were the ones who had very recently made them. Like you I am all for dumping laws which are useless or counter productive or counter to the public good. I can think of a lot of laws like that. But I also believe that as part of the democratic process those who make laws should be subject to them and should be held to account when they break them.
Cyclefree's argument is not against removal of laws it is against ignoring them. There is a fundamental and hugely important difference.
The Rwanda scheme is expected to be very expensive.
The cost quoted so far by the government is pretty much just a set up to a set up cost.
I have yet to see a reaction from *any* politician that has not been entirely predictable. Perhaps we are all the same as well.
My only 3 notes so far are:
1 - Note Priti Patel mentioning "politically motivated lawyers". 2 - One potential complication for the Rwanda relationship that no one has mentioned is that it is a very small country slightly larger than Wales, with a population density roughly double our own. Those numbers may be difficult to square. 3 - The fake moral posturing from Les Francais about refugees has already started (again). Presumably we are due a Macron tantrum before the next Presidential voting round.
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
An interesting one is coming up - if Sweden and Finland apply to join NATO, the vote must be unanimous to accept them.
What price Orban vetoing it? Or Le Pen coming out against it?
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
An interesting one is coming up - if Sweden and Finland apply to join NATO, the vote must be unanimous to accept them.
What price Orban vetoing it? Or Le Pen coming out against it?
I don't know what the Odds of Orban vetoing it would be, but is there a meconium to expel Hungary if it does?
I don't think expelling Hungary for simply vetoing expansion would be on the cards. There's no obligation to accept new members.
The case for expelling Hungary from the EU is they are turning away from the core values underpinning the project.
An interesting article but let me put a counterpoint. Let's imagine two scenarios:
Scenario A - All rules are followed to the letter but the outcome is bad Scenario B - There is a great outcome but some rules were broken.
If you ask the public, which scenario they prefer I suspect most will say the second scenario is better. If you ask people in Westminster and many on here then they will prefer the first scenario
The problem is that our political class and media often focus on whether or not someone broke the rules rather than asking if the rules were any good.
Look at the event Boris and Rishi were fined for - we have created a scenario where someone was punished for eating a slice of cake. It's ridiculous. Of course, Boris can't say this as he made the stupid rules himself.
Cyclefree's argument seems to be that the law should never be broken but I would argue that some laws matter more than others. The root problems here are:
1) There are too many laws and regulations in this country, especially with the tendency towards performative lawmaking (e.g. the conversion therapy ban) 2) Many rules and laws are badly written and unclear (e.g. whether pubs could sell scotch eggs during COVID) 3) Often the rules become a shield to exonerate people when the outcomes are bad (e.g. expenses troughers who were "following the rules"
My concern if Boris goes is that he is one of the few politicians who is prepared to think out of the political box (e.g. vaccine taskforce). We could easily end up with another Theresa May who will be conventional and fail conventionally.
If you look at the last 10 years, there has been a trend towards outsider causes or candidates- Sindy, Brexit, Trump, Boris, Corbyn, Le Pen. Even Macron initially ran as an outsider.
This says to me that the real problem is that for too many the system isn't working and outcomes are bad.
When was the last time anyone was sacked for bad outcomes? Cressida Dick was pushed out, not because of how her force dealt with crime but because of concerns about racism.
So Boris makes and breaks stupid rules. And this is the fault, not of him, but the "system". And add in a completely unrelated bit about racism at the end (Dick actually resigned because she would not create a plan to tackle not just racism, but bullying, sexism, poor perfomance and loss of trust with the public).
An article about Senator Feinstein's apparently increasing mental problems which is, unusually, not a political hit job, but rather reads as fair and careful reporting.
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
French politics getting to be as bad as American politics - can’t there be a way of voting for none of the above?
It's called voting for none of the above.
I've long advocated a from of election where
1) RON Is always a candidate 2) Anyone registered to vote, but not voting is assumed too have voted for RON 3) In the event RON wins, new election held. All existing candidates ineligible.
That way, sitting at home shouting at the TV, rather than voting, is actually a positive democratic choice.
I don't understand why sitting at home should be regarded as a positive democratic choice. It seems like a negative choice to me.
Doesn't that move us to endless elections.
On a good day, 30% people stay at home.
So of the rest, one candidate or the other would have to clear 44% of the votes actually cast to beat RON!
Excellent article from Cyclefree, as always. But it overlooks the voter's dilemma in 2019. I am fairly sure that several million people voted Tory in 2019 believing that they had an unsatisfactory leader in the ways Cyclefree lists. I was one of them. And in the same circumstances I would do so again.
The other choice for government was a Labour party with a deranged and bipolar approach to the crisis of Brexit, and with a leader who, to this day, we have no idea where he would stand in relation to defending the west and who has subsequently been denounced by the current moderate Labour leadership. We would have entered the Ukraine crisis with a cabinet full of MPs supporting STW.
What, Cyclefree, should the loyal, centrist, moderate, liberal democratic voter have done between those choices for government?
And BTW I would vote Labour (for the first time in decades) if there were a GE now; as I shall on 5th May.
Good to hear (last para) and definitely the right call. Johnson is crapping all over us but the Tory Party refuse to do the necessary, so it's down to the public come the GE, which means to people like you who voted for him in 2019.
True Blues and Hard Core Leavers will stick with him, as will the Shallow Apoliticals who still think he's a bit of a laugh and either can't see or don't care about the damage he's doing, however that's not enough for him to win. To get another term he needs those GE19 Con voters who *can* see he's a disgrace to the office he holds, and *do* care about it, to nevertheless vote Tory again, and I'm confident most of them will not oblige.
We are not a nation of nihilistic numbskulls - therefore we'll be kicking out Boris Johnson soon as we get the chance.
Thanks, but the chances of the various GE outcomes remain, IMHO, just about unchanged. There are too many variables and unknowns to see further. Of the three possibles, (and ignoring any outsiders running) : Tory government, Labour outright, Labour led government I reckon the chances to be about 45%, 5-10%, 45% respectively.
Two years plus is an immense stretch of time at the moment.
Ok. So we have diverged a bit. For me, Starmer PM in 24 is now a 66% chance.
On which subject I really do hope my old mukka 'Enoch was right and so was Paul Weller' Isam comes back - my bet with him on that outcome @ 3/1 is looking very good.
Betfair could do with a market along the lines of PM following next GE. The next PM market is too dominated by a potential Boris exit.
Yep, I'm surprised it's not up.
Although the 'Next PM' market has treated me well. Starmer was great value for ages for the exact reason you note - the flawed consensus that Johnson would be going before the election.
An article about Senator Feinstein's apparently increasing mental problems which is, unusually, not a political hit job, but rather reads as fair and careful reporting.
How does that rating compare with Cameron in 2008 ?
From October 2008, as its all I can find the raw data.
Con +10 lead
Do you think David Cameron is doing well or badly as Conservative leader? Very well 10 Fairly well 48 Fairly badly 21 Very badly 11 Don't know 11 TOTAL WELL: 58 % TOTAL BADLY: 32 %
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
An interesting one is coming up - if Sweden and Finland apply to join NATO, the vote must be unanimous to accept them.
What price Orban vetoing it? Or Le Pen coming out against it?
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
An interesting one is coming up - if Sweden and Finland apply to join NATO, the vote must be unanimous to accept them.
What price Orban vetoing it? Or Le Pen coming out against it?
I don't know what the Odds of Orban vetoing it would be, but is there a meconium to expel Hungary if it does?
I don't think expelling Hungary for simply vetoing expansion would be on the cards. There's no obligation to accept new members.
The case for expelling Hungary from the EU is they are turning away from the core values underpinning the project.
We were talking of NATO - which explicitly doesn't interact with domestic politics of the countries that are part of it.
Page 10 - Prime Ministers, except for one or two exception cases, are typically unpopular.
Page 11 - Governments, except for one or two exceptional cases, are typically unpopular.
Page 13 - Leaders of the Opposition, except for one or two exceptional cases, are rarely popular. And when unpopular, have to do a lot to overcome that.
It is mildly interesting that the small upswing seen in SKS there occurs at approximately the same point as similar ones observed for Cameron and Corbyn.
The Rwanda scheme is expected to be very expensive.
The cost quoted so far by the government is pretty much just a set up to a set up cost.
I have yet to see a reaction from *any* politician that has not been entirely predictable. Perhaps we are all the same as well.
My only 3 notes so far are:
1 - Note Priti Patel mentioning "politically motivated lawyers". 2 - One potential complication for the Rwanda relationship that no one has mentioned is that it is a very small country slightly larger than Wales, with a population density roughly double our own. Those numbers may be difficult to square. 3 - The fake moral posturing from Les Francais about refugees has already started (again). Presumably we are due a Macron tantrum before the next Presidential voting round.
I once discovered what I thought might be the first use of Wales or Belgium as a measure of the relative size of a country.
An article about Senator Feinstein's apparently increasing mental problems which is, unusually, not a political hit job, but rather reads as fair and careful reporting.
SKS is returning the Labour Party to a party that’s reliably in thrall to the rich and powerful.
It will be a Thatcher-lite Party in the style of Tony Blair.
It won't be a threat to anyone who’s important or wealthy in Britain
The affluent who were repelled by Corbyn are SKS' greatest fans.
So, I'd say SKS is an absolutely perfect fit for about 80 per cent of pb.com.
You mean, an election-winning one?
I am not sure whether the 'Heir to Blair' trajectory is enough to ensure that SKS will win. Three reasons, really:
1) SKS is not the fantastical & magical figure that Early Blair was.
2) The temper of the times has changed from optimism to sourness. Blair presided over a euphoric economy. Whoever wins the next election will have some real & nasty pain to administer.
3) Scotland.
At the moment, I'd say the next election is too difficult to call.
The Rwanda scheme is expected to be very expensive.
The cost quoted so far by the government is pretty much just a set up to a set up cost.
I have yet to see a reaction from *any* politician that has not been entirely predictable. Perhaps we are all the same as well.
My only 3 notes so far are:
1 - Note Priti Patel mentioning "politically motivated lawyers". 2 - One potential complication for the Rwanda relationship that no one has mentioned is that it is a very small country slightly larger than Wales, with a population density roughly double our own. Those numbers may be difficult to square. 3 - The fake moral posturing from Les Francais about refugees has already started (again). Presumably we are due a Macron tantrum before the next Presidential voting round.
I once discovered what I thought might be the first use of Wales or Belgium as a measure of the relative size of a country.
Twitter trading at $45.85, indicates to me at least that the deal ain't gonna happen.
What does Elon's offer work out as per Share?
$43 per share. That's a ~40% premium on the price before he started building up his stake, but probably a small undervaluation based on recent highs (which probably won't be easy to reach again).
SKS is returning the Labour Party to a party that’s reliably in thrall to the rich and powerful.
It will be a Thatcher-lite Party in the style of Tony Blair.
It won't be a threat to anyone who’s important or wealthy in Britain
The affluent who were repelled by Corbyn are SKS' greatest fans.
So, I'd say SKS is an absolutely perfect fit for about 80 per cent of pb.com.
You mean, an election-winning one?
I am not sure whether the 'Heir to Blair' trajectory is enough to ensure that SKS will win. Three reasons, really:
1) SKS is not the fantastical & magical figure that Early Blair was.
2) The temper of the times has changed from optimism to sourness. Blair presided over a euphoric economy. Whoever wins the next election will have some real & nasty pain to administer.
3) Scotland.
At the moment, I'd say the next election is too difficult to call.
I would agree with the last point, especially because it's not certain who the incumbent will be. NOM odds on feels right, but a Labour majority is more difficult than a Tory one (and a Labour majority over about 20 seems almost impossible, because Scotland).
SKS as PM after next GE seems more likely to me than Labour most seats (the rainbow loser coalition being quite possible), but where "most likely" is, it's too hard to say.
At the moment I'm focussed on the Tory leadership market, and the standard advice to lay the favourite.
Twitter trading at $45.85, indicates to me at least that the deal ain't gonna happen.
What does Elon's offer work out as per Share?
$43 per share. That's a ~40% premium on the price before he started building up his stake, but probably a small undervaluation based on recent highs (which probably won't be easy to reach again).
Isn't it $43bn @ $54 a share? That's what BBC etc. say
“ The Prime Minister and Chancellor have both apologised after being awarded Fixed Penalty Notices and I understand that both have now paid. I completely understand the frustrations and anger amongst people in Solihull right now. Solihull followed the rules diligently throughout the pandemic and it is important that those in public office set the right example.
That said, on the other side of the continent, Putin and his barbaric regime have illegally invaded Ukraine. Thousands of innocent Ukrainians, including children, have been murdered. And, the UK Government is now investigating whether Putin’s regime has used chemical weapons against innocent civilians in Mariupol.
The UK is leading the west’s efforts to support Ukraine, in particular, President Zelensky has openly praised the Prime Minister for his efforts in supporting Ukraine during this fractious period for Europe. Given the crucial point in Europe’s history right now, it is not the right time to change the leadership of the country. It’s time to move on.”
Pathetic Statement. His logic is absurd.
It is. Johnson is clinging to power because he wants to keep on being PM. That's all there is to it. It's got nothing to do with needing to 'deliver' things domestically (lols) or (even bigger lols) with saving the world from Putin.
This is why it's a no-brainer to remove him when we get the chance at the GE. It has big potential upside and is completely risk free. He brings no integrity, grip, intellect or imagination to the job, therefore nothing of value can possibly be lost by him leaving it.
Comments
See Campbeltown, after which one of our new frigates is named IIRC.
That blew up the lockgates in St Nazaire with a 4.5 ton haul of explosives.
Which is very roughly the same as 20 Exocets or 10 Tomahawks in the same place at the same time.
The big, pseudo public sector approach of NASA, the ESA and the Russians is completely doomed.
You probably already follow Eric Berger at Ars Technica... But if you don't, he's very good on the the business of space.
By the way, I suggested this multiple times on PB, so I'm delighted that someone seems to be reading.
And these days, you wouldn't need an heroic types on board.
True Blues and Hard Core Leavers will stick with him, as will the Shallow Apoliticals who still think he's a bit of a laugh and either can't see or don't care about the damage he's doing, however that's not enough for him to win. To get another term he needs those GE19 Con voters who *can* see he's a disgrace to the office he holds, and *do* care about it, to nevertheless vote Tory again, and I'm confident most of them will not oblige.
We are not a nation of nihilistic numbskulls - therefore we'll be kicking out Boris Johnson soon as we get the chance.
Unless you have a unique service (rapid small launch to a particular orbit, say), simply saying that you will be second cheapest after SS?SH doesn't seem much of a business plan.
+1 on Eric Berger. Also +1 on Ars Technica.
Though I would add nasaspaceflight.com as well.
Because almost everyone they know (in the political bubble they follow) breaks the rules.
I know of lots of teachers who are furious with Fabricant's claim that they were likely boozing in staff rooms after work. One who I know pointed out that the staff-room was permanently closed, the boiler was off, and he brought in a thermos to drink from every day. Half the class-rooms were used as class rooms, the other half as break-rooms for each class-room so the bubbles mixed as little as possible.
I think Fabricant would be staggered to learn that actually lots and lots of people did comply with the rules and that's why they're angry - and furious with him.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/IJsKHcSXcv0
It seems the Russians are still taking heavy losses.
1 - Depth of water is only 30ft at max.
2 - The amount of explosives. No idea how much would be required to cripple or destroy modern bridge pylons. Checking for vague comparisons, Dambuster bombs were 2 tons each, and the mines put under the Tirpitz by X-craft, which crippled it, were 2 tons each and they placed 4 of them.
3 - Getting it there.
4 - Nobody else's submarines in the Black Sea under the Montreux Convention except for countries with coastlines.
A TIR bomb could be tried on the roaddeck, perhaps. Do I remember the IRA wrenching the M1 Junction 0 tarffic island off its axis with a 1 ton truck bomb?
Enough speculation.
https://www.diomedia.com/stock-photo-benny-hill-british-comedian-actor-and-writer-compulsory-credit-uppaphotoshot-photo-cms-184537-12091984-image17375793.html
https://www.business-standard.com/article/international/france-s-marine-le-pen-warns-against-sending-weapons-to-ukraine-122041301400_1.html
Marine Le Pen warned Wednesday against sending any more weapons to Ukraine, and called for a rapprochement between NATO and Russia once Moscow's war in Ukraine winds down.
Le Pen, an outspoken nationalist who has long ties to Russia, also confirmed that if she unseats President Emmanuel Macron in France's April 24 presidential runoff, she will pull France out of NATO's military command and dial back French support for the whole European Union.
Macron, a pro-EU centrist, is facing a harder-than-expected fight to stay in power, in part because the economic impact of the war is hitting poor households the hardest. France's European partners are worried that a possible Le Pen presidency could undermine Western unity as the U.S. and Europe seek to support Ukraine and end Russia's ruinous war on its neighbor.
Asked about military aid to Ukraine, Le Pen said she would continue defense and intelligence support.
(But) I'm more reserved about direct arms deliveries. Why? Because ... the line is thin between aid and becoming a co-belligerent, the far-right leader said, citing concerns about an escalation of this conflict that could bring a whole number of countries into a military commitment.
Earlier Wednesday, French government spokesman Gabriel Attal said France had sent 100 million euros ($109 million) worth of weapons to Ukraine in recent weeks as part of a flow of Western arms....
Two years plus is an immense stretch of time at the moment.
What price Orban vetoing it? Or Le Pen coming out against it?
"The ethical and legal concerns are obvious. But a debate about a “cruel”, “hard-line” policy on migrants crossing the Channel is exactly the one the government, and Patel in particular, wants to have. (That it at least partially drowns out the Partygate fines is another bonus.) The number of people crossing the Channel in small boats has soared under Patel, despite her tough rhetoric.
[...]
The government is quite comfortable projecting a hard-line attitude to immigration, seeing it as a wedge issue that makes Labour uncomfortable. What it is less comfortable with is being challenged on its own terms, over whether a gratuitously expensive, cruel immigration approach will reduce the number of Channel crossings.
While many people may react viscerally to the human cost of the Rwandan offshoring policy, the most politically effective approach may be to point out its absurdity."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61085810
Con +10 lead
Do you think David Cameron is doing well or badly as Conservative leader?
Very well 10
Fairly well 48
Fairly badly 21
Very badly 11
Don't know 11
TOTAL WELL: 58 %
TOTAL BADLY: 32 %
There's also a summary here: http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/leaders/cameron
Who votes on Musk's offer. As he wants 100% can someone with a single share scupper it all ? Or is it 50.001% of shareholders or a special class of shareholders or the board or what ?
1) RON Is always a candidate
2) Anyone registered to vote, but not voting is assumed too have voted for RON
3) In the event RON wins, new election held. All existing candidates ineligible.
That way, sitting at home shouting at the TV, rather than voting, is actually a positive democratic choice.
I suspect that quite a few voters who are basically Tory will vote Labour in May not as a firm commitment but as a final message to the Government to sort themselves out or leave. Few people are really that bothered who their borough councillor is, so for many it will be a chance to give a final warning.
This is always broadly true of all council elections. Local matters do play a role and its a relatively risk-free way of sending a message.
Also the results on the day depend massively on where is electing, what they are electing and, bluntly, the order the results come in.
PRO-TIP: Don't over-fit May elections.
The cost quoted so far by the government is pretty much just a set up to a set up cost.
And taking a long view, it probably makes commercial sense for them not to abandon the market to Musk. It will also further drive development of launch technology.
https://www.spaceflightinsider.com/missions/commercial/amazon-signs-contracts-for-83-rocket-launches/
Last week, Amazon announced one of the most significant rocket deals within the commercial space market in order to build its Kuiper internet constellation.
On April 5, the company announced it signed with three launch service providers — Blue Origin, Arianespace and United Launch Alliance — for 83 missions to space for its highly-anticipated high-speed internet constellation, providing worldwide coverage with a network of 3,236 satellites in low Earth orbit.
The breakdown of the contracts distributed for the tech giant for what is being called the biggest rocket deal in commercial space, and its more than $10 billion investment, are as follows: 38 launches with United Launch Alliance — a joint venture with Boeing and Lockheed Martin, 18 launches with Arianespace — a European launch service provider, and 12 launches with Blue Origin with an option for 15 more with the private space company owned by Jeff Bezos.
Project Kuiper, Amazon’s satellite program for its internet constellation, plans to test a prototype pair — KuiperSat-1 and KuiperSat-2 — launching in late 2022 with ABL Space Systems on that company’s RS1 vehicle before flying operational satellites, totaling billions of dollars, according to Amazon.
“KuiperSat-1 and KuiperSat-2 will include much of technology and sub-systems that power the production version of our satellite design — phased array and parabolic antennas, power and propulsion systems, custom-designed modems and more,” Amazon said in a blog post.
Amazon plans to team up with Verizon to implement its high-speed internet as the Project Kuiper team — 750 employees and growing according to CNBC in November 2021 — plans to add hundreds more working out of the company’s 219,000 square foot facility in Redmond, Washington....
Thanks for the header.
At massive extra cost, compared to what SpaceX is doing. Mostly on unblown rockets, as well.
So his system will cost billions more than SpaceX. Just in terms of launch costs....
EDIT: apart from buying launches from Sue Origin, all the other buys are for legacy systems that are pretty much dead in the price war with SpaceX's approach. So not much investment in the future of launch, there.
There are already arguable grounds (and a mechanism) for suspending Hungary's voting rights, without expelling them. Their previous allies like Poland who would before have prevented such a thing might well consider going along with the threat.
On which subject I really do hope my old mukka 'Enoch was right and so was Paul Weller' Isam comes back - my bet with him on that outcome @ 3/1 is looking very good.
But maintaining the coalition against Putin is a matter of huge importance for European security; Le Pen threatens that.
https://www.twitter.com/julianknight15/status/1514208484841201664
“ The Prime Minister and Chancellor have both apologised after being awarded Fixed Penalty Notices and I understand that both have now paid. I completely understand the frustrations and anger amongst people in Solihull right now. Solihull followed the rules diligently throughout the pandemic and it is important that those in public office set the right example.
That said, on the other side of the continent, Putin and his barbaric regime have illegally invaded Ukraine. Thousands of innocent Ukrainians, including children, have been murdered. And, the UK Government is now investigating whether Putin’s regime has used chemical weapons against innocent civilians in Mariupol.
The UK is leading the west’s efforts to support Ukraine, in particular, President Zelensky has openly praised the Prime Minister for his efforts in supporting Ukraine during this fractious period for Europe. Given the crucial point in Europe’s history right now, it is not the right time to change the leadership of the country. It’s time to move on.”
Pathetic Statement. His logic is absurd.
It's a very expensive way to stay in the game, and it might fail, but I wouldn't automatically assume that it will. And should he succeed, the investment is possibly worth it.
Secondly the capacity of Labour to forget how to win elections is the stuff of legend and song. Only Wilson and Blair have done it in the last 72 years. You have to go back to George VI times.
Pidcock, Burgon, Abbott and McDonnell without any outside help could lose it for them in a couple of weeks without breaking sweat.
The exact percentage required will depend on the constitution of the company and the market (NYSE) where it’s currently listed, it’ll likely be around two thirds required in favour.
I'm unclear why the added prospect of losing to a dummy might encourage better candidates into the ring?
Scenario A - All rules are followed to the letter but the outcome is bad
Scenario B - There is a great outcome but some rules were broken.
If you ask the public, which scenario they prefer I suspect most will say the second scenario is better. If you ask people in Westminster and many on here then they will prefer the first scenario
The problem is that our political class and media often focus on whether or not someone broke the rules rather than asking if the rules were any good.
Look at the event Boris and Rishi were fined for - we have created a scenario where someone was punished for eating a slice of cake. It's ridiculous. Of course, Boris can't say this as he made the stupid rules himself.
Cyclefree's argument seems to be that the law should never be broken but I would argue that some laws matter more than others. The root problems here are:
1) There are too many laws and regulations in this country, especially with the tendency towards performative lawmaking (e.g. the conversion therapy ban)
2) Many rules and laws are badly written and unclear (e.g. whether pubs could sell scotch eggs during COVID)
3) Often the rules become a shield to exonerate people when the outcomes are bad (e.g. expenses troughers who were "following the rules"
My concern if Boris goes is that he is one of the few politicians who is prepared to think out of the political box (e.g. vaccine taskforce). We could easily end up with another Theresa May who will be conventional and fail conventionally.
If you look at the last 10 years, there has been a trend towards outsider causes or candidates- Sindy, Brexit, Trump, Boris, Corbyn, Le Pen. Even Macron initially ran as an outsider.
This says to me that the real problem is that for too many the system isn't working and outcomes are bad.
When was the last time anyone was sacked for bad outcomes? Cressida Dick was pushed out, not because of how her force dealt with crime but because of concerns about racism.
But I'm not sure that the implied threat might not still apply.
If Orban threatens European security, his former Visegrad allies, who are the very strongest supporters of Ukraine for what they see as existential reasons, will be allies no longer.
And again, Le Pen threatens all of that.
That's what I object to most - the sheer chutzpah of pretending that the Rwandan policy is designed to save the lives of migrants, whereas in reality most of those in favour of the policy couldn't give a damn how many migrants drown in the Channel.
https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/political-monitor-satisfaction-ratings-1997-present
Cyclefree's argument is not against removal of laws it is against ignoring them. There is a fundamental and hugely important difference.
My only 3 notes so far are:
1 - Note Priti Patel mentioning "politically motivated lawyers".
2 - One potential complication for the Rwanda relationship that no one has mentioned is that it is a very small country slightly larger than Wales, with a population density roughly double our own. Those numbers may be difficult to square.
3 - The fake moral posturing from Les Francais about refugees has already started (again). Presumably we are due a Macron tantrum before the next Presidential voting round.
Colleagues worry Dianne Feinstein is now mentally unfit to serve, citing recent interactions
https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/dianne-feinstein-senate-17079487.php
On a good day, 30% people stay at home.
So of the rest, one candidate or the other would have to clear 44% of the votes actually cast to beat RON!
Although the 'Next PM' market has treated me well. Starmer was great value for ages for the exact reason you note - the flawed consensus that Johnson would be going before the election.
But
"Via
@YouGov
, 9-11 Apr (+/- since 10 Mar)"
Do they have YouGov data?
I did make a mistake above in not taking the pre-market [=price, but it's still 10% off his offer.
Page 10 - Prime Ministers, except for one or two exception cases, are typically unpopular.
Page 11 - Governments, except for one or two exceptional cases, are typically unpopular.
Page 13 - Leaders of the Opposition, except for one or two exceptional cases, are rarely popular. And when unpopular, have to do a lot to overcome that.
It is mildly interesting that the small upswing seen in SKS there occurs at approximately the same point as similar ones observed for Cameron and Corbyn.
Page 27 - Chancellors - meh.
That was a good day.
1) SKS is not the fantastical & magical figure that Early Blair was.
2) The temper of the times has changed from optimism to sourness. Blair presided over a euphoric economy. Whoever wins the next election will have some real & nasty pain to administer.
3) Scotland.
At the moment, I'd say the next election is too difficult to call.
SKS as PM after next GE seems more likely to me than Labour most seats (the rainbow loser coalition being quite possible), but where "most likely" is, it's too hard to say.
At the moment I'm focussed on the Tory leadership market, and the standard advice to lay the favourite.
Macron (EC-RE): 55% (+1)
Le Pen (RN-ID): 44% (-1)
OpinionWay-Kéa Partners poll:
Macron (EC-RE): 53%
Le Pen (RN-ID): 47%
Elabe poll:
Macron (EC-RE): 53.5% (+1.5)
Le Pen (RN-ID): 46.5% (-1.5)"
https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1514566146015571972
https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1514563371852513291
https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1514562668958564352
This is why it's a no-brainer to remove him when we get the chance at the GE. It has big potential upside and is completely risk free. He brings no integrity, grip, intellect or imagination to the job, therefore nothing of value can possibly be lost by him leaving it.