So, the port authorities are blaming the French for the 'critical incident' at Dover.
I assume that the French are also to blame for all the queues at UK airports and the large number of cancelled flights in recent times. Or is it just possible that our tendency to scapegoat the French is a bit of a red herring, when it's apparent that there are widespread staffing problems, including in the UK, in the travel industry?
Round the world, the low cost of the airline/travel industry has been achieved by really, really pushing down wages. And conditions.
During COVID, a lot of people changed jobs and found better ones.
The husband of a family friend, who worked in a meal preparation factory by Heathrow told me that the conditions were increasingly horrible. As he put it, "I didn't leave Morocco to live the same crap here". He was in charge of a shift - the bottom end jobs were minimum wage to the penny.
Not sure how many of you have had any involvement in food production, or even been into a factory. There is very little that can be done to make conditions less horrible. Ready Meals is something I know about, and some of the processes to assemble these meals is a messy hot crowded faff.
The simple reality is that most people have decided they do not want to do this work - or any work that is boring, repetitive, dirty and unfulfilling. So we have removed whole sections of industries that used to exist, and the ones we need ultimately rely on finding people from less modernised parts of the world who don't mind.
Eventually some of these kinds of products will disappear because they are no longer economically viable. For an airline that means the end of in-flight meals for everything but the high end premium travellers.
The chap in question was quite smart - and was rather surprised that more wasn't automated. It was a completely manual operation.
How do you automate making ready meals? Depends on the meal. Cottage Pie? Easy. A big sauce cook for the meaty sauce bit. A load of mash in a hopper. Machine 1 deposits the sauce, then machine 2 deposits the mash. If you want to flavour the mash then have someone manually add a frozen pellet. Through the lidding machine and into the retort ovens to cook. That is automated.
But less simple foods? Much much harder. Even if machines exist that can dispense the different elements in the right order that usually isn't the visual experience that people want. So production is a series on manual processes to hand add ingredients. And the bottle neck isn't just that each extra topping adds a body and thus a cost, but can you physically get the people and their supply of ingredients around the line?
@BartholomewRoberts just curious, if you voted Labour in 2019 were you endorsing anti-Semitism or not
Not. I've said not to you many times.
I think it would be an offensive slur to suggest 10 million Britons were endorsing anti-Semitism.
Fair enough but yours is definitely a minority POV.
I have never been against taking a minority or unique POV. My POV is my own, not anybody else's.
But I don't think the notion that 10 million people weren't all endorsing anti-semitism is unique or that minority either. Corbyn and his ilk were, but not all Labour voters. I'll quote a part of a reply I wrote to you yesterday.
There were a vast number of Labour MPs who objected to Corbyn, objected to anti Semitism and made that vocally clear and resigned to the back benches. People like Stella Creasy were prepared to not just vote Labour but hold the Labour whip and were still willing to call out anti Semitism even while voting Labour. I may not agree with her politics much, but I really respect her and MPs like her let alone voters like her.
Parties are big tents, just because Corbyn was an anti-Semite doesn't mean every Labour voter was. Many Labour voters were anti-Corbyn, many Labour MPs were.
Tbf to Conservative supporters pointing out the error of Corbyn, he did kick out most of the MPs he disagreed with, particularly those of the Jewish faith like Luciana Berger.
So, the port authorities are blaming the French for the 'critical incident' at Dover.
I assume that the French are also to blame for all the queues at UK airports and the large number of cancelled flights in recent times. Or is it just possible that our tendency to scapegoat the French is a bit of a red herring, when it's apparent that there are widespread staffing problems, including in the UK, in the travel industry?
In this particular case 6 of the 12 booths checking passports etc are manned by the French at the present time according to the BBC. That seems to be the cause of the backlog. When going into one of the busiest weekends of the entire year that seems sub-optimal.
At which point the next question the BBC should be asking is
on a typical Friday how many booths are normally in use? as that will highlight where the issue is...
But the BBC don't seem to think to ask that sort of obvious question so you get a story without context or useful content...
It's not a typical Friday, though, is it? Surely having 12 booths means that you expect to use 12 booths at the busiest times, like today.
Why? Before the Single Market our Friench customs friends were notorious at ensuring they were as slow as they could be. We know how they operate, so this should not be a surprise.
Nor is it that unusual - a stack of empty booths is the experience that most people coming into Britain get when landing at Heathrow - or into America landing at JFK for that matter.
If the French are being arseholes, the blame for that is only on the French.
Of course! But dealing with these arseholes is what we have chosen by leaving the EEA and CU.
Because we never had to deal with those arseholes when we were in the EU did we?
It was Brexit that caused Operation Stack to be created in 1988 I suppose?
So, the port authorities are blaming the French for the 'critical incident' at Dover.
I assume that the French are also to blame for all the queues at UK airports and the large number of cancelled flights in recent times. Or is it just possible that our tendency to scapegoat the French is a bit of a red herring, when it's apparent that there are widespread staffing problems, including in the UK, in the travel industry?
In this particular case 6 of the 12 booths checking passports etc are manned by the French at the present time according to the BBC. That seems to be the cause of the backlog. When going into one of the busiest weekends of the entire year that seems sub-optimal.
At which point the next question the BBC should be asking is
on a typical Friday how many booths are normally in use? as that will highlight where the issue is...
But the BBC don't seem to think to ask that sort of obvious question so you get a story without context or useful content...
It's not a typical Friday, though, is it? Surely having 12 booths means that you expect to use 12 booths at the busiest times, like today.
Why? Before the Single Market our Friench customs friends were notorious at ensuring they were as slow as they could be. We know how they operate, so this should not be a surprise.
Nor is it that unusual - a stack of empty booths is the experience that most people coming into Britain get when landing at Heathrow - or into America landing at JFK for that matter.
If the French are being arseholes, the blame for that is only on the French.
Of course! But dealing with these arseholes is what we have chosen by leaving the EEA and CU.
Leaving the EU may have enabled the French to be arseholes but it didn't force them to be arseholes. That is their choice.
@BartholomewRoberts just curious, if you voted Labour in 2019 were you endorsing anti-Semitism or not
Not. I've said not to you many times.
I think it would be an offensive slur to suggest 10 million Britons were endorsing anti-Semitism.
Fair enough but yours is definitely a minority POV.
I have never been against taking a minority or unique POV. My POV is my own, not anybody else's.
But I don't think the notion that 10 million people weren't all endorsing anti-semitism is unique or that minority either. Corbyn and his ilk were, but not all Labour voters. I'll quote a part of a reply I wrote to you yesterday.
There were a vast number of Labour MPs who objected to Corbyn, objected to anti Semitism and made that vocally clear and resigned to the back benches. People like Stella Creasy were prepared to not just vote Labour but hold the Labour whip and were still willing to call out anti Semitism even while voting Labour. I may not agree with her politics much, but I really respect her and MPs like her let alone voters like her.
Parties are big tents, just because Corbyn was an anti-Semite doesn't mean every Labour voter was. Many Labour voters were anti-Corbyn, many Labour MPs were.
I do recall you saying that Starmer supported/didn't oppose anti-Semitism, why is he different? He called it out from WITHIN cabinet.
I said that Starmer by willing to be in Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet was willing to turn a blind eye to anti-Semitism.
He ought to have resigned to the backbenches as decent Labour MPs like Creasy etc did, but that wouldn't further his career.
So, the port authorities are blaming the French for the 'critical incident' at Dover.
I assume that the French are also to blame for all the queues at UK airports and the large number of cancelled flights in recent times. Or is it just possible that our tendency to scapegoat the French is a bit of a red herring, when it's apparent that there are widespread staffing problems, including in the UK, in the travel industry?
Round the world, the low cost of the airline/travel industry has been achieved by really, really pushing down wages. And conditions.
During COVID, a lot of people changed jobs and found better ones.
The husband of a family friend, who worked in a meal preparation factory by Heathrow told me that the conditions were increasingly horrible. As he put it, "I didn't leave Morocco to live the same crap here". He was in charge of a shift - the bottom end jobs were minimum wage to the penny.
Not sure how many of you have had any involvement in food production, or even been into a factory. There is very little that can be done to make conditions less horrible. Ready Meals is something I know about, and some of the processes to assemble these meals is a messy hot crowded faff.
The simple reality is that most people have decided they do not want to do this work - or any work that is boring, repetitive, dirty and unfulfilling. So we have removed whole sections of industries that used to exist, and the ones we need ultimately rely on finding people from less modernised parts of the world who don't mind.
Eventually some of these kinds of products will disappear because they are no longer economically viable. For an airline that means the end of in-flight meals for everything but the high end premium travellers.
The chap in question was quite smart - and was rather surprised that more wasn't automated. It was a completely manual operation.
Rather a big bonus if the ready meal industry shrinks by up to 75% I understand there are some reasons why some people 'have' to buy them, but most people could be so much better fed by using ingredients and cooking equipment rather than microwave and unknown contents of ready meals.
So, the port authorities are blaming the French for the 'critical incident' at Dover.
I assume that the French are also to blame for all the queues at UK airports and the large number of cancelled flights in recent times. Or is it just possible that our tendency to scapegoat the French is a bit of a red herring, when it's apparent that there are widespread staffing problems, including in the UK, in the travel industry?
Round the world, the low cost of the airline/travel industry has been achieved by really, really pushing down wages. And conditions.
During COVID, a lot of people changed jobs and found better ones.
The husband of a family friend, who worked in a meal preparation factory by Heathrow told me that the conditions were increasingly horrible. As he put it, "I didn't leave Morocco to live the same crap here". He was in charge of a shift - the bottom end jobs were minimum wage to the penny.
Not sure how many of you have had any involvement in food production, or even been into a factory. There is very little that can be done to make conditions less horrible. Ready Meals is something I know about, and some of the processes to assemble these meals is a messy hot crowded faff.
The simple reality is that most people have decided they do not want to do this work - or any work that is boring, repetitive, dirty and unfulfilling. So we have removed whole sections of industries that used to exist, and the ones we need ultimately rely on finding people from less modernised parts of the world who don't mind.
Eventually some of these kinds of products will disappear because they are no longer economically viable. For an airline that means the end of in-flight meals for everything but the high end premium travellers.
The chap in question was quite smart - and was rather surprised that more wasn't automated. It was a completely manual operation.
How do you automate making ready meals? Depends on the meal. Cottage Pie? Easy. A big sauce cook for the meaty sauce bit. A load of mash in a hopper. Machine 1 deposits the sauce, then machine 2 deposits the mash. If you want to flavour the mash then have someone manually add a frozen pellet. Through the lidding machine and into the retort ovens to cook. That is automated.
But less simple foods? Much much harder. Even if machines exist that can dispense the different elements in the right order that usually isn't the visual experience that people want. So production is a series on manual processes to hand add ingredients. And the bottle neck isn't just that each extra topping adds a body and thus a cost, but can you physically get the people and their supply of ingredients around the line?
He said that rice was being cooked by a bloke with an oar sized paddle stirring multiple giant aluminium pots, for example.
The next generation of robotics is fascinating - and can cope with handling soft/delicate materials in all kind of fascinating ways.
John Rentoul @JohnRentoul [Truss] tax cuts are like £350m on the side of the bus: the more economists say they make no sense, the stronger the message to Tory members
At Society of Professional Economists reception at @KingsCollegeLon last night I couldn’t find a single one who thought her plan OK
So, the port authorities are blaming the French for the 'critical incident' at Dover.
I assume that the French are also to blame for all the queues at UK airports and the large number of cancelled flights in recent times. Or is it just possible that our tendency to scapegoat the French is a bit of a red herring, when it's apparent that there are widespread staffing problems, including in the UK, in the travel industry?
In this particular case 6 of the 12 booths checking passports etc are manned by the French at the present time according to the BBC. That seems to be the cause of the backlog. When going into one of the busiest weekends of the entire year that seems sub-optimal.
At which point the next question the BBC should be asking is
on a typical Friday how many booths are normally in use? as that will highlight where the issue is...
But the BBC don't seem to think to ask that sort of obvious question so you get a story without context or useful content...
It's not a typical Friday, though, is it? Surely having 12 booths means that you expect to use 12 booths at the busiest times, like today.
Why? Before the Single Market our Friench customs friends were notorious at ensuring they were as slow as they could be. We know how they operate, so this should not be a surprise.
Nor is it that unusual - a stack of empty booths is the experience that most people coming into Britain get when landing at Heathrow - or into America landing at JFK for that matter.
If the French are being arseholes, the blame for that is only on the French.
Of course! But dealing with these arseholes is what we have chosen by leaving the EEA and CU.
Because we never had to deal with those arseholes when we were in the EU did we?
It was Brexit that caused Operation Stack to be created in 1988 I suppose?
Space is quite big. It would be a miracle if we could colonise Proxima Centauri, about the nearest one. Four light years away. 0.1c was suggested, so, with a following wind, a round trip in 40 years, half a life time.
Earth suits us very well, because we evolved here. Nowhere else will have that advantage. With a massive number of stars, the Drake number mght look encouraging. But some of them are 13 billion light years away, and we won't be traveeling anwhere near light speed. Well have evolved on a travelling space ship, and we might revert to bacteria, Who knows. Although if we travel at light speed (impossible), it wouldn't ake long in our F.O,R.
If space is expanding too some of the planets will be disappearing over the horizon, If we had an horizon to disappear over.
People can suggest 0.1C till they are blue in the face. Sleight of hand, surely 0.1 of something is not very much? In fact, 10% of a stupendous, unimaginably large thing is stupendously fucking large. Also, slowing down costs as much as speeding up. you can go 4 ly in 40 years at 0.1C but only if you don't mind shooting straight past your endpoint at 0.1C, or colliding with it.
So, the port authorities are blaming the French for the 'critical incident' at Dover.
I assume that the French are also to blame for all the queues at UK airports and the large number of cancelled flights in recent times. Or is it just possible that our tendency to scapegoat the French is a bit of a red herring, when it's apparent that there are widespread staffing problems, including in the UK, in the travel industry?
In this particular case 6 of the 12 booths checking passports etc are manned by the French at the present time according to the BBC. That seems to be the cause of the backlog. When going into one of the busiest weekends of the entire year that seems sub-optimal.
At which point the next question the BBC should be asking is
on a typical Friday how many booths are normally in use? as that will highlight where the issue is...
But the BBC don't seem to think to ask that sort of obvious question so you get a story without context or useful content...
It's not a typical Friday, though, is it? Surely having 12 booths means that you expect to use 12 booths at the busiest times, like today.
Why? Before the Single Market our Friench customs friends were notorious at ensuring they were as slow as they could be. We know how they operate, so this should not be a surprise.
Nor is it that unusual - a stack of empty booths is the experience that most people coming into Britain get when landing at Heathrow - or into America landing at JFK for that matter.
If the French are being arseholes, the blame for that is only on the French.
Of course! But dealing with these arseholes is what we have chosen by leaving the EEA and CU.
Leaving the EU may have enabled the French to be arseholes but it didn't force them to be arseholes. That is their choice.
I suspect being arseholes is what makes French customs people happy. My point is that we had evaded their clutches for decades, have just volunteered to have them look after us, and now seem upset to find they are arseholes.
"there are queues! Why are there queues?" - we knew there would be queues. Its just that some people insisted that claims of queues was just project fear.
I guess MPs always look a bit foolish when they defect between established parties, but the current axis around which a lot of politics revolves makes Wakeford look especially ridiculous:
So, the port authorities are blaming the French for the 'critical incident' at Dover.
I assume that the French are also to blame for all the queues at UK airports and the large number of cancelled flights in recent times. Or is it just possible that our tendency to scapegoat the French is a bit of a red herring, when it's apparent that there are widespread staffing problems, including in the UK, in the travel industry?
In this particular case 6 of the 12 booths checking passports etc are manned by the French at the present time according to the BBC. That seems to be the cause of the backlog. When going into one of the busiest weekends of the entire year that seems sub-optimal.
At which point the next question the BBC should be asking is
on a typical Friday how many booths are normally in use? as that will highlight where the issue is...
But the BBC don't seem to think to ask that sort of obvious question so you get a story without context or useful content...
It's not a typical Friday, though, is it? Surely having 12 booths means that you expect to use 12 booths at the busiest times, like today.
Why? Before the Single Market our Friench customs friends were notorious at ensuring they were as slow as they could be. We know how they operate, so this should not be a surprise.
Nor is it that unusual - a stack of empty booths is the experience that most people coming into Britain get when landing at Heathrow - or into America landing at JFK for that matter.
If the French are being arseholes, the blame for that is only on the French.
Of course! But dealing with these arseholes is what we have chosen by leaving the EEA and CU.
Because we never had to deal with those arseholes when we were in the EU did we?
It was Brexit that caused Operation Stack to be created in 1988 I suppose?
So, the port authorities are blaming the French for the 'critical incident' at Dover.
I assume that the French are also to blame for all the queues at UK airports and the large number of cancelled flights in recent times. Or is it just possible that our tendency to scapegoat the French is a bit of a red herring, when it's apparent that there are widespread staffing problems, including in the UK, in the travel industry?
In this particular case 6 of the 12 booths checking passports etc are manned by the French at the present time according to the BBC. That seems to be the cause of the backlog. When going into one of the busiest weekends of the entire year that seems sub-optimal.
At which point the next question the BBC should be asking is
on a typical Friday how many booths are normally in use? as that will highlight where the issue is...
But the BBC don't seem to think to ask that sort of obvious question so you get a story without context or useful content...
It's not a typical Friday, though, is it? Surely having 12 booths means that you expect to use 12 booths at the busiest times, like today.
Why? Before the Single Market our Friench customs friends were notorious at ensuring they were as slow as they could be. We know how they operate, so this should not be a surprise.
Nor is it that unusual - a stack of empty booths is the experience that most people coming into Britain get when landing at Heathrow - or into America landing at JFK for that matter.
If the French are being arseholes, the blame for that is only on the French.
Of course! But dealing with these arseholes is what we have chosen by leaving the EEA and CU.
Leaving the EU may have enabled the French to be arseholes but it didn't force them to be arseholes. That is their choice.
Good defence for e.g. the police at Uvalde. Being an arsehole was purely the shooter's choice.
So, the port authorities are blaming the French for the 'critical incident' at Dover.
I assume that the French are also to blame for all the queues at UK airports and the large number of cancelled flights in recent times. Or is it just possible that our tendency to scapegoat the French is a bit of a red herring, when it's apparent that there are widespread staffing problems, including in the UK, in the travel industry?
Round the world, the low cost of the airline/travel industry has been achieved by really, really pushing down wages. And conditions.
During COVID, a lot of people changed jobs and found better ones.
The husband of a family friend, who worked in a meal preparation factory by Heathrow told me that the conditions were increasingly horrible. As he put it, "I didn't leave Morocco to live the same crap here". He was in charge of a shift - the bottom end jobs were minimum wage to the penny.
Not sure how many of you have had any involvement in food production, or even been into a factory. There is very little that can be done to make conditions less horrible. Ready Meals is something I know about, and some of the processes to assemble these meals is a messy hot crowded faff.
The simple reality is that most people have decided they do not want to do this work - or any work that is boring, repetitive, dirty and unfulfilling. So we have removed whole sections of industries that used to exist, and the ones we need ultimately rely on finding people from less modernised parts of the world who don't mind.
Eventually some of these kinds of products will disappear because they are no longer economically viable. For an airline that means the end of in-flight meals for everything but the high end premium travellers.
The chap in question was quite smart - and was rather surprised that more wasn't automated. It was a completely manual operation.
How do you automate making ready meals? Depends on the meal. Cottage Pie? Easy. A big sauce cook for the meaty sauce bit. A load of mash in a hopper. Machine 1 deposits the sauce, then machine 2 deposits the mash. If you want to flavour the mash then have someone manually add a frozen pellet. Through the lidding machine and into the retort ovens to cook. That is automated.
But less simple foods? Much much harder. Even if machines exist that can dispense the different elements in the right order that usually isn't the visual experience that people want. So production is a series on manual processes to hand add ingredients. And the bottle neck isn't just that each extra topping adds a body and thus a cost, but can you physically get the people and their supply of ingredients around the line?
He said that rice was being cooked by a bloke with an oar sized paddle stirring multiple giant aluminium pots, for example.
The next generation of robotics is fascinating - and can cope with handling soft/delicate materials in all kind of fascinating ways.
Oh I think you can automate more parts of it - but the final assembly probably requires manual intervention because what is being produced continually changes.
It's not like it's a production line making identical or almost identical chocolate biscuits for various branded and own brand companies.
So, the port authorities are blaming the French for the 'critical incident' at Dover.
I assume that the French are also to blame for all the queues at UK airports and the large number of cancelled flights in recent times. Or is it just possible that our tendency to scapegoat the French is a bit of a red herring, when it's apparent that there are widespread staffing problems, including in the UK, in the travel industry?
In this particular case 6 of the 12 booths checking passports etc are manned by the French at the present time according to the BBC. That seems to be the cause of the backlog. When going into one of the busiest weekends of the entire year that seems sub-optimal.
At which point the next question the BBC should be asking is
on a typical Friday how many booths are normally in use? as that will highlight where the issue is...
But the BBC don't seem to think to ask that sort of obvious question so you get a story without context or useful content...
It's not a typical Friday, though, is it? Surely having 12 booths means that you expect to use 12 booths at the busiest times, like today.
Why? Before the Single Market our Friench customs friends were notorious at ensuring they were as slow as they could be. We know how they operate, so this should not be a surprise.
Nor is it that unusual - a stack of empty booths is the experience that most people coming into Britain get when landing at Heathrow - or into America landing at JFK for that matter.
If the French are being arseholes, the blame for that is only on the French.
Of course! But dealing with these arseholes is what we have chosen by leaving the EEA and CU.
Leaving the EU may have enabled the French to be arseholes but it didn't force them to be arseholes. That is their choice.
I suspect being arseholes is what makes French customs people happy. My point is that we had evaded their clutches for decades, have just volunteered to have them look after us, and now seem upset to find they are arseholes.
"there are queues! Why are there queues?" - we knew there would be queues. Its just that some people insisted that claims of queues was just project fear.
And, with the best will in the world, the same probably goes for most border people everywhere. The job selects for the personality. Not actually evil, but bad-tempered, bureaucratic, officious and callous...
So, the port authorities are blaming the French for the 'critical incident' at Dover.
I assume that the French are also to blame for all the queues at UK airports and the large number of cancelled flights in recent times. Or is it just possible that our tendency to scapegoat the French is a bit of a red herring, when it's apparent that there are widespread staffing problems, including in the UK, in the travel industry?
In this particular case 6 of the 12 booths checking passports etc are manned by the French at the present time according to the BBC. That seems to be the cause of the backlog. When going into one of the busiest weekends of the entire year that seems sub-optimal.
At which point the next question the BBC should be asking is
on a typical Friday how many booths are normally in use? as that will highlight where the issue is...
But the BBC don't seem to think to ask that sort of obvious question so you get a story without context or useful content...
It's not a typical Friday, though, is it? Surely having 12 booths means that you expect to use 12 booths at the busiest times, like today.
Why? Before the Single Market our Friench customs friends were notorious at ensuring they were as slow as they could be. We know how they operate, so this should not be a surprise.
Nor is it that unusual - a stack of empty booths is the experience that most people coming into Britain get when landing at Heathrow - or into America landing at JFK for that matter.
If the French are being arseholes, the blame for that is only on the French.
Of course! But dealing with these arseholes is what we have chosen by leaving the EEA and CU.
Leaving the EU may have enabled the French to be arseholes but it didn't force them to be arseholes. That is their choice.
Good defence for e.g. the police at Uvalde. Being an arsehole was purely the shooter's choice.
The police at Uvalde had a way to stop the shooter being an arsehole...
Hmm, what do we reckon? Is this just a bit of grumbling that will blow over (but ensure that Liz wins the vote for the new leader) or is this a sign of trouble ahead for Tory MPs with their grassroots?
One imagines that if Johnson goes to the Conservative Party conference that he might cause a bit of a splash. Does he want to?
I was thinking about Cicero's reported rumours in Finland.
1 - Recently the Finns are nervous about the Russians, hence the NATO moves 2 - The story is said to involve a high level Cabinet member 3 - The story is said to be extremely damaging
So, the port authorities are blaming the French for the 'critical incident' at Dover.
I assume that the French are also to blame for all the queues at UK airports and the large number of cancelled flights in recent times. Or is it just possible that our tendency to scapegoat the French is a bit of a red herring, when it's apparent that there are widespread staffing problems, including in the UK, in the travel industry?
In this particular case 6 of the 12 booths checking passports etc are manned by the French at the present time according to the BBC. That seems to be the cause of the backlog. When going into one of the busiest weekends of the entire year that seems sub-optimal.
At which point the next question the BBC should be asking is
on a typical Friday how many booths are normally in use? as that will highlight where the issue is...
But the BBC don't seem to think to ask that sort of obvious question so you get a story without context or useful content...
It's not a typical Friday, though, is it? Surely having 12 booths means that you expect to use 12 booths at the busiest times, like today.
Why? Before the Single Market our Friench customs friends were notorious at ensuring they were as slow as they could be. We know how they operate, so this should not be a surprise.
Nor is it that unusual - a stack of empty booths is the experience that most people coming into Britain get when landing at Heathrow - or into America landing at JFK for that matter.
So it was typical French even before
So presumably nothing to do with our leaving the EU.
The appropriate strategy is to facilitate the development alternatives so the French get the consequences of their own actions.
So, the port authorities are blaming the French for the 'critical incident' at Dover.
I assume that the French are also to blame for all the queues at UK airports and the large number of cancelled flights in recent times. Or is it just possible that our tendency to scapegoat the French is a bit of a red herring, when it's apparent that there are widespread staffing problems, including in the UK, in the travel industry?
In this particular case 6 of the 12 booths checking passports etc are manned by the French at the present time according to the BBC. That seems to be the cause of the backlog. When going into one of the busiest weekends of the entire year that seems sub-optimal.
At which point the next question the BBC should be asking is
on a typical Friday how many booths are normally in use? as that will highlight where the issue is...
But the BBC don't seem to think to ask that sort of obvious question so you get a story without context or useful content...
It's not a typical Friday, though, is it? Surely having 12 booths means that you expect to use 12 booths at the busiest times, like today.
Why? Before the Single Market our Friench customs friends were notorious at ensuring they were as slow as they could be. We know how they operate, so this should not be a surprise.
Nor is it that unusual - a stack of empty booths is the experience that most people coming into Britain get when landing at Heathrow - or into America landing at JFK for that matter.
If the French are being arseholes, the blame for that is only on the French.
Of course! But dealing with these arseholes is what we have chosen by leaving the EEA and CU.
Leaving the EU may have enabled the French to be arseholes but it didn't force them to be arseholes. That is their choice.
Good defence for e.g. the police at Uvalde. Being an arsehole was purely the shooter's choice.
The police at Uvalde had a way to stop the shooter being an arsehole...
No, they had a way of moderating and frustrating his arseholishness. Can you think of anything we could have done differently in the last 6 or so years which would have worked similarly with the French?
Hmm, what do we reckon? Is this just a bit of grumbling that will blow over (but ensure that Liz wins the vote for the new leader) or is this a sign of trouble ahead for Tory MPs with their grassroots?
One imagines that if Johnson goes to the Conservative Party conference that he might cause a bit of a splash. Does he want to?
I was thinking about Cicero's reported rumours in Finland.
1 - Recently the Finns are nervous about the Russians, hence the NATO moves 2 - The story is said to involve a high level Cabinet member 3 - The story is said to be extremely damaging
So, the port authorities are blaming the French for the 'critical incident' at Dover.
I assume that the French are also to blame for all the queues at UK airports and the large number of cancelled flights in recent times. Or is it just possible that our tendency to scapegoat the French is a bit of a red herring, when it's apparent that there are widespread staffing problems, including in the UK, in the travel industry?
In this particular case 6 of the 12 booths checking passports etc are manned by the French at the present time according to the BBC. That seems to be the cause of the backlog. When going into one of the busiest weekends of the entire year that seems sub-optimal.
At which point the next question the BBC should be asking is
on a typical Friday how many booths are normally in use? as that will highlight where the issue is...
But the BBC don't seem to think to ask that sort of obvious question so you get a story without context or useful content...
It's not a typical Friday, though, is it? Surely having 12 booths means that you expect to use 12 booths at the busiest times, like today.
Why? Before the Single Market our Friench customs friends were notorious at ensuring they were as slow as they could be. We know how they operate, so this should not be a surprise.
Nor is it that unusual - a stack of empty booths is the experience that most people coming into Britain get when landing at Heathrow - or into America landing at JFK for that matter.
If the French are being arseholes, the blame for that is only on the French.
Of course! But dealing with these arseholes is what we have chosen by leaving the EEA and CU.
Leaving the EU may have enabled the French to be arseholes but it didn't force them to be arseholes. That is their choice.
Good defence for e.g. the police at Uvalde. Being an arsehole was purely the shooter's choice.
The police at Uvalde had a way to stop the shooter being an arsehole...
No, they had a way of moderating and frustrating his arseholishness. Can you think of anything we could have done differently in the last 6 or so years which would have worked similarly with the French?
Invest more in getting our goods moved via Zeebrugge and other alternatives not in France.
Hmm, what do we reckon? Is this just a bit of grumbling that will blow over (but ensure that Liz wins the vote for the new leader) or is this a sign of trouble ahead for Tory MPs with their grassroots?
One imagines that if Johnson goes to the Conservative Party conference that he might cause a bit of a splash. Does he want to?
I was thinking about Cicero's reported rumours in Finland.
1 - Recently the Finns are nervous about the Russians, hence the NATO moves 2 - The story is said to involve a high level Cabinet member 3 - The story is said to be extremely damaging
So, the port authorities are blaming the French for the 'critical incident' at Dover.
I assume that the French are also to blame for all the queues at UK airports and the large number of cancelled flights in recent times. Or is it just possible that our tendency to scapegoat the French is a bit of a red herring, when it's apparent that there are widespread staffing problems, including in the UK, in the travel industry?
In this particular case 6 of the 12 booths checking passports etc are manned by the French at the present time according to the BBC. That seems to be the cause of the backlog. When going into one of the busiest weekends of the entire year that seems sub-optimal.
At which point the next question the BBC should be asking is
on a typical Friday how many booths are normally in use? as that will highlight where the issue is...
But the BBC don't seem to think to ask that sort of obvious question so you get a story without context or useful content...
It's not a typical Friday, though, is it? Surely having 12 booths means that you expect to use 12 booths at the busiest times, like today.
Why? Before the Single Market our Friench customs friends were notorious at ensuring they were as slow as they could be. We know how they operate, so this should not be a surprise.
Nor is it that unusual - a stack of empty booths is the experience that most people coming into Britain get when landing at Heathrow - or into America landing at JFK for that matter.
If the French are being arseholes, the blame for that is only on the French.
Of course! But dealing with these arseholes is what we have chosen by leaving the EEA and CU.
Leaving the EU may have enabled the French to be arseholes but it didn't force them to be arseholes. That is their choice.
Good defence for e.g. the police at Uvalde. Being an arsehole was purely the shooter's choice.
The police at Uvalde had a way to stop the shooter being an arsehole...
No, they had a way of moderating and frustrating his arseholishness.
No, they had a way to stop him... you can't be an arsehole when you're dead...
@BartholomewRoberts just curious, if you voted Labour in 2019 were you endorsing anti-Semitism or not
Not. I've said not to you many times.
I think it would be an offensive slur to suggest 10 million Britons were endorsing anti-Semitism.
Fair enough but yours is definitely a minority POV.
I have never been against taking a minority or unique POV. My POV is my own, not anybody else's.
But I don't think the notion that 10 million people weren't all endorsing anti-semitism is unique or that minority either. Corbyn and his ilk were, but not all Labour voters. I'll quote a part of a reply I wrote to you yesterday.
There were a vast number of Labour MPs who objected to Corbyn, objected to anti Semitism and made that vocally clear and resigned to the back benches. People like Stella Creasy were prepared to not just vote Labour but hold the Labour whip and were still willing to call out anti Semitism even while voting Labour. I may not agree with her politics much, but I really respect her and MPs like her let alone voters like her.
Parties are big tents, just because Corbyn was an anti-Semite doesn't mean every Labour voter was. Many Labour voters were anti-Corbyn, many Labour MPs were.
I do recall you saying that Starmer supported/didn't oppose anti-Semitism, why is he different? He called it out from WITHIN cabinet.
I said that Starmer by willing to be in Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet was willing to turn a blind eye to anti-Semitism.
He ought to have resigned to the backbenches as decent Labour MPs like Creasy etc did, but that wouldn't further his career.
How is calling it out and then removing Corbyn from the party turning a blind eye?
So, the port authorities are blaming the French for the 'critical incident' at Dover.
I assume that the French are also to blame for all the queues at UK airports and the large number of cancelled flights in recent times. Or is it just possible that our tendency to scapegoat the French is a bit of a red herring, when it's apparent that there are widespread staffing problems, including in the UK, in the travel industry?
In this particular case 6 of the 12 booths checking passports etc are manned by the French at the present time according to the BBC. That seems to be the cause of the backlog. When going into one of the busiest weekends of the entire year that seems sub-optimal.
At which point the next question the BBC should be asking is
on a typical Friday how many booths are normally in use? as that will highlight where the issue is...
But the BBC don't seem to think to ask that sort of obvious question so you get a story without context or useful content...
It's not a typical Friday, though, is it? Surely having 12 booths means that you expect to use 12 booths at the busiest times, like today.
Why? Before the Single Market our Friench customs friends were notorious at ensuring they were as slow as they could be. We know how they operate, so this should not be a surprise.
Nor is it that unusual - a stack of empty booths is the experience that most people coming into Britain get when landing at Heathrow - or into America landing at JFK for that matter.
So it was typical French even before
So presumably nothing to do with our leaving the EU.
The appropriate strategy is to facilitate the development alternatives so the French get the consequences of their own actions.
What, build a France 2.0 in the North Sea so nobody goes to the current version? wtf is facilitating development alternatives?
Hmm, what do we reckon? Is this just a bit of grumbling that will blow over (but ensure that Liz wins the vote for the new leader) or is this a sign of trouble ahead for Tory MPs with their grassroots?
One imagines that if Johnson goes to the Conservative Party conference that he might cause a bit of a splash. Does he want to?
I was thinking about Cicero's reported rumours in Finland.
1 - Recently the Finns are nervous about the Russians, hence the NATO moves 2 - The story is said to involve a high level Cabinet member 3 - The story is said to be extremely damaging
Space is quite big. It would be a miracle if we could colonise Proxima Centauri, about the nearest one. Four light years away. 0.1c was suggested, so, with a following wind, a round trip in 40 years, half a life time.
Earth suits us very well, because we evolved here. Nowhere else will have that advantage. With a massive number of stars, the Drake number mght look encouraging. But some of them are 13 billion light years away, and we won't be traveeling anwhere near light speed. Well have evolved on a travelling space ship, and we might revert to bacteria, Who knows. Although if we travel at light speed (impossible), it wouldn't ake long in our F.O,R.
If space is expanding too some of the planets will be disappearing over the horizon, If we had an horizon to disappear over.
People can suggest 0.1C till they are blue in the face. Sleight of hand, surely 0.1 of something is not very much? In fact, 10% of a stupendous, unimaginably large thing is stupendously fucking large. Also, slowing down costs as much as speeding up. you can go 4 ly in 40 years at 0.1C but only if you don't mind shooting straight past your endpoint at 0.1C, or colliding with it.
At acceleration/deceleration of 1g it takes just under a year to accelerate to, or decelerate from, 0.1C. So, if you have enough propellant, and you can chuck it out the right end of your spaceship fast enough, there's nothing particularly difficult about 0.1C. We currently can't do the fast enough, but if we avoid nuclear war for another century we will likely be closer to it.
@BartholomewRoberts just curious, if you voted Labour in 2019 were you endorsing anti-Semitism or not
Not. I've said not to you many times.
I think it would be an offensive slur to suggest 10 million Britons were endorsing anti-Semitism.
Fair enough but yours is definitely a minority POV.
I have never been against taking a minority or unique POV. My POV is my own, not anybody else's.
But I don't think the notion that 10 million people weren't all endorsing anti-semitism is unique or that minority either. Corbyn and his ilk were, but not all Labour voters. I'll quote a part of a reply I wrote to you yesterday.
There were a vast number of Labour MPs who objected to Corbyn, objected to anti Semitism and made that vocally clear and resigned to the back benches. People like Stella Creasy were prepared to not just vote Labour but hold the Labour whip and were still willing to call out anti Semitism even while voting Labour. I may not agree with her politics much, but I really respect her and MPs like her let alone voters like her.
Parties are big tents, just because Corbyn was an anti-Semite doesn't mean every Labour voter was. Many Labour voters were anti-Corbyn, many Labour MPs were.
I do recall you saying that Starmer supported/didn't oppose anti-Semitism, why is he different? He called it out from WITHIN cabinet.
I said that Starmer by willing to be in Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet was willing to turn a blind eye to anti-Semitism.
He ought to have resigned to the backbenches as decent Labour MPs like Creasy etc did, but that wouldn't further his career.
How is calling it out and then removing Corbyn from the party turning a blind eye?
He didn't call out and then remove Corbyn from the party, he remained Corbyn's loyal lieutenant, standing shoulder-to-shoulder with him in his Shadow Cabinet until the British voters removed Corbyn by rejecting him a second time.
I hate comparisons between Corbyn and Boris as they're nothing alike, but to equate them then Creasy etc were like Aaron Bell etc, while Starmer was like Truss - loyal until the end. It was only once Starmer was safely entrenched as Labour leader that he took any action against Corbyn.
@BartholomewRoberts just curious, if you voted Labour in 2019 were you endorsing anti-Semitism or not
Not. I've said not to you many times.
I think it would be an offensive slur to suggest 10 million Britons were endorsing anti-Semitism.
Fair enough but yours is definitely a minority POV.
I have never been against taking a minority or unique POV. My POV is my own, not anybody else's.
But I don't think the notion that 10 million people weren't all endorsing anti-semitism is unique or that minority either. Corbyn and his ilk were, but not all Labour voters. I'll quote a part of a reply I wrote to you yesterday.
There were a vast number of Labour MPs who objected to Corbyn, objected to anti Semitism and made that vocally clear and resigned to the back benches. People like Stella Creasy were prepared to not just vote Labour but hold the Labour whip and were still willing to call out anti Semitism even while voting Labour. I may not agree with her politics much, but I really respect her and MPs like her let alone voters like her.
Parties are big tents, just because Corbyn was an anti-Semite doesn't mean every Labour voter was. Many Labour voters were anti-Corbyn, many Labour MPs were.
Tbf to Conservative supporters pointing out the error of Corbyn, he did kick out most of the MPs he disagreed with, particularly those of the Jewish faith like Luciana Berger.
Corbyn did not kick out MPs he disagreed with, not even Luciana Berger who left and founded TIG or one of the other names they churned through.
Hmm, what do we reckon? Is this just a bit of grumbling that will blow over (but ensure that Liz wins the vote for the new leader) or is this a sign of trouble ahead for Tory MPs with their grassroots?
One imagines that if Johnson goes to the Conservative Party conference that he might cause a bit of a splash. Does he want to?
I was thinking about Cicero's reported rumours in Finland.
1 - Recently the Finns are nervous about the Russians, hence the NATO moves 2 - The story is said to involve a high level Cabinet member 3 - The story is said to be extremely damaging
This morning you read a week-old story. Why would that be banned?
@Beibheirli_C is quite right though, Finlandgate is much most likely to put flesh on the bones of that story. It is even possible to speculate what the flesh might be, 🎻.
@BartholomewRoberts just curious, if you voted Labour in 2019 were you endorsing anti-Semitism or not
Not. I've said not to you many times.
I think it would be an offensive slur to suggest 10 million Britons were endorsing anti-Semitism.
Fair enough but yours is definitely a minority POV.
I have never been against taking a minority or unique POV. My POV is my own, not anybody else's.
But I don't think the notion that 10 million people weren't all endorsing anti-semitism is unique or that minority either. Corbyn and his ilk were, but not all Labour voters. I'll quote a part of a reply I wrote to you yesterday.
There were a vast number of Labour MPs who objected to Corbyn, objected to anti Semitism and made that vocally clear and resigned to the back benches. People like Stella Creasy were prepared to not just vote Labour but hold the Labour whip and were still willing to call out anti Semitism even while voting Labour. I may not agree with her politics much, but I really respect her and MPs like her let alone voters like her.
Parties are big tents, just because Corbyn was an anti-Semite doesn't mean every Labour voter was. Many Labour voters were anti-Corbyn, many Labour MPs were.
Tbf to Conservative supporters pointing out the error of Corbyn, he did kick out most of the MPs he disagreed with, particularly those of the Jewish faith like Luciana Berger.
Corbyn did not kick out MPs he disagreed with, not even Luciana Berger who left and founded TIG or one of the other names they churned through.
@BartholomewRoberts just curious, if you voted Labour in 2019 were you endorsing anti-Semitism or not
Not. I've said not to you many times.
I think it would be an offensive slur to suggest 10 million Britons were endorsing anti-Semitism.
Fair enough but yours is definitely a minority POV.
I have never been against taking a minority or unique POV. My POV is my own, not anybody else's.
But I don't think the notion that 10 million people weren't all endorsing anti-semitism is unique or that minority either. Corbyn and his ilk were, but not all Labour voters. I'll quote a part of a reply I wrote to you yesterday.
There were a vast number of Labour MPs who objected to Corbyn, objected to anti Semitism and made that vocally clear and resigned to the back benches. People like Stella Creasy were prepared to not just vote Labour but hold the Labour whip and were still willing to call out anti Semitism even while voting Labour. I may not agree with her politics much, but I really respect her and MPs like her let alone voters like her.
Parties are big tents, just because Corbyn was an anti-Semite doesn't mean every Labour voter was. Many Labour voters were anti-Corbyn, many Labour MPs were.
Tbf to Conservative supporters pointing out the error of Corbyn, he did kick out most of the MPs he disagreed with, particularly those of the Jewish faith like Luciana Berger.
Corbyn did not kick out MPs he disagreed with, not even Luciana Berger who left and founded TIG or one of the other names they churned through.
In a workplace Berger et al would certainly have had a case for constructive dismissal.
An entertaining 5 minutes: 1. Get an email from Royal Mail saying my lost package is being delivered today 2. Doorbell rings. David the postie with my package 3. Neighbour waves me over. Big hole dug in my lawn next to his driveway. With bumblebees swarming around in the bottom of it
Big communication blunder by 🇩🇪 Foreign Minister Baerbock
“If we don’t get the gas turbine, then we won’t get any more gas, and then we won’t be able to provide any support for Ukraine at all, because then we’ll be busy with popular uprisings.” She immediately backtracked but damage was done.
Hmm, what do we reckon? Is this just a bit of grumbling that will blow over (but ensure that Liz wins the vote for the new leader) or is this a sign of trouble ahead for Tory MPs with their grassroots?
One imagines that if Johnson goes to the Conservative Party conference that he might cause a bit of a splash. Does he want to?
I was thinking about Cicero's reported rumours in Finland.
1 - Recently the Finns are nervous about the Russians, hence the NATO moves 2 - The story is said to involve a high level Cabinet member 3 - The story is said to be extremely damaging
This morning you read a week-old story. Why would that be banned?
Press stories rarely get the whole tale in the first go. Watergate took years to come out after the initial reporting. Bernstein and Woodward were busy for years!
So, the port authorities are blaming the French for the 'critical incident' at Dover.
I assume that the French are also to blame for all the queues at UK airports and the large number of cancelled flights in recent times. Or is it just possible that our tendency to scapegoat the French is a bit of a red herring, when it's apparent that there are widespread staffing problems, including in the UK, in the travel industry?
In this particular case 6 of the 12 booths checking passports etc are manned by the French at the present time according to the BBC. That seems to be the cause of the backlog. When going into one of the busiest weekends of the entire year that seems sub-optimal.
At which point the next question the BBC should be asking is
on a typical Friday how many booths are normally in use? as that will highlight where the issue is...
But the BBC don't seem to think to ask that sort of obvious question so you get a story without context or useful content...
It's not a typical Friday, though, is it? Surely having 12 booths means that you expect to use 12 booths at the busiest times, like today.
Why? Before the Single Market our Friench customs friends were notorious at ensuring they were as slow as they could be. We know how they operate, so this should not be a surprise.
Nor is it that unusual - a stack of empty booths is the experience that most people coming into Britain get when landing at Heathrow - or into America landing at JFK for that matter.
So it was typical French even before
So presumably nothing to do with our leaving the EU.
The appropriate strategy is to facilitate the development alternatives so the French get the consequences of their own actions.
What, build a France 2.0 in the North Sea so nobody goes to the current version? wtf is facilitating development alternatives?
Zeebrugge isn't in France, or a new development in the North Sea.
There is of course the sand on the beach theory of aliens.
When you go to the beach and are sitting on the sand, say, two feet away from you and two feet down into the sand could be an ant colony. You would never see or know about it despite being close to it.
The aliens could be in the vicinity, cosmic-wise but they never bother to investigate or happen upon the infinitesimally tiny part that is our planet.
Big communication blunder by 🇩🇪 Foreign Minister Baerbock
“If we don’t get the gas turbine, then we won’t get any more gas, and then we won’t be able to provide any support for Ukraine at all, because then we’ll be busy with popular uprisings.” She immediately backtracked but damage was done.
That is just "accidentally speaking what she thinks" - quite a few German politicians seem to think that if anything happens that causes inconvenience for the man in the street, everyone will shopping at Hugo Boss in about 30 seconds.
I've always struggled to understand that. It bears no resemblance to the actual Germans I have met.
Sunak is the establishment candidate. Expect big campaign in his favour, MP's, Party Chairs, maybe Mordaunt, plus the Times, other important party factors. Lib Dems yesterday within 10 votes of taking a very safe Tory ward in Staffordshire that has been uncontested for years and years and voted heavy Leave!
Hmm, what do we reckon? Is this just a bit of grumbling that will blow over (but ensure that Liz wins the vote for the new leader) or is this a sign of trouble ahead for Tory MPs with their grassroots?
One imagines that if Johnson goes to the Conservative Party conference that he might cause a bit of a splash. Does he want to?
I was thinking about Cicero's reported rumours in Finland.
1 - Recently the Finns are nervous about the Russians, hence the NATO moves 2 - The story is said to involve a high level Cabinet member 3 - The story is said to be extremely damaging
This morning you read a week-old story. Why would that be banned?
Press stories rarely get the whole tale in the first go. Watergate took years to come out after the initial reporting. Bernstein and Woodward were busy for years!
The Living Daylights is a James Bond short story in which a beautiful Russian cellist turns out to be a KGB agent. Irrelevantly.
Keir Starmer asked me if he should resign over issues under Corbyn - Wes Streeting
Streeting gave him the wrong advice IMNSHO. 👎
Voting Labour wasn't immoral. Being a backbench critic of Corbyn wasn't. Standing in Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet was at the very least turning a blind eye to anti-Semitism.
That is the difference. There is a world of difference between an ordinary voter, a backbench critic, and a frontbencher.
Breaking - Dover port declares critical incident due to overwhelming queues at the border
A Dover port guy was just on the radio blaming the French for not having enough staff.
Bloody French, not willing to spend more on border staff post-Brexit. Don’t they know we’re British? How dare they inconvenience us.
Well, British tourists will spend money in France, thus boosting the French economy, so it would be rational for France to make travel easier. It's a bit like the German cars argument.
If the French want to lose visitors from their largest tourism source county (when I last checked) by making travel difficult, then many of those visitors will go elsewhere. Time for the Zeebrugge route to reopen?
Spain has shown it is quite possible to make borders more efficient when necessary.
On this occasion it really is the "bloody French", to borrow the avoid-a-conversation rhetoric above.
Mons. Macron and many in his Government announced that they thought the UK needed to be 'punished', including unlawful measures - to the extent that he had to be slapped down like a yapping puppy by Brussels at least twice.
At present the French are importing 5+% of their electricity from the UK much of the time. Perhaps we should borrow from the French playbook and threaten to cut them off at the point of maximum potential pain, just like the .. er .. bloody French.
There has been a sudden and marked change on our balance of payments from the interconnectors. Until very recently we were always importing quite a bit of power when wind was anywhere away from its peak. We are now fairly consistently exporting power.
My guess would be that the fact that we can import LNG and Germany, for example, can't means that it makes sense to burn that gas in UK power stations and export the product of the LNG to the EU. It must be good business for our power plants here although it may prove fairly short term if Germany gets their act together, at least until we have an excess of wind power. A new interconnector is being built right now connecting us directly with Germany for the first time so that they can import our renewable energy.
Yes - various factors. Is it RCS who is in this area professionally?
The main one wrt French imports of electricity from everyone except afaics Italy is that the French nuclear power station fleet is on the cronk. Last week they relaxed some safety limits on some of them (max output temp of cooling water) on a number of nuclear sites as it was on the edge.
This morning they are importing approx 20% of their electricity from Germany, UK, Spain, Switzerland.
I think that the UK don't have the French Government willingness to be bastards. Perhaps unfortunately.
The last year or two also imo showed that they are pretty weak on following rhetoric with delivery in defence of the UK interest.
So, the port authorities are blaming the French for the 'critical incident' at Dover.
I assume that the French are also to blame for all the queues at UK airports and the large number of cancelled flights in recent times. Or is it just possible that our tendency to scapegoat the French is a bit of a red herring, when it's apparent that there are widespread staffing problems, including in the UK, in the travel industry?
In this particular case 6 of the 12 booths checking passports etc are manned by the French at the present time according to the BBC. That seems to be the cause of the backlog. When going into one of the busiest weekends of the entire year that seems sub-optimal.
At which point the next question the BBC should be asking is
on a typical Friday how many booths are normally in use? as that will highlight where the issue is...
But the BBC don't seem to think to ask that sort of obvious question so you get a story without context or useful content...
It's not a typical Friday, though, is it? Surely having 12 booths means that you expect to use 12 booths at the busiest times, like today.
Why? Before the Single Market our Friench customs friends were notorious at ensuring they were as slow as they could be. We know how they operate, so this should not be a surprise.
Nor is it that unusual - a stack of empty booths is the experience that most people coming into Britain get when landing at Heathrow - or into America landing at JFK for that matter.
If the French are being arseholes, the blame for that is only on the French.
Of course! But dealing with these arseholes is what we have chosen by leaving the EEA and CU.
Leaving the EU may have enabled the French to be arseholes but it didn't force them to be arseholes. That is their choice.
Good defence for e.g. the police at Uvalde. Being an arsehole was purely the shooter's choice.
The police at Uvalde had a way to stop the shooter being an arsehole...
No, they had a way of moderating and frustrating his arseholishness. Can you think of anything we could have done differently in the last 6 or so years which would have worked similarly with the French?
You mean we should have elected @TSE dictator for life and invaded?
Keir Starmer asked me if he should resign over issues under Corbyn - Wes Streeting
Streeting gave him the wrong advice IMNSHO. 👎
Voting Labour wasn't immoral. Being a backbench critic of Corbyn wasn't. Standing in Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet was at the very least turning a blind eye to anti-Semitism.
That is the difference. There is a world of difference between an ordinary voter, a backbench critic, and a frontbencher.
As Wes says, if Keir had not done that, he would never have been elected the leader and never been in a position to resolve the problem and kick out Corbyn. I maintain that neither RLB nor Nandy would have done what Keir did.
My relationship with Brexit is like a long tennis rally. Before the 2016 referendum I was pi**ed off with the EU, and critical of it. But I didn't believe leave had any coherent plan, so reluctantly voted remain. Since then, events have had me going over the net from one side to the other: the EUs stupidity over vaccines or intransigence over NI, or Germany's attitude towards Ukraine, see me going towards leave. Then all the other sh*t going on with Brexit on our side sees me going back to remain.
But it's all academic, as I would not support another referendum. We have made our bed; we need adults to remove the soiled sheets and tidy the room.
The failure of policy from 1970 onwards is to have got the UK into a place where there is neither consensus nor a good answer nor a compromise available.
Brexit is no answer, it merely reframes the question; being in the EU was unacceptable to the majority of voters, and would be again if we rejoined; the long term solution of EFTA/EEA and then have a long national think was deemed impossible by both sides.
BTW, Scottish independence presents exactly similar problems,as we shall continue to find out.
Big communication blunder by 🇩🇪 Foreign Minister Baerbock
“If we don’t get the gas turbine, then we won’t get any more gas, and then we won’t be able to provide any support for Ukraine at all, because then we’ll be busy with popular uprisings.” She immediately backtracked but damage was done.
That is just "accidentally speaking what she thinks" - quite a few German politicians seem to think that if anything happens that causes inconvenience for the man in the street, everyone will shopping at Hugo Boss in about 30 seconds.
I've always struggled to understand that. It bears no resemblance to the actual Germans I have met.
It also misses out the fundamental issue that most riots occur in summer and not in the middle of winter (for multiple reasons)...
Hmm, what do we reckon? Is this just a bit of grumbling that will blow over (but ensure that Liz wins the vote for the new leader) or is this a sign of trouble ahead for Tory MPs with their grassroots?
One imagines that if Johnson goes to the Conservative Party conference that he might cause a bit of a splash. Does he want to?
I was thinking about Cicero's reported rumours in Finland.
1 - Recently the Finns are nervous about the Russians, hence the NATO moves 2 - The story is said to involve a high level Cabinet member 3 - The story is said to be extremely damaging
This morning you read a week-old story. Why would that be banned?
@Beibheirli_C is quite right though, Finlandgate is much most likely to put flesh on the bones of that story. It is even possible to speculate what the flesh might be, 🎻.
Whilst I do believe Lebedevgate is probably Boris's worst scandal by far, I can't really see how it fits with what we know about Finlandgate which, in my case, is almost nothing.
So, the port authorities are blaming the French for the 'critical incident' at Dover.
I assume that the French are also to blame for all the queues at UK airports and the large number of cancelled flights in recent times. Or is it just possible that our tendency to scapegoat the French is a bit of a red herring, when it's apparent that there are widespread staffing problems, including in the UK, in the travel industry?
In this particular case 6 of the 12 booths checking passports etc are manned by the French at the present time according to the BBC. That seems to be the cause of the backlog. When going into one of the busiest weekends of the entire year that seems sub-optimal.
At which point the next question the BBC should be asking is
on a typical Friday how many booths are normally in use? as that will highlight where the issue is...
But the BBC don't seem to think to ask that sort of obvious question so you get a story without context or useful content...
It's not a typical Friday, though, is it? Surely having 12 booths means that you expect to use 12 booths at the busiest times, like today.
Why? Before the Single Market our Friench customs friends were notorious at ensuring they were as slow as they could be. We know how they operate, so this should not be a surprise.
Nor is it that unusual - a stack of empty booths is the experience that most people coming into Britain get when landing at Heathrow - or into America landing at JFK for that matter.
So it was typical French even before
So presumably nothing to do with our leaving the EU.
The appropriate strategy is to facilitate the development alternatives so the French get the consequences of their own actions.
What, build a France 2.0 in the North Sea so nobody goes to the current version? wtf is facilitating development alternatives?
My typo - sorry. Development of alternatives.
eg as I pointed out Zeebrugge ferries, which P&O closed.
Hmm, what do we reckon? Is this just a bit of grumbling that will blow over (but ensure that Liz wins the vote for the new leader) or is this a sign of trouble ahead for Tory MPs with their grassroots?
One imagines that if Johnson goes to the Conservative Party conference that he might cause a bit of a splash. Does he want to?
I was thinking about Cicero's reported rumours in Finland.
1 - Recently the Finns are nervous about the Russians, hence the NATO moves 2 - The story is said to involve a high level Cabinet member 3 - The story is said to be extremely damaging
This morning you read a week-old story. Why would that be banned?
@Beibheirli_C is quite right though, Finlandgate is much most likely to put flesh on the bones of that story. It is even possible to speculate what the flesh might be, 🎻.
We've all heard the story now, anyone with an internet connection has heard it, why are they bothering to stay so shtoom?
Pretty sure the SNP would be happy for C&S until towards the end of a minority Labour government. There's plenty in common in terms of big policies. Scottish government elections are another matter.
Although C&S would be favourites for the LDs (meaning they hold onto the alternative vote to Tories without being 'minor Labour '), if PR is offered, all bets are off. I wouldn't rule it out.
The SNP would only support Labour in return for indyref2
I wouldn't rule out the SNP supporting (but not supporting) the Tories in return for Indyref2 either.
If the Tories agree to an Indyref2 and have more seats than Labour + LD combined then its exceptionally easy for the SNP and other parties to say that coalition talks have failed, that there is no new, alternative, viable government available, and the Tories continuing as a minority government seeking support from the opposition on a case-by-case basis to get bills through.
All the SNP care about is that they get their Indyref2. Having a Tory in Downing Street + Indyref2 is going to be the dream scenario for them, so sabotaging talks with Labour is the cynical thing to do.
If the Tories give the SNP indyref2 there would be open civil war in the party, me included. All Scottish Tory MPs would vote with the opposition rather than a Tory government allowing indyref2.
Indeed I would prefer a Conservative and Labour grand coalition than any deal with the SNP.
However if the Tories win most seats in a hung parliament and also have more seats than Labour and the LDs combined they don't need to offer indyref2. The SNP would abstain without a Labour commitment to indyref2 and the Tories can form a minority government in a bill by Bill basis as you suggest
The SNP would never countenance the continuation of a Tory Government. They would back a Labour minority Government's Queens Speech even without a referendum commitment. Sure, the Nats would vote for or against (or abstain) on specific legislation, which would mean that Starmer wouldn't be able to achieve much. But he wouldn't care greatly, being focused on the best moment (6 months?) to call a second election during his honeymoon.
No the SNP would abstain on a Queen's Speech vote now absent an indyref2 commitment from Labour
The SNP would not vote/abstain in a vote for a Queen's Speech that would ensure a Tory government.
Labour do not have to offer them IndyRef2 and the SNP would not ask.
Yes they would abstain, otherwise Salmond would stand Alba candidates across Scotland at general elections against the SNP as Sturgeon not taking a hard enough line to push indyref2
So just to be clear, you think the SNP - who's main clarion call is "No more Tory governments in Scotland ever" would take action to directly install a Tory government?
Space is quite big. It would be a miracle if we could colonise Proxima Centauri, about the nearest one. Four light years away. 0.1c was suggested, so, with a following wind, a round trip in 40 years, half a life time.
Earth suits us very well, because we evolved here. Nowhere else will have that advantage. With a massive number of stars, the Drake number mght look encouraging. But some of them are 13 billion light years away, and we won't be traveeling anwhere near light speed. Well have evolved on a travelling space ship, and we might revert to bacteria, Who knows. Although if we travel at light speed (impossible), it wouldn't ake long in our F.O,R.
If space is expanding too some of the planets will be disappearing over the horizon, If we had an horizon to disappear over.
People can suggest 0.1C till they are blue in the face. Sleight of hand, surely 0.1 of something is not very much? In fact, 10% of a stupendous, unimaginably large thing is stupendously fucking large. Also, slowing down costs as much as speeding up. you can go 4 ly in 40 years at 0.1C but only if you don't mind shooting straight past your endpoint at 0.1C, or colliding with it.
At acceleration/deceleration of 1g it takes just under a year to accelerate to, or decelerate from, 0.1C. So, if you have enough propellant, and you can chuck it out the right end of your spaceship fast enough, there's nothing particularly difficult about 0.1C. We currently can't do the fast enough, but if we avoid nuclear war for another century we will likely be closer to it.
Also, the faster you go, the more deadly interstellar dust and radiation becomes. The radiation gets blue-shifted into deadly high energy X-rays whilst small particles have their apparent mass/energy increased to the point that an impact with them is like semtex exploding on the front of the spacecraft.
To be fair Sunak seems to have accepted that Brexit is no longer a defining issue - but Truss seems to be stuck on it.
There are probably Tory membership votes in getting Brexit done correctly - which don't exist elsewhere. I can see why Truss may wish to focus on it because other areas end up looking bad for her.
Keir Starmer asked me if he should resign over issues under Corbyn - Wes Streeting
Streeting gave him the wrong advice IMNSHO. 👎
Voting Labour wasn't immoral. Being a backbench critic of Corbyn wasn't. Standing in Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet was at the very least turning a blind eye to anti-Semitism.
That is the difference. There is a world of difference between an ordinary voter, a backbench critic, and a frontbencher.
What general election winning Opposition leader did not serve in the previous party leader's Shadow Cabinet or Cabinet? Cameron served in Howard's Shadow Cabinet, Blair served in Smith and Kinnock's Shadow Cabinet, Thatcher served in Heath's Cabinet and Shadow Cabinet, Heath served in Home's Cabinet, Wilson served in Gaitskell's Shadow Cabinet
There is of course the sand on the beach theory of aliens.
When you go to the beach and are sitting on the sand, say, two feet away from you and two feet down into the sand could be an ant colony. You would never see or know about it despite being close to it.
The aliens could be in the vicinity, cosmic-wise but they never bother to investigate or happen upon the infinitesimally tiny part that is our planet.
There's a lot of sci fi on a similarish theme - Roadside Picnic, William Gibson short whose name I forget, Gateway in reverse: if we do encounter aliens, it won't do us much good, any more than it would a swarm (?) of ants investigating the remains of a human picnic. might get a discarded apple core out of it.
Space is quite big. It would be a miracle if we could colonise Proxima Centauri, about the nearest one. Four light years away. 0.1c was suggested, so, with a following wind, a round trip in 40 years, half a life time.
Earth suits us very well, because we evolved here. Nowhere else will have that advantage. With a massive number of stars, the Drake number mght look encouraging. But some of them are 13 billion light years away, and we won't be traveeling anwhere near light speed. Well have evolved on a travelling space ship, and we might revert to bacteria, Who knows. Although if we travel at light speed (impossible), it wouldn't ake long in our F.O,R.
If space is expanding too some of the planets will be disappearing over the horizon, If we had an horizon to disappear over.
People can suggest 0.1C till they are blue in the face. Sleight of hand, surely 0.1 of something is not very much? In fact, 10% of a stupendous, unimaginably large thing is stupendously fucking large. Also, slowing down costs as much as speeding up. you can go 4 ly in 40 years at 0.1C but only if you don't mind shooting straight past your endpoint at 0.1C, or colliding with it.
At acceleration/deceleration of 1g it takes just under a year to accelerate to, or decelerate from, 0.1C. So, if you have enough propellant, and you can chuck it out the right end of your spaceship fast enough, there's nothing particularly difficult about 0.1C. We currently can't do the fast enough, but if we avoid nuclear war for another century we will likely be closer to it.
Carrying propellant for prolonged 1g acceleration - even at crazy ISP that is simply not going to happen... Maybe if you invented conversion of matter to energy at 99% efficiency....
Hmm, what do we reckon? Is this just a bit of grumbling that will blow over (but ensure that Liz wins the vote for the new leader) or is this a sign of trouble ahead for Tory MPs with their grassroots?
One imagines that if Johnson goes to the Conservative Party conference that he might cause a bit of a splash. Does he want to?
I was thinking about Cicero's reported rumours in Finland.
1 - Recently the Finns are nervous about the Russians, hence the NATO moves 2 - The story is said to involve a high level Cabinet member 3 - The story is said to be extremely damaging
Space is quite big. It would be a miracle if we could colonise Proxima Centauri, about the nearest one. Four light years away. 0.1c was suggested, so, with a following wind, a round trip in 40 years, half a life time.
Earth suits us very well, because we evolved here. Nowhere else will have that advantage. With a massive number of stars, the Drake number mght look encouraging. But some of them are 13 billion light years away, and we won't be traveeling anwhere near light speed. Well have evolved on a travelling space ship, and we might revert to bacteria, Who knows. Although if we travel at light speed (impossible), it wouldn't ake long in our F.O,R.
If space is expanding too some of the planets will be disappearing over the horizon, If we had an horizon to disappear over.
People can suggest 0.1C till they are blue in the face. Sleight of hand, surely 0.1 of something is not very much? In fact, 10% of a stupendous, unimaginably large thing is stupendously fucking large. Also, slowing down costs as much as speeding up. you can go 4 ly in 40 years at 0.1C but only if you don't mind shooting straight past your endpoint at 0.1C, or colliding with it.
At acceleration/deceleration of 1g it takes just under a year to accelerate to, or decelerate from, 0.1C. So, if you have enough propellant, and you can chuck it out the right end of your spaceship fast enough, there's nothing particularly difficult about 0.1C. We currently can't do the fast enough, but if we avoid nuclear war for another century we will likely be closer to it.
Carrying propellant for prolonged 1g acceleration - even at crazy ISP that is simply not going to happen... Maybe if you invented conversion of matter to energy at 99% efficiency....
There is Starshot, if you don't need to send anything bigger han a postage stamp
So, the port authorities are blaming the French for the 'critical incident' at Dover.
I assume that the French are also to blame for all the queues at UK airports and the large number of cancelled flights in recent times. Or is it just possible that our tendency to scapegoat the French is a bit of a red herring, when it's apparent that there are widespread staffing problems, including in the UK, in the travel industry?
In this particular case 6 of the 12 booths checking passports etc are manned by the French at the present time according to the BBC. That seems to be the cause of the backlog. When going into one of the busiest weekends of the entire year that seems sub-optimal.
At which point the next question the BBC should be asking is
on a typical Friday how many booths are normally in use? as that will highlight where the issue is...
But the BBC don't seem to think to ask that sort of obvious question so you get a story without context or useful content...
It's not a typical Friday, though, is it? Surely having 12 booths means that you expect to use 12 booths at the busiest times, like today.
Why? Before the Single Market our Friench customs friends were notorious at ensuring they were as slow as they could be. We know how they operate, so this should not be a surprise.
Nor is it that unusual - a stack of empty booths is the experience that most people coming into Britain get when landing at Heathrow - or into America landing at JFK for that matter.
So it was typical French even before
So presumably nothing to do with our leaving the EU.
The appropriate strategy is to facilitate the development alternatives so the French get the consequences of their own actions.
What, build a France 2.0 in the North Sea so nobody goes to the current version? wtf is facilitating development alternatives?
My typo - sorry. Development of alternatives.
eg as I pointed out Zeebrugge ferries, which P&O closed.
That would require Belgium officials to work in Dover - one reason why Zeebrugge ferries are no more is because Belguims don't want to do that.
Keir Starmer asked me if he should resign over issues under Corbyn - Wes Streeting
Streeting gave him the wrong advice IMNSHO. 👎
Voting Labour wasn't immoral. Being a backbench critic of Corbyn wasn't. Standing in Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet was at the very least turning a blind eye to anti-Semitism.
That is the difference. There is a world of difference between an ordinary voter, a backbench critic, and a frontbencher.
As Wes says, if Keir had not done that, he would never have been elected the leader and never been in a position to resolve the problem and kick out Corbyn. I maintain that neither RLB nor Nandy would have done what Keir did.
So he put his own career first before standing up for Jews. And if Corbyn had won the 2017 or 2019 election, what then?
Lisa Nandy did the decent thing in refusing to serve in Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet and also served in Smith's leadership campaign run against Corbyn, she certainly could have expelled Corbyn too, but Starmer wanted to get Corbynites to vote him into being Leader so he didn't do the right thing until it was politically opportune, unlike Nandy.
I have respect for Nandy, even if I don't like her politics, and even if she is a Labour voter and MP, I still respect her.
@BartholomewRoberts just curious, if you voted Labour in 2019 were you endorsing anti-Semitism or not
Not. I've said not to you many times.
I think it would be an offensive slur to suggest 10 million Britons were endorsing anti-Semitism.
Fair enough but yours is definitely a minority POV.
I have never been against taking a minority or unique POV. My POV is my own, not anybody else's.
But I don't think the notion that 10 million people weren't all endorsing anti-semitism is unique or that minority either. Corbyn and his ilk were, but not all Labour voters. I'll quote a part of a reply I wrote to you yesterday.
There were a vast number of Labour MPs who objected to Corbyn, objected to anti Semitism and made that vocally clear and resigned to the back benches. People like Stella Creasy were prepared to not just vote Labour but hold the Labour whip and were still willing to call out anti Semitism even while voting Labour. I may not agree with her politics much, but I really respect her and MPs like her let alone voters like her.
Parties are big tents, just because Corbyn was an anti-Semite doesn't mean every Labour voter was. Many Labour voters were anti-Corbyn, many Labour MPs were.
Tbf to Conservative supporters pointing out the error of Corbyn, he did kick out most of the MPs he disagreed with, particularly those of the Jewish faith like Luciana Berger.
Corbyn did not kick out MPs he disagreed with, not even Luciana Berger who left and founded TIG or one of the other names they churned through.
Constructive dismissal.
Berger was in no way constructively dismissed. She was actively briefing against her party leader, who was massively popular with her local constituency party. They were following the proper process to have her deselected, as was their right, and she jumped before she was pushed.
I sympathise with her to the extent that it's obvious why she was so against the party leader, but that wouldn't have been such an issue if she hadn't been parachuted into a seat she wasn't particularly suited for in the first place.
There is of course the sand on the beach theory of aliens.
When you go to the beach and are sitting on the sand, say, two feet away from you and two feet down into the sand could be an ant colony. You would never see or know about it despite being close to it.
The aliens could be in the vicinity, cosmic-wise but they never bother to investigate or happen upon the infinitesimally tiny part that is our planet.
There's a lot of sci fi on a similarish theme - Roadside Picnic, William Gibson short whose name I forget, Gateway in reverse: if we do encounter aliens, it won't do us much good, any more than it would a swarm (?) of ants investigating the remains of a human picnic. might get a discarded apple core out of it.
The experience of the Aztec, the Incas, the tribes of Africa, the Natives of North America, the indigenes of Japan, the aborigines of Australia, the locals in Papua New Guinea, even the Neanderthals, all suggest that when a relatively inferior civilisation (in terms of tech, etc) meets an obviously superior civilisation, the result is a catastrophe for the more primitive lifeform
I see no reason why we would be different; I was amazed last night by the number of PB-ers who think humans would just shrug and continue as normal if it was proved we are being visited by super-powerful aliens
Hmm, what do we reckon? Is this just a bit of grumbling that will blow over (but ensure that Liz wins the vote for the new leader) or is this a sign of trouble ahead for Tory MPs with their grassroots?
One imagines that if Johnson goes to the Conservative Party conference that he might cause a bit of a splash. Does he want to?
I was thinking about Cicero's reported rumours in Finland.
1 - Recently the Finns are nervous about the Russians, hence the NATO moves 2 - The story is said to involve a high level Cabinet member 3 - The story is said to be extremely damaging
This morning you read a week-old story. Why would that be banned?
Press stories rarely get the whole tale in the first go. Watergate took years to come out after the initial reporting. Bernstein and Woodward were busy for years!
Watergate was a nothing burger until Nixon started covering up. The story progressed because the cover up progressed. Had Nixon said 'sowwi' at the outset nothing would be a gate today and the original story a minor blip in the presidency of the only man who could go to China
Keir Starmer asked me if he should resign over issues under Corbyn - Wes Streeting
Streeting gave him the wrong advice IMNSHO. 👎
Voting Labour wasn't immoral. Being a backbench critic of Corbyn wasn't. Standing in Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet was at the very least turning a blind eye to anti-Semitism.
That is the difference. There is a world of difference between an ordinary voter, a backbench critic, and a frontbencher.
As Wes says, if Keir had not done that, he would never have been elected the leader and never been in a position to resolve the problem and kick out Corbyn. I maintain that neither RLB nor Nandy would have done what Keir did.
So he put his own career first before standing up for Jews. And if Corbyn had won the 2017 or 2019 election, what then?
Lisa Nandy did the decent thing in refusing to serve in Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet and also served in Smith's leadership campaign run against Corbyn, she certainly could have expelled Corbyn too, but Starmer wanted to get Corbynites to vote him into being Leader so he didn't do the right thing until it was politically opportune, unlike Nandy.
I have respect for Nandy, even if I don't like her politics, and even if she is a Labour voter and MP, I still respect her.
Nandy did serve in Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet for a time.
I don't particularly want to intrude into the private argument between Barty and CHB. Starmer has done a lot to sort out the problems left behind by Corbyn, for which he deserves credit.
There is of course the sand on the beach theory of aliens.
When you go to the beach and are sitting on the sand, say, two feet away from you and two feet down into the sand could be an ant colony. You would never see or know about it despite being close to it.
The aliens could be in the vicinity, cosmic-wise but they never bother to investigate or happen upon the infinitesimally tiny part that is our planet.
There's a lot of sci fi on a similarish theme - Roadside Picnic, William Gibson short whose name I forget, Gateway in reverse: if we do encounter aliens, it won't do us much good, any more than it would a swarm (?) of ants investigating the remains of a human picnic. might get a discarded apple core out of it.
The experience of the Aztec, the Incas, the tribes of Africa, the Natives of North America, the indigenes of Japan, the aborigines of Australia, the locals in Papua New Guinea, even the Neanderthals, all suggest that when a relatively inferior civilisation (in terms of tech, etc) meets an obviously superior civilisation, the result is a catastrophe for the more primitive lifeform
I see no reason why we would be different; I was amazed last night by the number of PB-ers who think humans would just shrug and continue as normal if it was proved we are being visited by super-powerful aliens
Yes but we have nuclear weapons unlike the aborigines, Indians Aztecs etc.
Aliens would have to be super powerful to neutralise a nuclear weapon if our weapon of last resort if they attacked us or tried to colonise us
Keir Starmer asked me if he should resign over issues under Corbyn - Wes Streeting
Streeting gave him the wrong advice IMNSHO. 👎
Voting Labour wasn't immoral. Being a backbench critic of Corbyn wasn't. Standing in Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet was at the very least turning a blind eye to anti-Semitism.
That is the difference. There is a world of difference between an ordinary voter, a backbench critic, and a frontbencher.
As Wes says, if Keir had not done that, he would never have been elected the leader and never been in a position to resolve the problem and kick out Corbyn. I maintain that neither RLB nor Nandy would have done what Keir did.
So he put his own career first before standing up for Jews. And if Corbyn had won the 2017 or 2019 election, what then?
Lisa Nandy did the decent thing in refusing to serve in Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet and also served in Smith's leadership campaign run against Corbyn, she certainly could have expelled Corbyn too, but Starmer wanted to get Corbynites to vote him into being Leader so he didn't do the right thing until it was politically opportune, unlike Nandy.
I have respect for Nandy, even if I don't like her politics, and even if she is a Labour voter and MP, I still respect her.
Nandy did serve in Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet for a time.
Before the anti-Semitism stories broke and she resigned and refused to serve with him again since.
If Starmer had resigned before the 2019 election I'd have more respect for him, but he didn't. I don't think he's an anti-Semite but at the very least he put furthering his own career ahead of standing up against anti-Semitism.
@BartholomewRoberts just curious, if you voted Labour in 2019 were you endorsing anti-Semitism or not
Not. I've said not to you many times.
I think it would be an offensive slur to suggest 10 million Britons were endorsing anti-Semitism.
Fair enough but yours is definitely a minority POV.
I have never been against taking a minority or unique POV. My POV is my own, not anybody else's.
But I don't think the notion that 10 million people weren't all endorsing anti-semitism is unique or that minority either. Corbyn and his ilk were, but not all Labour voters. I'll quote a part of a reply I wrote to you yesterday.
There were a vast number of Labour MPs who objected to Corbyn, objected to anti Semitism and made that vocally clear and resigned to the back benches. People like Stella Creasy were prepared to not just vote Labour but hold the Labour whip and were still willing to call out anti Semitism even while voting Labour. I may not agree with her politics much, but I really respect her and MPs like her let alone voters like her.
Parties are big tents, just because Corbyn was an anti-Semite doesn't mean every Labour voter was. Many Labour voters were anti-Corbyn, many Labour MPs were.
Tbf to Conservative supporters pointing out the error of Corbyn, he did kick out most of the MPs he disagreed with, particularly those of the Jewish faith like Luciana Berger.
Corbyn did not kick out MPs he disagreed with, not even Luciana Berger who left and founded TIG or one of the other names they churned through.
Constructive dismissal.
Berger was in no way constructively dismissed. She was actively briefing against her party leader, who was massively popular with her local constituency party. They were following the proper process to have her deselected, as was their right, and she jumped before she was pushed.
I sympathise with her to the extent that it's obvious why she was so against the party leader, but that wouldn't have been such an issue if she hadn't been parachuted into a seat she wasn't particularly suited for in the first place.
So if an anti-Semite had been parachuted in to that seat it would have been fine?
Hmm, what do we reckon? Is this just a bit of grumbling that will blow over (but ensure that Liz wins the vote for the new leader) or is this a sign of trouble ahead for Tory MPs with their grassroots?
One imagines that if Johnson goes to the Conservative Party conference that he might cause a bit of a splash. Does he want to?
I was thinking about Cicero's reported rumours in Finland.
1 - Recently the Finns are nervous about the Russians, hence the NATO moves 2 - The story is said to involve a high level Cabinet member 3 - The story is said to be extremely damaging
This morning you read a week-old story. Why would that be banned?
@Beibheirli_C is quite right though, Finlandgate is much most likely to put flesh on the bones of that story. It is even possible to speculate what the flesh might be, 🎻.
We've all heard the story now, anyone with an internet connection has heard it, why are they bothering to stay so shtoom?
It is *exciting* if you like fishing
My skills must be declining, I know nothing beyond what is in the open in the UK. Merely speculating that the Finland stuff adds to the story which it might do spectacularly: kompromat videos, or something.
There is of course the sand on the beach theory of aliens.
When you go to the beach and are sitting on the sand, say, two feet away from you and two feet down into the sand could be an ant colony. You would never see or know about it despite being close to it.
The aliens could be in the vicinity, cosmic-wise but they never bother to investigate or happen upon the infinitesimally tiny part that is our planet.
There's a lot of sci fi on a similarish theme - Roadside Picnic, William Gibson short whose name I forget, Gateway in reverse: if we do encounter aliens, it won't do us much good, any more than it would a swarm (?) of ants investigating the remains of a human picnic. might get a discarded apple core out of it.
The experience of the Aztec, the Incas, the tribes of Africa, the Natives of North America, the indigenes of Japan, the aborigines of Australia, the locals in Papua New Guinea, even the Neanderthals, all suggest that when a relatively inferior civilisation (in terms of tech, etc) meets an obviously superior civilisation, the result is a catastrophe for the more primitive lifeform
I see no reason why we would be different; I was amazed last night by the number of PB-ers who think humans would just shrug and continue as normal if it was proved we are being visited by super-powerful aliens
Yes but we have nuclear weapons unlike the aborigines, Indians Astecs etc.
Aliens would have to be super powerful to neutralise a nuclear weapon if our weapon of last resort if they attacked us or tried to colonise us
We will be saved by Russia's hypersonic missiles? Huzzah for President Putin! You don't think we might be following the alien trolls a thread too far?
There is of course the sand on the beach theory of aliens.
When you go to the beach and are sitting on the sand, say, two feet away from you and two feet down into the sand could be an ant colony. You would never see or know about it despite being close to it.
The aliens could be in the vicinity, cosmic-wise but they never bother to investigate or happen upon the infinitesimally tiny part that is our planet.
There's a lot of sci fi on a similarish theme - Roadside Picnic, William Gibson short whose name I forget, Gateway in reverse: if we do encounter aliens, it won't do us much good, any more than it would a swarm (?) of ants investigating the remains of a human picnic. might get a discarded apple core out of it.
The experience of the Aztec, the Incas, the tribes of Africa, the Natives of North America, the indigenes of Japan, the aborigines of Australia, the locals in Papua New Guinea, even the Neanderthals, all suggest that when a relatively inferior civilisation (in terms of tech, etc) meets an obviously superior civilisation, the result is a catastrophe for the more primitive lifeform
I see no reason why we would be different; I was amazed last night by the number of PB-ers who think humans would just shrug and continue as normal if it was proved we are being visited by super-powerful aliens
Is the human race a catastrophe for the gnat population?
You are, understandably, suffering from a solipsistic view of the world.
Just looked at the latest #Lebedev output on twitter.
A suggestion that the obliqueness required has less to do with the Dramatis personae section of this play than might be supposed.
As to Finland, the main open controversy when Cicero posted related to the state bailout of a gas supplier operating in the German market. No links jumped out at me from that one, but it was implied to be more underground.
So, the port authorities are blaming the French for the 'critical incident' at Dover.
I assume that the French are also to blame for all the queues at UK airports and the large number of cancelled flights in recent times. Or is it just possible that our tendency to scapegoat the French is a bit of a red herring, when it's apparent that there are widespread staffing problems, including in the UK, in the travel industry?
In this particular case 6 of the 12 booths checking passports etc are manned by the French at the present time according to the BBC. That seems to be the cause of the backlog. When going into one of the busiest weekends of the entire year that seems sub-optimal.
At which point the next question the BBC should be asking is
on a typical Friday how many booths are normally in use? as that will highlight where the issue is...
But the BBC don't seem to think to ask that sort of obvious question so you get a story without context or useful content...
It's not a typical Friday, though, is it? Surely having 12 booths means that you expect to use 12 booths at the busiest times, like today.
Why? Before the Single Market our Friench customs friends were notorious at ensuring they were as slow as they could be. We know how they operate, so this should not be a surprise.
Nor is it that unusual - a stack of empty booths is the experience that most people coming into Britain get when landing at Heathrow - or into America landing at JFK for that matter.
So it was typical French even before
So presumably nothing to do with our leaving the EU.
The appropriate strategy is to facilitate the development alternatives so the French get the consequences of their own actions.
What, build a France 2.0 in the North Sea so nobody goes to the current version? wtf is facilitating development alternatives?
My typo - sorry. Development of alternatives.
eg as I pointed out Zeebrugge ferries, which P&O closed.
That would require Belgium officials to work in Dover - one reason why Zeebrugge ferries are no more is because Belguims don't want to do that.
Interesting - I have not heard that reason for closure before - is there a cite?
Everything I have seen has been 'lack of demand during the pandemic'.
There is of course the sand on the beach theory of aliens.
When you go to the beach and are sitting on the sand, say, two feet away from you and two feet down into the sand could be an ant colony. You would never see or know about it despite being close to it.
The aliens could be in the vicinity, cosmic-wise but they never bother to investigate or happen upon the infinitesimally tiny part that is our planet.
There's a lot of sci fi on a similarish theme - Roadside Picnic, William Gibson short whose name I forget, Gateway in reverse: if we do encounter aliens, it won't do us much good, any more than it would a swarm (?) of ants investigating the remains of a human picnic. might get a discarded apple core out of it.
The experience of the Aztec, the Incas, the tribes of Africa, the Natives of North America, the indigenes of Japan, the aborigines of Australia, the locals in Papua New Guinea, even the Neanderthals, all suggest that when a relatively inferior civilisation (in terms of tech, etc) meets an obviously superior civilisation, the result is a catastrophe for the more primitive lifeform
I see no reason why we would be different; I was amazed last night by the number of PB-ers who think humans would just shrug and continue as normal if it was proved we are being visited by super-powerful aliens
All human on human interactions: narcissism of small differences. How much change did the kangaroos and funnel web spiders notice?
There is of course the sand on the beach theory of aliens.
When you go to the beach and are sitting on the sand, say, two feet away from you and two feet down into the sand could be an ant colony. You would never see or know about it despite being close to it.
The aliens could be in the vicinity, cosmic-wise but they never bother to investigate or happen upon the infinitesimally tiny part that is our planet.
There's a lot of sci fi on a similarish theme - Roadside Picnic, William Gibson short whose name I forget, Gateway in reverse: if we do encounter aliens, it won't do us much good, any more than it would a swarm (?) of ants investigating the remains of a human picnic. might get a discarded apple core out of it.
The experience of the Aztec, the Incas, the tribes of Africa, the Natives of North America, the indigenes of Japan, the aborigines of Australia, the locals in Papua New Guinea, even the Neanderthals, all suggest that when a relatively inferior civilisation (in terms of tech, etc) meets an obviously superior civilisation, the result is a catastrophe for the more primitive lifeform
I see no reason why we would be different; I was amazed last night by the number of PB-ers who think humans would just shrug and continue as normal if it was proved we are being visited by super-powerful aliens
Is the human race a catastrophe for the gnat population?
lol. Are you arguing we are NOT a catastrophe for thousands of animal and plant species across the world?
Space is quite big. It would be a miracle if we could colonise Proxima Centauri, about the nearest one. Four light years away. 0.1c was suggested, so, with a following wind, a round trip in 40 years, half a life time.
Earth suits us very well, because we evolved here. Nowhere else will have that advantage. With a massive number of stars, the Drake number mght look encouraging. But some of them are 13 billion light years away, and we won't be traveeling anwhere near light speed. Well have evolved on a travelling space ship, and we might revert to bacteria, Who knows. Although if we travel at light speed (impossible), it wouldn't ake long in our F.O,R.
If space is expanding too some of the planets will be disappearing over the horizon, If we had an horizon to disappear over.
People can suggest 0.1C till they are blue in the face. Sleight of hand, surely 0.1 of something is not very much? In fact, 10% of a stupendous, unimaginably large thing is stupendously fucking large. Also, slowing down costs as much as speeding up. you can go 4 ly in 40 years at 0.1C but only if you don't mind shooting straight past your endpoint at 0.1C, or colliding with it.
At acceleration/deceleration of 1g it takes just under a year to accelerate to, or decelerate from, 0.1C. So, if you have enough propellant, and you can chuck it out the right end of your spaceship fast enough, there's nothing particularly difficult about 0.1C. We currently can't do the fast enough, but if we avoid nuclear war for another century we will likely be closer to it.
Carrying propellant for prolonged 1g acceleration - even at crazy ISP that is simply not going to happen... Maybe if you invented conversion of matter to energy at 99% efficiency....
There is Starshot, if you don't need to send anything bigger han a postage stamp
The thing is, even if the stamp got to Alpha centauri, we wouldn't know for 4.7 years right? Any 'we've arrived' communication travelling at the speed of light from there would take 4.7 years to get here...?
And it would take us a further 4.7 years to instruct it what to do next?
There is of course the sand on the beach theory of aliens.
When you go to the beach and are sitting on the sand, say, two feet away from you and two feet down into the sand could be an ant colony. You would never see or know about it despite being close to it.
The aliens could be in the vicinity, cosmic-wise but they never bother to investigate or happen upon the infinitesimally tiny part that is our planet.
There's a lot of sci fi on a similarish theme - Roadside Picnic, William Gibson short whose name I forget, Gateway in reverse: if we do encounter aliens, it won't do us much good, any more than it would a swarm (?) of ants investigating the remains of a human picnic. might get a discarded apple core out of it.
The experience of the Aztec, the Incas, the tribes of Africa, the Natives of North America, the indigenes of Japan, the aborigines of Australia, the locals in Papua New Guinea, even the Neanderthals, all suggest that when a relatively inferior civilisation (in terms of tech, etc) meets an obviously superior civilisation, the result is a catastrophe for the more primitive lifeform
I see no reason why we would be different; I was amazed last night by the number of PB-ers who think humans would just shrug and continue as normal if it was proved we are being visited by super-powerful aliens
Yes but we have nuclear weapons unlike the aborigines, Indians Astecs etc.
Aliens would have to be super powerful to neutralise a nuclear weapon if our weapon of last resort if they attacked us or tried to colonise us
See the testimony of Robert Salas for some perspective on UAPs/UFOs and nukes. The Malmstrom incident, Rendlesham in the UK and others.
Hmm, what do we reckon? Is this just a bit of grumbling that will blow over (but ensure that Liz wins the vote for the new leader) or is this a sign of trouble ahead for Tory MPs with their grassroots?
One imagines that if Johnson goes to the Conservative Party conference that he might cause a bit of a splash. Does he want to?
I was thinking about Cicero's reported rumours in Finland.
1 - Recently the Finns are nervous about the Russians, hence the NATO moves 2 - The story is said to involve a high level Cabinet member 3 - The story is said to be extremely damaging
This morning you read a week-old story. Why would that be banned?
@Beibheirli_C is quite right though, Finlandgate is much most likely to put flesh on the bones of that story. It is even possible to speculate what the flesh might be, 🎻.
We've all heard the story now, anyone with an internet connection has heard it, why are they bothering to stay so shtoom?
It is *exciting* if you like fishing
My skills must be declining, I know nothing beyond what is in the open in the UK. Merely speculating that the Finland stuff adds to the story which it might do spectacularly: kompromat videos, or something.
I don't want to get UNJUSTIFIABLY banned again, and Mike Smithson won't even let Junior talk about it, so mum's the word for me
There is of course the sand on the beach theory of aliens.
When you go to the beach and are sitting on the sand, say, two feet away from you and two feet down into the sand could be an ant colony. You would never see or know about it despite being close to it.
The aliens could be in the vicinity, cosmic-wise but they never bother to investigate or happen upon the infinitesimally tiny part that is our planet.
There's a lot of sci fi on a similarish theme - Roadside Picnic, William Gibson short whose name I forget, Gateway in reverse: if we do encounter aliens, it won't do us much good, any more than it would a swarm (?) of ants investigating the remains of a human picnic. might get a discarded apple core out of it.
The experience of the Aztec, the Incas, the tribes of Africa, the Natives of North America, the indigenes of Japan, the aborigines of Australia, the locals in Papua New Guinea, even the Neanderthals, all suggest that when a relatively inferior civilisation (in terms of tech, etc) meets an obviously superior civilisation, the result is a catastrophe for the more primitive lifeform
I see no reason why we would be different; I was amazed last night by the number of PB-ers who think humans would just shrug and continue as normal if it was proved we are being visited by super-powerful aliens
If they are that much smarter than us presumably resistance would indeed be useless, in which case shrugging and carrying as normal would be able all we could do.
@BartholomewRoberts just curious, if you voted Labour in 2019 were you endorsing anti-Semitism or not
Not. I've said not to you many times.
I think it would be an offensive slur to suggest 10 million Britons were endorsing anti-Semitism.
Fair enough but yours is definitely a minority POV.
I have never been against taking a minority or unique POV. My POV is my own, not anybody else's.
But I don't think the notion that 10 million people weren't all endorsing anti-semitism is unique or that minority either. Corbyn and his ilk were, but not all Labour voters. I'll quote a part of a reply I wrote to you yesterday.
There were a vast number of Labour MPs who objected to Corbyn, objected to anti Semitism and made that vocally clear and resigned to the back benches. People like Stella Creasy were prepared to not just vote Labour but hold the Labour whip and were still willing to call out anti Semitism even while voting Labour. I may not agree with her politics much, but I really respect her and MPs like her let alone voters like her.
Parties are big tents, just because Corbyn was an anti-Semite doesn't mean every Labour voter was. Many Labour voters were anti-Corbyn, many Labour MPs were.
Tbf to Conservative supporters pointing out the error of Corbyn, he did kick out most of the MPs he disagreed with, particularly those of the Jewish faith like Luciana Berger.
Corbyn did not kick out MPs he disagreed with, not even Luciana Berger who left and founded TIG or one of the other names they churned through.
Constructive dismissal.
Berger was in no way constructively dismissed. She was actively briefing against her party leader, who was massively popular with her local constituency party. They were following the proper process to have her deselected, as was their right, and she jumped before she was pushed.
I sympathise with her to the extent that it's obvious why she was so against the party leader, but that wouldn't have been such an issue if she hadn't been parachuted into a seat she wasn't particularly suited for in the first place.
So if an anti-Semite had been parachuted in to that seat it would have been fine?
No, they just might not have had that specific issue with the local party.
Obviously none of this is "fine". The point is that Berger had plenty of opportunities to be a victim, and refused them - she put her career ahead of doing the right thing, and ultimately lost both her job, and the right to play the victim.
Comments
But less simple foods? Much much harder. Even if machines exist that can dispense the different elements in the right order that usually isn't the visual experience that people want. So production is a series on manual processes to hand add ingredients. And the bottle neck isn't just that each extra topping adds a body and thus a cost, but can you physically get the people and their supply of ingredients around the line?
Major nerd
Blair jock
Brown nerd (amusingly NOT a jock!)
Cameron jock
May nerd
Johnson jock
Truss/Sunak both nerds
I think it’s silly, but if I’m wrong and there’s something in it.. surely Starmer can’t come next. He ain’t no jock
It was Brexit that caused Operation Stack to be created in 1988 I suppose?
https://www.urbo.com/content/nerds-jocks-and-emos-oh-my-these-are-the-types-of-high-school-kids/
He ought to have resigned to the backbenches as decent Labour MPs like Creasy etc did, but that wouldn't further his career.
I understand there are some reasons why some people 'have' to buy them, but most people could be so much better fed by using ingredients and cooking equipment rather than microwave and unknown contents of ready meals.
The next generation of robotics is fascinating - and can cope with handling soft/delicate materials in all kind of fascinating ways.
What would you call her?
I agree with Blanche's list in full.
"there are queues! Why are there queues?" - we knew there would be queues. Its just that some people insisted that claims of queues was just project fear.
https://order-order.com/2022/07/22/watch-christian-wakefords-woke-u-turn/
How do you solve a problem like Operation Stack - 9 July 2015.
Dealing with French arseholes is not due to Brexit.
It's not like it's a production line making identical or almost identical chocolate biscuits for various branded and own brand companies.
1 - Recently the Finns are nervous about the Russians, hence the NATO moves
2 - The story is said to involve a high level Cabinet member
3 - The story is said to be extremely damaging
Then, this morning, I read this....
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jul/16/carole-cadwalladr-boris-johnson-lebedevs-prime-ministers-defining-scandal
So presumably nothing to do with our leaving the EU.
The appropriate strategy is to facilitate the development alternatives so the French get the consequences of their own actions.
Main difference is us sci fi geeks and predisposed towards violent outbursts against fans of other shows or genres
I hate comparisons between Corbyn and Boris as they're nothing alike, but to equate them then Creasy etc were like Aaron Bell etc, while Starmer was like Truss - loyal until the end. It was only once Starmer was safely entrenched as Labour leader that he took any action against Corbyn.
Looks like that will happen.
The UK economy is about to be smashed after Truss becomes PM.
1. Get an email from Royal Mail saying my lost package is being delivered today
2. Doorbell rings. David the postie with my package
3. Neighbour waves me over. Big hole dug in my lawn next to his driveway. With bumblebees swarming around in the bottom of it
Keir Starmer asked me if he should resign over issues under Corbyn - Wes Streeting
“If we don’t get the gas turbine, then we won’t get any more gas, and then we won’t be able to provide any support for Ukraine at all, because then we’ll be busy with popular uprisings.” She immediately backtracked but damage was done.
https://twitter.com/vonderburchard/status/1550398698701656064
Where's the evidence? How do you (how does anyone?) know what she will do if she becomes PM?
There is of course the sand on the beach theory of aliens.
When you go to the beach and are sitting on the sand, say, two feet away from you and two feet down into the sand could be an ant colony. You would never see or know about it despite being close to it.
The aliens could be in the vicinity, cosmic-wise but they never bother to investigate or happen upon the infinitesimally tiny part that is our planet.
I've always struggled to understand that. It bears no resemblance to the actual Germans I have met.
As the FT guy has said the economic institutions don't agree it will work and so:
"So Trussonomics is radical. It would involve changing the economic institutions for the experiment to be tried"
Lib Dems yesterday within 10 votes of taking a very safe Tory ward in Staffordshire that has been uncontested for years and years and voted heavy Leave!
Voting Labour wasn't immoral. Being a backbench critic of Corbyn wasn't. Standing in Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet was at the very least turning a blind eye to anti-Semitism.
That is the difference. There is a world of difference between an ordinary voter, a backbench critic, and a frontbencher.
The main one wrt French imports of electricity from everyone except afaics Italy is that the French nuclear power station fleet is on the cronk. Last week they relaxed some safety limits on some of them (max output temp of cooling water) on a number of nuclear sites as it was on the edge.
This morning they are importing approx 20% of their electricity from Germany, UK, Spain, Switzerland.
I think that the UK don't have the French Government willingness to be bastards. Perhaps unfortunately.
The last year or two also imo showed that they are pretty weak on following rhetoric with delivery in defence of the UK interest.
Brexit is no answer, it merely reframes the question; being in the EU was unacceptable to the majority of voters, and would be again if we rejoined; the long term solution of EFTA/EEA and then have a long national think was deemed impossible by both sides.
BTW, Scottish independence presents exactly similar problems,as we shall continue to find out.
eg as I pointed out Zeebrugge ferries, which P&O closed.
It is *exciting* if you like fishing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakthrough_Starshot
Lisa Nandy did the decent thing in refusing to serve in Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet and also served in Smith's leadership campaign run against Corbyn, she certainly could have expelled Corbyn too, but Starmer wanted to get Corbynites to vote him into being Leader so he didn't do the right thing until it was politically opportune, unlike Nandy.
I have respect for Nandy, even if I don't like her politics, and even if she is a Labour voter and MP, I still respect her.
I sympathise with her to the extent that it's obvious why she was so against the party leader, but that wouldn't have been such an issue if she hadn't been parachuted into a seat she wasn't particularly suited for in the first place.
I see no reason why we would be different; I was amazed last night by the number of PB-ers who think humans would just shrug and continue as normal if it was proved we are being visited by super-powerful aliens
But this header may be of interest in relation to the "blind eye / passive acquiescence" issue - https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/03/12/amber-warnings-what-might-be-the-signals-that-all-is-not-well-in-a-democracy/ - especially the paragraph in bold and subsequent ones.
Aliens would have to be super powerful to neutralise a nuclear weapon if our weapon of last resort if they attacked us or tried to colonise us
If Starmer had resigned before the 2019 election I'd have more respect for him, but he didn't. I don't think he's an anti-Semite but at the very least he put furthering his own career ahead of standing up against anti-Semitism.
You are, understandably, suffering from a solipsistic view of the world.
A suggestion that the obliqueness required has less to do with the Dramatis personae section of this play than might be supposed.
As to Finland, the main open controversy when Cicero posted related to the state bailout of a gas supplier operating in the German market. No links jumped out at me from that one, but it was implied to be more underground.
Everything I have seen has been 'lack of demand during the pandemic'.
That's one example - there are others, of course.
The megafauna of Australia say Hi
And it would take us a further 4.7 years to instruct it what to do next?
Mum
Mum is the word
Obviously none of this is "fine". The point is that Berger had plenty of opportunities to be a victim, and refused them - she put her career ahead of doing the right thing, and ultimately lost both her job, and the right to play the victim.