How long before the LAB lead is in single figures? – politicalbetting.com
Given the current state of UK politics, it comes as something of a shock to recall that a little over two years ago one of the leading betting markets was on which month LAB would get at least one pollster recording a lead.
That’s reminded me by some obscure method of A Very Peculiar Practice which was excellent. And by way of Barbara Flynn, The Beiderbecke Tapes, another good un.
Anything by Alan Plater is usually top notch. The Beiderbecke trilogy was pretty good.
A Very Peculiar Practice holds up very well today; it's got a wonderful surrealism that is a long way ahead of its time. (The nuns rummaging round in the trash bins being one particular favorite of mine.)
I remember the Beiderbecke trilogy as excellent, but haven't seen it in 30+ years: time to dig it out.
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
I suppose it solves the dilemma of how they’re going to find a barely adequate escort group for a second carrier. Sounds pretty bleak for the PoW; if they don’t have a functioning supply chain for the operational carrier, how long is the PoW going to be laid up?
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
At least we’ve not sent the Chinooks racing to rescue a load of stray dogs this time.
Given the RSF are loosely, supposedly, Wagner allies I do wonder if we won’t see a bit of NATO special military operation.
That’s reminded me by some obscure method of A Very Peculiar Practice which was excellent. And by way of Barbara Flynn, The Beiderbecke Tapes, another good un.
Anything by Alan Plater is usually top notch. The Beiderbecke trilogy was pretty good.
A Very Peculiar Practice holds up very well today; it's got a wonderful surrealism that is a long way ahead of its time. (The nuns rummaging round in the trash bins being one particular favorite of mine.)
I remember the Beiderbecke trilogy as excellent, but haven't seen it in 30+ years: time to dig it out.
"But ummmm... Why exactly does a fish need a bicycle?"
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
I think these policies ultimately need updating due to migration and global mobility. In the olden days it could be a handful of expats working for large companies and a few other hangers on, now you have thousands of dual citizens and tens of thousands more relatives, families who have some kind of possible claim for assistance. It is a tough situation that it is quite difficult to generalise about, but it is not going to be realistic to apply a general policy of evacuation.
That’s reminded me by some obscure method of A Very Peculiar Practice which was excellent. And by way of Barbara Flynn, The Beiderbecke Tapes, another good un.
Anything by Alan Plater is usually top notch. The Beiderbecke trilogy was pretty good.
A Very Peculiar Practice holds up very well today; it's got a wonderful surrealism that is a long way ahead of its time. (The nuns rummaging round in the trash bins being one particular favorite of mine.)
I remember the Beiderbecke trilogy as excellent, but haven't seen it in 30+ years: time to dig it out.
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
At least we’ve not sent the Chinooks racing to rescue a load of stray dogs this time.
Given the RSF are loosely, supposedly, Wagner allies I do wonder if we won’t see a bit of NATO special military operation.
Western liberal political hope rests upon two great foundations: One, that the world is gradually becoming a better place under its influence; Two, that the western liberal world can carry a big stick as well as keeping its powder dry.
The last few years have not been great for these two rather shaky foundations. By far the greatest change is the real issue of authoritarianism, Trump and Trumpism, and isolationism in the USA, but the list of states darkening rather than otherwise is growing fast. Is a tipping point coming?
That’s reminded me by some obscure method of A Very Peculiar Practice which was excellent. And by way of Barbara Flynn, The Beiderbecke Tapes, another good un.
Anything by Alan Plater is usually top notch. The Beiderbecke trilogy was pretty good.
A Very Peculiar Practice holds up very well today; it's got a wonderful surrealism that is a long way ahead of its time. (The nuns rummaging round in the trash bins being one particular favorite of mine.)
I remember the Beiderbecke trilogy as excellent, but haven't seen it in 30+ years: time to dig it out.
"But ummmm... Why exactly does a fish need a bicycle?"
To search for work, having listened to Sir Norman Turbot.
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
At least we’ve not sent the Chinooks racing to rescue a load of stray dogs this time.
Given the RSF are loosely, supposedly, Wagner allies I do wonder if we won’t see a bit of NATO special military operation.
I agree with Algarkirk on avoiding unrealistic expectations. Also one mistake I learned after supporting the Iraq invasion was that it's a mistake to try to identify good guys by identification of bad guys who they oppose - you end up in the mud with all of them. It's not obvious to me that supporting any of the rival factions currently fighting in Sudan is a good idea. Wagner and his paymasters will regret it too.
That’s reminded me by some obscure method of A Very Peculiar Practice which was excellent. And by way of Barbara Flynn, The Beiderbecke Tapes, another good un.
Anything by Alan Plater is usually top notch. The Beiderbecke trilogy was pretty good.
A Very Peculiar Practice holds up very well today; it's got a wonderful surrealism that is a long way ahead of its time. (The nuns rummaging round in the trash bins being one particular favorite of mine.)
I remember the Beiderbecke trilogy as excellent, but haven't seen it in 30+ years: time to dig it out.
If the real lead is fourteen or so, some single figure leads ought to creep in, just by Margin of Error. But while it would be symbolically important, there are a couple of caveats.
First is that, so far, polls are mostly picking up disgruntled ex-Conservatives returning from Don't Know to the blue column. They're the low hanging fruit for Sunak, but they're only enough to turn disaster into defeat. He might be able to move onto the next tranche, but that will be harder.
Second, one of the things that happened in Spring '97 was churn from Labour to Lib Dem. That looks like a narrowing of the polls, but depending on where it happens, it's got the potential to be really bad news for the Conservatives.
I suppose it solves the dilemma of how they’re going to find a barely adequate escort group for a second carrier. Sounds pretty bleak for the PoW; if they don’t have a functioning supply chain for the operational carrier, how long is the PoW going to be laid up?
Until "Autumn" is the official MoD line but there's no rush as they've nicked loads of bits off it and don't have a crew.
Bear in the mind the next tasking for the PoW is meant to be Flight Deck quals, the schedule of which is entirely in the gift of the US 2nd Fleet. We've already fucked them around and cancelled on them twice at the last minute. The first time was when somebody flooded the ship and blew up the IEP by not understanding how the fire suppression system worked and the second time was this propeller falling off business. They knew it was fucked from the dock trials but insisted on trying to limp it across the Atlantic due to the embarrassment of the first cancellation. This plan lasted as long as it took to get to with hailing distance of Egypt Point.
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
At least we’ve not sent the Chinooks racing to rescue a load of stray dogs this time.
Given the RSF are loosely, supposedly, Wagner allies I do wonder if we won’t see a bit of NATO special military operation.
Western liberal political hope rests upon two great foundations: One, that the world is gradually becoming a better place under its influence; Two, that the western liberal world can carry a big stick as well as keeping its powder dry.
The last few years have not been great for these two rather shaky foundations. By far the greatest change is the real issue of authoritarianism, Trump and Trumpism, and isolationism in the USA, but the list of states darkening rather than otherwise is growing fast. Is a tipping point coming?
The tension between global systems and Westphalian sovereignty is maybe the story of our times.
I suppose it solves the dilemma of how they’re going to find a barely adequate escort group for a second carrier. Sounds pretty bleak for the PoW; if they don’t have a functioning supply chain for the operational carrier, how long is the PoW going to be laid up?
Until "Autumn" is the official MoD line but there's no rush as they've nicked loads of bits off it and don't have a crew.
Bear in the mind the next tasking for the PoW is meant to be Flight Deck quals, the schedule of which is entirely in the gift of the US 2nd Fleet. We've already fucked them around and cancelled on them twice at the last minute. The first time was when somebody flooded the ship and blew up the IEP by not understanding how the fire suppression system worked and the second time was this propeller falling off business. They knew it was fucked from the dock trials but insisted on trying to limp it across the Atlantic due to the embarrassment of the first cancellation. This plan lasted as long as it took to get to with hailing distance of Egypt Point.
Someone's First Law of Engineering is "don't believe a schedule that's measured in seasons."
It was only a few days ago that labour officials were 'reacting with glee' to their (rather pathetic) personal attacks on Sunak; I think Sunak is looking a lot slicker and more professional and is so undoing a lot of the harm that arose through Boris Johnson's divisive political style and personal attacks.
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
I think these policies ultimately need updating due to migration and global mobility. In the olden days it could be a handful of expats working for large companies and a few other hangers on, now you have thousands of dual citizens and tens of thousands more relatives, families who have some kind of possible claim for assistance. It is a tough situation that it is quite difficult to generalise about, but it is not going to be realistic to apply a general policy of evacuation.
Time to end the idea of dual nationality, would you say?
On polling, R4 was doing one of its occasional Scotch politics for dummies by dummies this am, and interviewing Neil Gray MSP about Humza’s impending visit with Rishi. In one of the BBC’s ‘we don’t mention polls except when we do’ spasms, Justin Webb was blathering on about the SNP’s dip in the polls crippling the SNP’s ability to front up to HMG. I’m slightly mystified by the idea that a governing party on 37% is somehow materially weaker than a governing party polling regularly in the 20s.
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
At least we’ve not sent the Chinooks racing to rescue a load of stray dogs this time.
Given the RSF are loosely, supposedly, Wagner allies I do wonder if we won’t see a bit of NATO special military operation.
I agree with Algarkirk on avoiding unrealistic expectations. Also one mistake I learned after supporting the Iraq invasion was that it's a mistake to try to identify good guys by identification of bad guys who they oppose - you end up in the mud with all of them. It's not obvious to me that supporting any of the rival factions currently fighting in Sudan is a good idea. Wagner and his paymasters will regret it too.
Yes. IIRC everyone apart from Cameron had worked this out by the time Syria exploded. In a (sort of) post imperial age the sorting of other countries in good ways is very limited. They can be bought, they can be conquered and handed back, they can be made worse by random participation.
Abandoning traditional empire we have tried to destruction other approaches. Western liberals have yet to come to terms with the fact that other powers have neither abandoned empire, nor necessarily care about the world becoming better or more democratic or more liberal.
In the USA the Republican party is massively in the hands of people who do not trust liberalism, democracy or the rule of law. This is the beginnings of fascism; interestingly it seems to me that defensive forms of fascism are where people will turn when the liberal project is no longer convincing.
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
Can't we at least send them a very loud SMS warning message?
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
I think these policies ultimately need updating due to migration and global mobility. In the olden days it could be a handful of expats working for large companies and a few other hangers on, now you have thousands of dual citizens and tens of thousands more relatives, families who have some kind of possible claim for assistance. It is a tough situation that it is quite difficult to generalise about, but it is not going to be realistic to apply a general policy of evacuation.
Time to end the idea of dual nationality, would you say?
It will come on to the agenda in the near future, I think. One paradox that I found is that the government want to reduce immigration and asylum seekers but perversely make it quite easy to become a naturalised citizen, it is a few years of law abiding living, form filling, some language tests, and then a pretty hefty fee. I mentioned before that I once had a taxi driver who just boasted about having several different citizenships - In some cases, the concept of citizenship to something that is about private advantage.
I suppose it solves the dilemma of how they’re going to find a barely adequate escort group for a second carrier. Sounds pretty bleak for the PoW; if they don’t have a functioning supply chain for the operational carrier, how long is the PoW going to be laid up?
Until "Autumn" is the official MoD line but there's no rush as they've nicked loads of bits off it and don't have a crew.
Bear in the mind the next tasking for the PoW is meant to be Flight Deck quals, the schedule of which is entirely in the gift of the US 2nd Fleet. We've already fucked them around and cancelled on them twice at the last minute. The first time was when somebody flooded the ship and blew up the IEP by not understanding how the fire suppression system worked and the second time was this propeller falling off business. They knew it was fucked from the dock trials but insisted on trying to limp it across the Atlantic due to the embarrassment of the first cancellation. This plan lasted as long as it took to get to with hailing distance of Egypt Point.
Quite a lot of parts on 1990s Ducatis are interchangeable. I think my record for one of my bikes sitting inactive because I ‘temporarily borrowed’ a few parts for another is 8 years.
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
I think these policies ultimately need updating due to migration and global mobility. In the olden days it could be a handful of expats working for large companies and a few other hangers on, now you have thousands of dual citizens and tens of thousands more relatives, families who have some kind of possible claim for assistance. It is a tough situation that it is quite difficult to generalise about, but it is not going to be realistic to apply a general policy of evacuation.
Time to end the idea of dual nationality, would you say?
No, just dual nationals need to be very clear (it’s explained often enough) that the UKG cannot protect them in the country of their dual nationality. If you want that you need to give up that nationality - but many don’t and seem to want only the advantages that brings, not the disadvantages.
I suppose it solves the dilemma of how they’re going to find a barely adequate escort group for a second carrier. Sounds pretty bleak for the PoW; if they don’t have a functioning supply chain for the operational carrier, how long is the PoW going to be laid up?
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
I think these policies ultimately need updating due to migration and global mobility. In the olden days it could be a handful of expats working for large companies and a few other hangers on, now you have thousands of dual citizens and tens of thousands more relatives, families who have some kind of possible claim for assistance. It is a tough situation that it is quite difficult to generalise about, but it is not going to be realistic to apply a general policy of evacuation.
First rule of working abroad, make sure you have an exit plan if things start to go teats-up.
Second rule of working abroad, if you’re thinking about discussing when it might be time to leave, then you’re already too late. Many others will be in the same situation.
Diplomats and government workers might be able to get rescued by the Hereford Boat Club, but the rest of us won’t be so lucky.
I suppose it solves the dilemma of how they’re going to find a barely adequate escort group for a second carrier. Sounds pretty bleak for the PoW; if they don’t have a functioning supply chain for the operational carrier, how long is the PoW going to be laid up?
Until we sell it to India ?
Time to convert it into a giant taxi for British nationals in international hell holes surely?
If we are including adaptations, then what about The Barchester Chronicles? Adapted from Trollope by Alan Plater.
For those who can read Trollope requires no adapting. One of life's supreme enjoyments, with the longest and best saved to the end.
I remember John Major once saying his fave book was A Small House at Allington'. Suddenly his rating soared. Only a decent man could say that. Let me guess: Putin, Xi and Trump don't read Trollope.
I suppose it solves the dilemma of how they’re going to find a barely adequate escort group for a second carrier. Sounds pretty bleak for the PoW; if they don’t have a functioning supply chain for the operational carrier, how long is the PoW going to be laid up?
Until "Autumn" is the official MoD line but there's no rush as they've nicked loads of bits off it and don't have a crew.
Bear in the mind the next tasking for the PoW is meant to be Flight Deck quals, the schedule of which is entirely in the gift of the US 2nd Fleet. We've already fucked them around and cancelled on them twice at the last minute. The first time was when somebody flooded the ship and blew up the IEP by not understanding how the fire suppression system worked and the second time was this propeller falling off business. They knew it was fucked from the dock trials but insisted on trying to limp it across the Atlantic due to the embarrassment of the first cancellation. This plan lasted as long as it took to get to with hailing distance of Egypt Point.
Someone's First Law of Engineering is "don't believe a schedule that's measured in seasons."
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
I think these policies ultimately need updating due to migration and global mobility. In the olden days it could be a handful of expats working for large companies and a few other hangers on, now you have thousands of dual citizens and tens of thousands more relatives, families who have some kind of possible claim for assistance. It is a tough situation that it is quite difficult to generalise about, but it is not going to be realistic to apply a general policy of evacuation.
Time to end the idea of dual nationality, would you say?
No, just dual nationals need to be very clear (it’s explained often enough) that the UKG cannot protect them in the country of their dual nationality. If you want that you need to give up that nationality - but many don’t and seem to want only the advantages that brings, not the disadvantages.
Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe was a classic example of that. Without in any way being unsympathetic to her plight I was never clear what exactly it had to do with us.
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
At least we’ve not sent the Chinooks racing to rescue a load of stray dogs this time.
Given the RSF are loosely, supposedly, Wagner allies I do wonder if we won’t see a bit of NATO special military operation.
I agree with Algarkirk on avoiding unrealistic expectations. Also one mistake I learned after supporting the Iraq invasion was that it's a mistake to try to identify good guys by identification of bad guys who they oppose - you end up in the mud with all of them. It's not obvious to me that supporting any of the rival factions currently fighting in Sudan is a good idea. Wagner and his paymasters will regret it too.
Yes. IIRC everyone apart from Cameron had worked this out by the time Syria exploded. In a (sort of) post imperial age the sorting of other countries in good ways is very limited. They can be bought, they can be conquered and handed back, they can be made worse by random participation.
Abandoning traditional empire we have tried to destruction other approaches. Western liberals have yet to come to terms with the fact that other powers have neither abandoned empire, nor necessarily care about the world becoming better or more democratic or more liberal.
In the USA the Republican party is massively in the hands of people who do not trust liberalism, democracy or the rule of law. This is the beginnings of fascism; interestingly it seems to me that defensive forms of fascism are where people will turn when the liberal project is no longer convincing.
That is not really true, the likes of Romney and Pence are even harder against Putin than Biden is. Yes there is a significant Trump factor within the Republican Party but about a quarter of the Democrats are anti supporting Ukraine and over here most of the Corbynites are pro Putin or at least not pro Zelensky.
Though of course if Trump and Le Pen won the next US and French Presidential elections as polls suggest is not impossible that would massively shift the western world back away from long dominant liberalism towards authoritarianism
I suppose it solves the dilemma of how they’re going to find a barely adequate escort group for a second carrier. Sounds pretty bleak for the PoW; if they don’t have a functioning supply chain for the operational carrier, how long is the PoW going to be laid up?
Until we sell it to India ?
Time to convert it into a giant taxi for British nationals in international hell holes surely?
Sail it into the middle of Sudan ? Impressive even by MOD/FO standards.
Stephen Flynn reveals he was not told about auditors quitting until Feb 10, despite Ian Blackford finding out late last year and insisting he gave a full briefing on finances to Flynn when he took over.
Also refuses to commit to auditors being in place in time for end of May deadline to submit audited accounts to Westminster authorities.
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
I think these policies ultimately need updating due to migration and global mobility. In the olden days it could be a handful of expats working for large companies and a few other hangers on, now you have thousands of dual citizens and tens of thousands more relatives, families who have some kind of possible claim for assistance. It is a tough situation that it is quite difficult to generalise about, but it is not going to be realistic to apply a general policy of evacuation.
Time to end the idea of dual nationality, would you say?
It will come on to the agenda in the near future, I think. One paradox that I found is that the government want to reduce immigration and asylum seekers but perversely make it quite easy to become a naturalised citizen, it is a few years of law abiding living, form filling, some language tests, and then a pretty hefty fee. I mentioned before that I once had a taxi driver who just boasted about having several different citizenships - In some cases, the concept of citizenship to something that is about private advantage.
When you have a PM who held a US Green Card, meaning that he planned to become a US citizen, and whose wife is a non-dom, meaning that she has no long-term plan to stay in the UK, you can hardly blame a cab driver for similarly seeking some advantage from the system. Or do those kinds of criticisms only apply to the little people?
I suppose it solves the dilemma of how they’re going to find a barely adequate escort group for a second carrier. Sounds pretty bleak for the PoW; if they don’t have a functioning supply chain for the operational carrier, how long is the PoW going to be laid up?
Until "Autumn" is the official MoD line but there's no rush as they've nicked loads of bits off it and don't have a crew.
Bear in the mind the next tasking for the PoW is meant to be Flight Deck quals, the schedule of which is entirely in the gift of the US 2nd Fleet. We've already fucked them around and cancelled on them twice at the last minute. The first time was when somebody flooded the ship and blew up the IEP by not understanding how the fire suppression system worked and the second time was this propeller falling off business. They knew it was fucked from the dock trials but insisted on trying to limp it across the Atlantic due to the embarrassment of the first cancellation. This plan lasted as long as it took to get to with hailing distance of Egypt Point.
Someone's First Law of Engineering is "don't believe a schedule that's measured in seasons."
I know I keep banging on about this, but Sunak really needs to set out a vision for where he wants to take the country, and make people (well at least 40-45% of them) believe that tomorrow will be better than today. At the moment I've no idea where he wants to take us and his actions so far have been contradictory - for instance, he describes himself as a low tax Tory but has raised taxes (unnecessarily I think) to the highest peacetime level in decades, if not ever.
However, on topic, running the country with moderate seriousness and competence may well be enough to get the Labour lead down to single digits, as Starmer hasn't set out such a vision either, and, as observed downthread, there are probably enough people who lean Tory to get them to 30-35% if they can avoid screwups. But it is much more difficult to see them back in the lead without knowing where they want to take the country, after 13 years of office (if not of power).
I suppose it solves the dilemma of how they’re going to find a barely adequate escort group for a second carrier. Sounds pretty bleak for the PoW; if they don’t have a functioning supply chain for the operational carrier, how long is the PoW going to be laid up?
Until "Autumn" is the official MoD line but there's no rush as they've nicked loads of bits off it and don't have a crew.
Bear in the mind the next tasking for the PoW is meant to be Flight Deck quals, the schedule of which is entirely in the gift of the US 2nd Fleet. We've already fucked them around and cancelled on them twice at the last minute. The first time was when somebody flooded the ship and blew up the IEP by not understanding how the fire suppression system worked and the second time was this propeller falling off business. They knew it was fucked from the dock trials but insisted on trying to limp it across the Atlantic due to the embarrassment of the first cancellation. This plan lasted as long as it took to get to with hailing distance of Egypt Point.
Someone's First Law of Engineering is "don't believe a schedule that's measured in seasons."
I suppose it solves the dilemma of how they’re going to find a barely adequate escort group for a second carrier. Sounds pretty bleak for the PoW; if they don’t have a functioning supply chain for the operational carrier, how long is the PoW going to be laid up?
Until we sell it to India ?
Time to convert it into a giant taxi for British nationals in international hell holes surely?
Sail it into the middle of Sudan ? Impressive even by MOD/FO standards.
Khartoum is only a couple of hundred miles from the Red Sea by chopper. I spent one of the first 2 years of my life in Port Sudan as it happens. My memories of it are somewhat vague but that makes me a 5* Sudani Expert in PB World.
I suppose it solves the dilemma of how they’re going to find a barely adequate escort group for a second carrier. Sounds pretty bleak for the PoW; if they don’t have a functioning supply chain for the operational carrier, how long is the PoW going to be laid up?
Until we sell it to India ?
I think that option has lapsed as the Indian Navy is now committed to the Vishal project with EMALS/CATOBAR (and probably Rafale M).
South Korea would be an option with maybe T-50s, Hyundai Ioniqs and other assorted hardware going the other way.
I suppose it solves the dilemma of how they’re going to find a barely adequate escort group for a second carrier. Sounds pretty bleak for the PoW; if they don’t have a functioning supply chain for the operational carrier, how long is the PoW going to be laid up?
Until we sell it to India ?
I think that option has lapsed as the Indian Navy is now committed to the Vishal project with EMALS/CATOBAR (and probably Rafale M).
South Korea would be an option with maybe T-50s, Hyundai Ioniqs and other assorted hardware going the other way.
I think they've shelved their carrier plans, having more sense than us. And they could probably build one cheaper; certainly more seaworthy.
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
I think these policies ultimately need updating due to migration and global mobility. In the olden days it could be a handful of expats working for large companies and a few other hangers on, now you have thousands of dual citizens and tens of thousands more relatives, families who have some kind of possible claim for assistance. It is a tough situation that it is quite difficult to generalise about, but it is not going to be realistic to apply a general policy of evacuation.
Time to end the idea of dual nationality, would you say?
It will come on to the agenda in the near future, I think. One paradox that I found is that the government want to reduce immigration and asylum seekers but perversely make it quite easy to become a naturalised citizen, it is a few years of law abiding living, form filling, some language tests, and then a pretty hefty fee. I mentioned before that I once had a taxi driver who just boasted about having several different citizenships - In some cases, the concept of citizenship to something that is about private advantage.
When you have a PM who held a US Green Card, meaning that he planned to become a US citizen, and whose wife is a non-dom, meaning that she has no long-term plan to stay in the UK, you can hardly blame a cab driver for similarly seeking some advantage from the system. Or do those kinds of criticisms only apply to the little people?
Never mind green cards, Rishi's predecessor but one actually held dual British/American citizenship until 2016.
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
I think these policies ultimately need updating due to migration and global mobility. In the olden days it could be a handful of expats working for large companies and a few other hangers on, now you have thousands of dual citizens and tens of thousands more relatives, families who have some kind of possible claim for assistance. It is a tough situation that it is quite difficult to generalise about, but it is not going to be realistic to apply a general policy of evacuation.
Time to end the idea of dual nationality, would you say?
It will come on to the agenda in the near future, I think. One paradox that I found is that the government want to reduce immigration and asylum seekers but perversely make it quite easy to become a naturalised citizen, it is a few years of law abiding living, form filling, some language tests, and then a pretty hefty fee. I mentioned before that I once had a taxi driver who just boasted about having several different citizenships - In some cases, the concept of citizenship to something that is about private advantage.
When you have a PM who held a US Green Card, meaning that he planned to become a US citizen, and whose wife is a non-dom, meaning that she has no long-term plan to stay in the UK, you can hardly blame a cab driver for similarly seeking some advantage from the system. Or do those kinds of criticisms only apply to the little people?
I am old enough to remember the boasting and hype from certain "patriotic" (well more accurately anti-immigration) PBers when they found out they could live abroad and pay less tax.....
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
I think these policies ultimately need updating due to migration and global mobility. In the olden days it could be a handful of expats working for large companies and a few other hangers on, now you have thousands of dual citizens and tens of thousands more relatives, families who have some kind of possible claim for assistance. It is a tough situation that it is quite difficult to generalise about, but it is not going to be realistic to apply a general policy of evacuation.
Time to end the idea of dual nationality, would you say?
That would be absurd overkill - people have a right to hold different nationalities if they meet their requirements, and should be able to do so. To end that just because a few people occasionally find themselves in danger is ridiculous. But, as others have observed, we also need to be clearer that if people perch themselves in dangerous shitholes they do so at their own risk, and, while the government will do what it can, it can't guarantee their safety if things go wrong.
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
I think these policies ultimately need updating due to migration and global mobility. In the olden days it could be a handful of expats working for large companies and a few other hangers on, now you have thousands of dual citizens and tens of thousands more relatives, families who have some kind of possible claim for assistance. It is a tough situation that it is quite difficult to generalise about, but it is not going to be realistic to apply a general policy of evacuation.
Time to end the idea of dual nationality, would you say?
It will come on to the agenda in the near future, I think. One paradox that I found is that the government want to reduce immigration and asylum seekers but perversely make it quite easy to become a naturalised citizen, it is a few years of law abiding living, form filling, some language tests, and then a pretty hefty fee. I mentioned before that I once had a taxi driver who just boasted about having several different citizenships - In some cases, the concept of citizenship to something that is about private advantage.
When you have a PM who held a US Green Card, meaning that he planned to become a US citizen, and whose wife is a non-dom, meaning that she has no long-term plan to stay in the UK, you can hardly blame a cab driver for similarly seeking some advantage from the system. Or do those kinds of criticisms only apply to the little people?
Clearly people will try and gain some advantage from whatever system is in place, but this means that you have to make policy accordingly. Something like citizenship should necessitate a strong degree of commitment to it. Talking to the taxi driver I was really unimpressed in this respect, but it was a brief encounter and perhaps I am judging him harshly. Obviously though the same criticism could be applied to the very wealthy, for instance those that promote 'passport collecting' as a way to a avoid tax.
Sunak and his wife have spent a decade in public service, when they could have done far more profitable things, so his commitment to the UK can hardly be doubted.
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
I think these policies ultimately need updating due to migration and global mobility. In the olden days it could be a handful of expats working for large companies and a few other hangers on, now you have thousands of dual citizens and tens of thousands more relatives, families who have some kind of possible claim for assistance. It is a tough situation that it is quite difficult to generalise about, but it is not going to be realistic to apply a general policy of evacuation.
Time to end the idea of dual nationality, would you say?
It will come on to the agenda in the near future, I think. One paradox that I found is that the government want to reduce immigration and asylum seekers but perversely make it quite easy to become a naturalised citizen, it is a few years of law abiding living, form filling, some language tests, and then a pretty hefty fee. I mentioned before that I once had a taxi driver who just boasted about having several different citizenships - In some cases, the concept of citizenship to something that is about private advantage.
When you have a PM who held a US Green Card, meaning that he planned to become a US citizen, and whose wife is a non-dom, meaning that she has no long-term plan to stay in the UK, you can hardly blame a cab driver for similarly seeking some advantage from the system. Or do those kinds of criticisms only apply to the little people?
Never mind green cards, Rishi's predecessor but one actually held dual British/American citizenship until 2016.
That's right, and only gave it up when the IRS wanted a piece of him!
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
I think these policies ultimately need updating due to migration and global mobility. In the olden days it could be a handful of expats working for large companies and a few other hangers on, now you have thousands of dual citizens and tens of thousands more relatives, families who have some kind of possible claim for assistance. It is a tough situation that it is quite difficult to generalise about, but it is not going to be realistic to apply a general policy of evacuation.
Time to end the idea of dual nationality, would you say?
It will come on to the agenda in the near future, I think. One paradox that I found is that the government want to reduce immigration and asylum seekers but perversely make it quite easy to become a naturalised citizen, it is a few years of law abiding living, form filling, some language tests, and then a pretty hefty fee. I mentioned before that I once had a taxi driver who just boasted about having several different citizenships - In some cases, the concept of citizenship to something that is about private advantage.
When you have a PM who held a US Green Card, meaning that he planned to become a US citizen, and whose wife is a non-dom, meaning that she has no long-term plan to stay in the UK, you can hardly blame a cab driver for similarly seeking some advantage from the system. Or do those kinds of criticisms only apply to the little people?
Clearly people will try and gain some advantage from whatever system is in place, but this means that you have to make policy accordingly. Something like citizenship should necessitate a strong degree of commitment to it. Talking to the taxi driver I was really unimpressed in this respect, but it was a brief encounter and perhaps I am judging him harshly. Obviously though the same criticism could be applied to the very wealthy, for instance those that promote 'passport collecting' as a way to a avoid tax.
Sunak and his wife have spent a decade in public service, when they could have done far more profitable things, so his commitment to the UK can hardly be doubted.
His wife has literally told HMRC that she doesn't plan to live here long term, so your absence of doubt is admirable.
Coming back to the emergency alert test.... the alert in Welsh told people to 'cadwch in Vogel' which means 'stay in Vogel' which is a small town in Austria. Presumably it should have said 'cadwch yn ddiogel' 'stay safe'. Dont they have proof readers for these things ffs..
How close would the polls have to get for Conservatives to have real grounds for hope, and Labour real cause for concern?
Going from the Wikiworm average, EdM's best was about L43C32, which turned out to be insufficient when 2015 came around.
Dave in Opposition got to C46L26 in the aftermath of the Global Financial Crisis (what happened in October 2008ish to cause a biggish closing of the gap?) and C38L23 during the 2009 Euro elections UKIP surge. That was enough for Labour to lose in 2010, but not for the Conservatives to win.
Before 2005 and 2001, there were only spasmodic Conservative leads.
Jez's lead was never more than a couple of points.
The gap is closing, but it's still awfully big in terms of recent history.
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
I think these policies ultimately need updating due to migration and global mobility. In the olden days it could be a handful of expats working for large companies and a few other hangers on, now you have thousands of dual citizens and tens of thousands more relatives, families who have some kind of possible claim for assistance. It is a tough situation that it is quite difficult to generalise about, but it is not going to be realistic to apply a general policy of evacuation.
Time to end the idea of dual nationality, would you say?
It will come on to the agenda in the near future, I think. One paradox that I found is that the government want to reduce immigration and asylum seekers but perversely make it quite easy to become a naturalised citizen, it is a few years of law abiding living, form filling, some language tests, and then a pretty hefty fee. I mentioned before that I once had a taxi driver who just boasted about having several different citizenships - In some cases, the concept of citizenship to something that is about private advantage.
When you have a PM who held a US Green Card, meaning that he planned to become a US citizen, and whose wife is a non-dom, meaning that she has no long-term plan to stay in the UK, you can hardly blame a cab driver for similarly seeking some advantage from the system. Or do those kinds of criticisms only apply to the little people?
I am old enough to remember the boasting and hype from certain "patriotic" (well more accurately anti-immigration) PBers when they found out they could live abroad and pay less tax.....
The Spaniards who were in Sudan are already flying on their way to Djibouti 🇸🇩 Thank you to the Armed Forces, for their magnificent work in this evacuation operation, and to all those who have made it possible! https://twitter.com/EmbSpainUK/status/1650421394163789825
If we are including adaptations, then what about The Barchester Chronicles? Adapted from Trollope by Alan Plater.
That was brilliant. Launched Alan Rickman's career. Fantastic cast.
The other weekend we introduced our son to Galaxy Quest. He's failed to show any interest in Star Wars, unlike many of his friends, and he's probably a bit too young to get much out of Star Trek. But he absolutely loved Galaxy Quest - and Rickman's character was a large part of that.
Off the top of my head, it's hard to think of anything that Rickman wasn't good in.
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
I think these policies ultimately need updating due to migration and global mobility. In the olden days it could be a handful of expats working for large companies and a few other hangers on, now you have thousands of dual citizens and tens of thousands more relatives, families who have some kind of possible claim for assistance. It is a tough situation that it is quite difficult to generalise about, but it is not going to be realistic to apply a general policy of evacuation.
First rule of working abroad, make sure you have an exit plan if things start to go teats-up.
Second rule of working abroad, if you’re thinking about discussing when it might be time to leave, then you’re already too late. Many others will be in the same situation.
Diplomats and government workers might be able to get rescued by the Hereford Boat Club, but the rest of us won’t be so lucky.
Yeah but with the rapid rise in global mobility I think a lot of people are going to sleepwalk in to trouble without thinking about it at all.
It is amazing to think about how many people are still in China despite the many, many warning signs. There are also people still in Russia.
I suppose it solves the dilemma of how they’re going to find a barely adequate escort group for a second carrier. Sounds pretty bleak for the PoW; if they don’t have a functioning supply chain for the operational carrier, how long is the PoW going to be laid up?
Until we sell it to India ?
I think that option has lapsed as the Indian Navy is now committed to the Vishal project with EMALS/CATOBAR (and probably Rafale M).
South Korea would be an option with maybe T-50s, Hyundai Ioniqs and other assorted hardware going the other way.
I think they've shelved their carrier plans, having more sense than us. And they could probably build one cheaper; certainly more seaworthy.
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
I think these policies ultimately need updating due to migration and global mobility. In the olden days it could be a handful of expats working for large companies and a few other hangers on, now you have thousands of dual citizens and tens of thousands more relatives, families who have some kind of possible claim for assistance. It is a tough situation that it is quite difficult to generalise about, but it is not going to be realistic to apply a general policy of evacuation.
Time to end the idea of dual nationality, would you say?
No, just dual nationals need to be very clear (it’s explained often enough) that the UKG cannot protect them in the country of their dual nationality. If you want that you need to give up that nationality - but many don’t and seem to want only the advantages that brings, not the disadvantages.
Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe was a classic example of that. Without in any way being unsympathetic to her plight I was never clear what exactly it had to do with us.
Became a bit more to do with us when ‘our’ then foreign secretary stuck his oar in.
I know I keep banging on about this, but Sunak really needs to set out a vision for where he wants to take the country, and make people (well at least 40-45% of them) believe that tomorrow will be better than today. At the moment I've no idea where he wants to take us and his actions so far have been contradictory - for instance, he describes himself as a low tax Tory but has raised taxes (unnecessarily I think) to the highest peacetime level in decades, if not ever.
However, on topic, running the country with moderate seriousness and competence may well be enough to get the Labour lead down to single digits, as Starmer hasn't set out such a vision either, and, as observed downthread, there are probably enough people who lean Tory to get them to 30-35% if they can avoid screwups. But it is much more difficult to see them back in the lead without knowing where they want to take the country, after 13 years of office (if not of power).
Fair points, but the suggestion that tax levels are too high have to be matched by a view on two other things: continuing borrowing (how much, how long, why) and/or how and where to cut many many billions off state managed expenditure.
Only dealing with these matters individually (usually about more expenditure) is the special domain of R4 Today programme contributors and should not be added to.
The tweet titled "Alevi" of Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu who is a candidate of Turkey’s president against Erdogan has been the most watched video in Twitter history*, surpassing Lionel Messi's 2022 World Cup video with 25.8 million views. https://twitter.com/nurdogandiyorki/status/1650152518591168514
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
I think these policies ultimately need updating due to migration and global mobility. In the olden days it could be a handful of expats working for large companies and a few other hangers on, now you have thousands of dual citizens and tens of thousands more relatives, families who have some kind of possible claim for assistance. It is a tough situation that it is quite difficult to generalise about, but it is not going to be realistic to apply a general policy of evacuation.
Time to end the idea of dual nationality, would you say?
It will come on to the agenda in the near future, I think. One paradox that I found is that the government want to reduce immigration and asylum seekers but perversely make it quite easy to become a naturalised citizen, it is a few years of law abiding living, form filling, some language tests, and then a pretty hefty fee. I mentioned before that I once had a taxi driver who just boasted about having several different citizenships - In some cases, the concept of citizenship to something that is about private advantage.
When you have a PM who held a US Green Card, meaning that he planned to become a US citizen, and whose wife is a non-dom, meaning that she has no long-term plan to stay in the UK, you can hardly blame a cab driver for similarly seeking some advantage from the system. Or do those kinds of criticisms only apply to the little people?
Clearly people will try and gain some advantage from whatever system is in place, but this means that you have to make policy accordingly. Something like citizenship should necessitate a strong degree of commitment to it. Talking to the taxi driver I was really unimpressed in this respect, but it was a brief encounter and perhaps I am judging him harshly. Obviously though the same criticism could be applied to the very wealthy, for instance those that promote 'passport collecting' as a way to a avoid tax.
Sunak and his wife have spent a decade in public service, when they could have done far more profitable things, so his commitment to the UK can hardly be doubted.
His wife has literally told HMRC that she doesn't plan to live here long term, so your absence of doubt is admirable.
She isn't a British citizen though, she is an Indian citizen. She isn't a dual national. So your comparison is wrong.
I can't work out what your point is about Rishi Sunak. He was once a permanent resident in the USA. Are you suggesting that this somehow dilutes his British citizenship?
It was only a few days ago that labour officials were 'reacting with glee' to their (rather pathetic) personal attacks on Sunak; I think Sunak is looking a lot slicker and more professional and is so undoing a lot of the harm that arose through Boris Johnson's divisive political style and personal attacks.
I'm a Sunak fan. And he is significantly better as an operator than either of his predecessors. His problem remains delivery. In that he created 5 priorities, insisted they are everyone's priorities when that obviously isn't true, and then screwed up delivery of them.
HY said he would do well in the debates - does being taken apart because you promised stuff you haven't delivered work for late polling surges?
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
I think these policies ultimately need updating due to migration and global mobility. In the olden days it could be a handful of expats working for large companies and a few other hangers on, now you have thousands of dual citizens and tens of thousands more relatives, families who have some kind of possible claim for assistance. It is a tough situation that it is quite difficult to generalise about, but it is not going to be realistic to apply a general policy of evacuation.
First rule of working abroad, make sure you have an exit plan if things start to go teats-up.
Second rule of working abroad, if you’re thinking about discussing when it might be time to leave, then you’re already too late. Many others will be in the same situation.
Diplomats and government workers might be able to get rescued by the Hereford Boat Club, but the rest of us won’t be so lucky.
Yeah but with the rapid rise in global mobility I think a lot of people are going to sleepwalk in to trouble without thinking about it at all.
It is amazing to think about how many people are still in China despite the many, many warning signs. There are also people still in Russia.
Yes. It’s also important to keeep your plans updated, and to be aware that places can go from safe to unsafe very quickly. Bahrain 2011 springs to mind, where it was only a couple of weeks from the start of protests, to widespread civil disobedience among sections of the local population.
The pandemic should also make us think what can happen, and where we want to be if it does.
Most of all, have options. If half a million people turn up at the same airport, it’s going to be a long wait. Escaping over land might be easier, if there’s a safe country close by for which you don’t need a visa. Oh, and cash. A few friends called Benjamin can be very useful in such a situation!
That’s reminded me by some obscure method of A Very Peculiar Practice which was excellent. And by way of Barbara Flynn, The Beiderbecke Tapes, another good un.
Anything by Alan Plater is usually top notch. The Beiderbecke trilogy was pretty good.
A Very Peculiar Practice holds up very well today; it's got a wonderful surrealism that is a long way ahead of its time. (The nuns rummaging round in the trash bins being one particular favorite of mine.)
I remember the Beiderbecke trilogy as excellent, but haven't seen it in 30+ years: time to dig it out.
I didn't see that in its time (TBT), but watched series 1 quite recently. I didn't really 'get it', though it was a fairly pleasant good natured watch.
I think a lot of Dennis Potter's works were in the 80's right? Singing Detective? So really whoever said TV drama in the 80's was bad, was talking nonsense.
I think period drama in the 80's was OK, but was often recorded on videotape, so has a murky, fuzzy quality. The 90's ones have aged better.
It was only a few days ago that labour officials were 'reacting with glee' to their (rather pathetic) personal attacks on Sunak; I think Sunak is looking a lot slicker and more professional and is so undoing a lot of the harm that arose through Boris Johnson's divisive political style and personal attacks.
I'm a Sunak fan. And he is significantly better as an operator than either of his predecessors. His problem remains delivery. In that he created 5 priorities, insisted they are everyone's priorities when that obviously isn't true, and then screwed up delivery of them.
HY said he would do well in the debates - does being taken apart because you promised stuff you haven't delivered work for late polling surges?
The bigger problem with HY's assertion is that it assumes that there will be debates. Can we really see the ultra-cautious, try-to-win-by-default Sir Keir risking debates?
This is potentially quite worrying for UK science and manufacturing.
AstraZeneca overtakes Pfizer as crunch week for UK pharma looms https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/apr/24/astrazeneca-overtakes-pfizer-as-crunch-week-for-uk-pharma-looms ...In a week when AstraZeneca and Britain’s second-biggest pharma firm GSK release their latest quarterly results and the main industry body, the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry holds its annual conference, all eyes will be on what pharma executives say about the UK as a place to operate and invest in.
GSK’s chief executive, Emma Walmsley, recently said that life sciences were at a “tipping point,” saying the UK needed to reverse the decline in clinical trials, speed up approvals of new drugs and deploy the latest medicines more quickly.
Her counterpart at AstraZeneca, Pascal Soriot, also took a shot at the business climate, saying less favourable tax rates had prompted the firm to build a new factory in Ireland rather than the UK. The industry is locked in a battle with the government over the soaring rebates it pays to the National Health Service, which are designed to limit the NHS’s medicines bill...
There's probably no immediate threat to UK life sciences, but there's certainly a prospect of long slow decline, if not addressed by government.
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
It’s also these things take time to plan and execute. Remember that case in Libya - everyone was critical of Cameron until it turned out that while the government was “publicly prevaricating” the SAS was already in field executing on a mission to rescue the trapped oil workers
I suppose it solves the dilemma of how they’re going to find a barely adequate escort group for a second carrier. Sounds pretty bleak for the PoW; if they don’t have a functioning supply chain for the operational carrier, how long is the PoW going to be laid up?
With only two ships spare parts are largely made to order (you’d have thought they might keep some in stock but I guess that’s expensive and you might have maintenance issues). So if you have one laid up anyway you cannibalise it and keep the other functional while the spare parts are being made. Normal practice (although not very resilient)
That’s reminded me by some obscure method of A Very Peculiar Practice which was excellent. And by way of Barbara Flynn, The Beiderbecke Tapes, another good un.
Anything by Alan Plater is usually top notch. The Beiderbecke trilogy was pretty good.
A Very Peculiar Practice holds up very well today; it's got a wonderful surrealism that is a long way ahead of its time. (The nuns rummaging round in the trash bins being one particular favorite of mine.)
I remember the Beiderbecke trilogy as excellent, but haven't seen it in 30+ years: time to dig it out.
"But ummmm... Why exactly does a fish need a bicycle?"
To get to the other side of the road. You weren’t expecting them to walk, right?
I think period drama in the 80's was OK, but was often recorded on videotape, so has a murky, fuzzy quality. The 90's ones have aged better.
I am not sure that's true. I think they may have been transferred for broadcast.
I recently saw the early episodes of The Professionals. Broadcast on TV they are fuzzy and washed out. On a streaming service they are pinsharp, so I guess the original films survive.
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
It’s also these things take time to plan and execute. Remember that case in Libya - everyone was critical of Cameron until it turned out that while the government was “publicly prevaricating” the SAS was already in field executing on a mission to rescue the trapped oil workers
I remember Michael Gove standing in front of a plane, spinning a yarn for the assembled hacks as to why it hadn’t left the UK yet. They were waiting for a load of ‘diplomats’ to get on the plane, and a few days later said ‘diplomats’ had cleared a runway in the middle of the desert, for a C130 to pick up the stranded oil workers.
I know I keep banging on about this, but Sunak really needs to set out a vision for where he wants to take the country, and make people (well at least 40-45% of them) believe that tomorrow will be better than today. At the moment I've no idea where he wants to take us and his actions so far have been contradictory - for instance, he describes himself as a low tax Tory but has raised taxes (unnecessarily I think) to the highest peacetime level in decades, if not ever.
However, on topic, running the country with moderate seriousness and competence may well be enough to get the Labour lead down to single digits, as Starmer hasn't set out such a vision either, and, as observed downthread, there are probably enough people who lean Tory to get them to 30-35% if they can avoid screwups. But it is much more difficult to see them back in the lead without knowing where they want to take the country, after 13 years of office (if not of power).
He had to earn the right to be listened to first. He’s nearly there.
If he had come out with a vision immediately after being appointed then he would have been ignored. Now people will listen, may be.
It was only a few days ago that labour officials were 'reacting with glee' to their (rather pathetic) personal attacks on Sunak; I think Sunak is looking a lot slicker and more professional and is so undoing a lot of the harm that arose through Boris Johnson's divisive political style and personal attacks.
I'm a Sunak fan. And he is significantly better as an operator than either of his predecessors. His problem remains delivery. In that he created 5 priorities, insisted they are everyone's priorities when that obviously isn't true, and then screwed up delivery of them.
HY said he would do well in the debates - does being taken apart because you promised stuff you haven't delivered work for late polling surges?
I think there is a 20% chance that Sunak will be PM after the next election. The big issue is that the swing voters are accepting of Sunak but not of the Tory party. So it depends which prevails. This partly depends on labour of course. The several million Tory votes he needs can be put off by a leader (Jezza perhaps) and also by the party (the twenty or so MPs who can lose it for Labour by being the people they are).
Sunak can't deliver the party. They are just tainted. SKS intends to deliver leader+ party to the disaffected Tory voters. If he does I think he will be next PM.
Scotland (barring a Tory miracle) makes little difference to next PM. There has to be one. The SNP will not enable a Tory PM. By default it will enable a Labour one.
It was only a few days ago that labour officials were 'reacting with glee' to their (rather pathetic) personal attacks on Sunak; I think Sunak is looking a lot slicker and more professional and is so undoing a lot of the harm that arose through Boris Johnson's divisive political style and personal attacks.
I'm a Sunak fan. And he is significantly better as an operator than either of his predecessors. His problem remains delivery. In that he created 5 priorities, insisted they are everyone's priorities when that obviously isn't true, and then screwed up delivery of them.
HY said he would do well in the debates - does being taken apart because you promised stuff you haven't delivered work for late polling surges?
HY is talking nonsense - Sunak is poor in debates - each husting he did he rated worse and worse afaicr. You don't get your arse handed to you by Liz Truss if you're a half competent debator.
With the exception of 'Stop the boats', his 5 pledges were all flimsy nonsense that he calculated would hapoen anyway. Had we got Liz's economic plans, no CT rise etc., the economy would look very different.
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
I think these policies ultimately need updating due to migration and global mobility. In the olden days it could be a handful of expats working for large companies and a few other hangers on, now you have thousands of dual citizens and tens of thousands more relatives, families who have some kind of possible claim for assistance. It is a tough situation that it is quite difficult to generalise about, but it is not going to be realistic to apply a general policy of evacuation.
Time to end the idea of dual nationality, would you say?
It will come on to the agenda in the near future, I think. One paradox that I found is that the government want to reduce immigration and asylum seekers but perversely make it quite easy to become a naturalised citizen, it is a few years of law abiding living, form filling, some language tests, and then a pretty hefty fee. I mentioned before that I once had a taxi driver who just boasted about having several different citizenships - In some cases, the concept of citizenship to something that is about private advantage.
When you have a PM who held a US Green Card, meaning that he planned to become a US citizen, and whose wife is a non-dom, meaning that she has no long-term plan to stay in the UK, you can hardly blame a cab driver for similarly seeking some advantage from the system. Or do those kinds of criticisms only apply to the little people?
Clearly people will try and gain some advantage from whatever system is in place, but this means that you have to make policy accordingly. Something like citizenship should necessitate a strong degree of commitment to it. Talking to the taxi driver I was really unimpressed in this respect, but it was a brief encounter and perhaps I am judging him harshly. Obviously though the same criticism could be applied to the very wealthy, for instance those that promote 'passport collecting' as a way to a avoid tax.
Sunak and his wife have spent a decade in public service, when they could have done far more profitable things, so his commitment to the UK can hardly be doubted.
His wife has literally told HMRC that she doesn't plan to live here long term, so your absence of doubt is admirable.
She isn't a British citizen though, she is an Indian citizen. She isn't a dual national. So your comparison is wrong.
I can't work out what your point is about Rishi Sunak. He was once a permanent resident in the USA. Are you suggesting that this somehow dilutes his British citizenship?
The Green Card is a pathway to US citizenship, which Sunak held onto while he was UK Chancellor. He only gave it up when he travelled to the US as Chancellor and the US authorities advised him to return it. I'm all in favour of keeping one's options open, but I think if you're in charge of the nation's finances you shouldn't still be looking at becoming a citizen of another country and you certainly should be up front about it. Sunak's wife holds non dom status as she has told HMRC that she does not plan to live in the UK long term. Doesnt that rather suggest to you that he doesn't either? Or are they planning to transition to a long distance relationship? I find it a bit odd that you take umbrage at some poor taxi driver trying to game the system to his advantage but are totally fine with the PM doing the same while his wife avoids a hefty tax bill by claiming she plans to leave the country in a few years. I'm a bit of a Citizen of Nowhere myself but even I find this kind of behaviour a bit distasteful.
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
I think these policies ultimately need updating due to migration and global mobility. In the olden days it could be a handful of expats working for large companies and a few other hangers on, now you have thousands of dual citizens and tens of thousands more relatives, families who have some kind of possible claim for assistance. It is a tough situation that it is quite difficult to generalise about, but it is not going to be realistic to apply a general policy of evacuation.
Time to end the idea of dual nationality, would you say?
It will come on to the agenda in the near future, I think. One paradox that I found is that the government want to reduce immigration and asylum seekers but perversely make it quite easy to become a naturalised citizen, it is a few years of law abiding living, form filling, some language tests, and then a pretty hefty fee. I mentioned before that I once had a taxi driver who just boasted about having several different citizenships - In some cases, the concept of citizenship to something that is about private advantage.
When you have a PM who held a US Green Card, meaning that he planned to become a US citizen, and whose wife is a non-dom, meaning that she has no long-term plan to stay in the UK, you can hardly blame a cab driver for similarly seeking some advantage from the system. Or do those kinds of criticisms only apply to the little people?
Clearly people will try and gain some advantage from whatever system is in place, but this means that you have to make policy accordingly. Something like citizenship should necessitate a strong degree of commitment to it. Talking to the taxi driver I was really unimpressed in this respect, but it was a brief encounter and perhaps I am judging him harshly. Obviously though the same criticism could be applied to the very wealthy, for instance those that promote 'passport collecting' as a way to a avoid tax.
Sunak and his wife have spent a decade in public service, when they could have done far more profitable things, so his commitment to the UK can hardly be doubted.
His wife has literally told HMRC that she doesn't plan to live here long term, so your absence of doubt is admirable.
She isn't a British citizen though, she is an Indian citizen. She isn't a dual national. So your comparison is wrong.
I can't work out what your point is about Rishi Sunak. He was once a permanent resident in the USA. Are you suggesting that this somehow dilutes his British citizenship?
The Green Card is a pathway to US citizenship
That's true, but simply having a green card isn't necessarily a sign of wanting to acquire that citizenship.
It was only a few days ago that labour officials were 'reacting with glee' to their (rather pathetic) personal attacks on Sunak; I think Sunak is looking a lot slicker and more professional and is so undoing a lot of the harm that arose through Boris Johnson's divisive political style and personal attacks.
I'm a Sunak fan. And he is significantly better as an operator than either of his predecessors. His problem remains delivery. In that he created 5 priorities, insisted they are everyone's priorities when that obviously isn't true, and then screwed up delivery of them.
HY said he would do well in the debates - does being taken apart because you promised stuff you haven't delivered work for late polling surges?
I think there is a 20% chance that Sunak will be PM after the next election. The big issue is that the swing voters are accepting of Sunak but not of the Tory party. So it depends which prevails. This partly depends on labour of course. The several million Tory votes he needs can be put off by a leader (Jezza perhaps) and also by the party (the twenty or so MPs who can lose it for Labour by being the people they are).
Sunak can't deliver the party. They are just tainted. SKS intends to deliver leader+ party to the disaffected Tory voters. If he does I think he will be next PM.
Scotland (barring a Tory miracle) makes little difference to next PM. There has to be one. The SNP will not enable a Tory PM. By default it will enable a Labour one.
"But in terms of getting to a majority LAB has to be taking Tory seats"
Not entirely true. The LibDems are going to take 10+ seats from the tories, possibly 20.
The more tory seats are lost to others, the fewer gains Labour need for a majority.
And, of course, the more SNP seats go to Labour (20+ now possible), the more likely their outright majority as opposed to a coalition.
I am surprised at your comments as you have not averted from your opinion that the next GE is an extinction event for the conservatives and lots of your friends have told you so as well
It was only a few days ago that labour officials were 'reacting with glee' to their (rather pathetic) personal attacks on Sunak; I think Sunak is looking a lot slicker and more professional and is so undoing a lot of the harm that arose through Boris Johnson's divisive political style and personal attacks.
I'm a Sunak fan. And he is significantly better as an operator than either of his predecessors. His problem remains delivery. In that he created 5 priorities, insisted they are everyone's priorities when that obviously isn't true, and then screwed up delivery of them.
HY said he would do well in the debates - does being taken apart because you promised stuff you haven't delivered work for late polling surges?
I actually agree with @HYUFD as I think Starmer will struggle against him
"But in terms of getting to a majority LAB has to be taking Tory seats"
Not entirely true. The LibDems are going to take 10+ seats from the tories, possibly 20.
The more tory seats are lost to others, the fewer gains Labour need for a majority.
And, of course, the more SNP seats go to Labour (20+ now possible), the more likely their outright majority as opposed to a coalition.
I am surprised at your comments as you have not averted from your opinion that the next GE is an extinction event for the conservatives and lots of your friends have told you so as well
Maybe less complacency and hubris would be wise
Heathener is posting what ... hopes will happen..let him/her/they live in their dreamworld.
It was only a few days ago that labour officials were 'reacting with glee' to their (rather pathetic) personal attacks on Sunak; I think Sunak is looking a lot slicker and more professional and is so undoing a lot of the harm that arose through Boris Johnson's divisive political style and personal attacks.
I'm a Sunak fan. And he is significantly better as an operator than either of his predecessors. His problem remains delivery. In that he created 5 priorities, insisted they are everyone's priorities when that obviously isn't true, and then screwed up delivery of them.
HY said he would do well in the debates - does being taken apart because you promised stuff you haven't delivered work for late polling surges?
HY is talking nonsense - Sunak is poor in debates - each husting he did he rated worse and worse afaicr. You don't get your arse handed to you by Liz Truss if you're a half competent debator.
With the exception of 'Stop the boats', his 5 pledges were all flimsy nonsense that he calculated would hapoen anyway. Had we got Liz's economic plans, no CT rise etc., the economy would look very different.
Sunak lost to Truss due to the idiotic membership as he was accurate, and has been proven correct, in his warnings against the dangers of Truss
The Spaniards who were in Sudan are already flying on their way to Djibouti 🇸🇩 Thank you to the Armed Forces, for their magnificent work in this evacuation operation, and to all those who have made it possible! https://twitter.com/EmbSpainUK/status/1650421394163789825
Well done Spain, but one wonders what the Spanish Embassy in London thinks it’s accomplishing by drawing attention to the fact? Doesn’t strike me as terribly diplomatic! Perhaps they’re celebrating how small the Spanish expat community there is and how much bigger (4,000) the U.K. one is?
"But in terms of getting to a majority LAB has to be taking Tory seats"
Not entirely true. The LibDems are going to take 10+ seats from the tories, possibly 20.
The more tory seats are lost to others, the fewer gains Labour need for a majority.
And, of course, the more SNP seats go to Labour (20+ now possible), the more likely their outright majority as opposed to a coalition.
I am surprised at your comments as you have not averted from your opinion that the next GE is an extinction event for the conservatives and lots of your friends have told you so as well
Maybe less complacency and hubris would be wise
It should be a bad result for the Conservatives though, as they have really lost their way on what they stand for and have governed abysmally for quite a few years now. As Sunak’s own ratings go down now, as they inevitably will over the coming year with constant attacks on him and his mistakes as chancellor, the Tory rating probably go backwards too, so it’s looking like a sub 200 seat result for them in my opinion.
I am still convinced the Tory rating drops back in May after a good April, just like it did for Boris last year. Council tax and mortgages might be the reason for it.
To answer Mikes question we might not see a single digit lead this side of an election. But surely it’s the monthly average of polls that really matters, not a rogue one from favourite pollster, and that’s still a huge 14% or more
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
I think these policies ultimately need updating due to migration and global mobility. In the olden days it could be a handful of expats working for large companies and a few other hangers on, now you have thousands of dual citizens and tens of thousands more relatives, families who have some kind of possible claim for assistance. It is a tough situation that it is quite difficult to generalise about, but it is not going to be realistic to apply a general policy of evacuation.
Time to end the idea of dual nationality, would you say?
It will come on to the agenda in the near future, I think. One paradox that I found is that the government want to reduce immigration and asylum seekers but perversely make it quite easy to become a naturalised citizen, it is a few years of law abiding living, form filling, some language tests, and then a pretty hefty fee. I mentioned before that I once had a taxi driver who just boasted about having several different citizenships - In some cases, the concept of citizenship to something that is about private advantage.
When you have a PM who held a US Green Card, meaning that he planned to become a US citizen, and whose wife is a non-dom, meaning that she has no long-term plan to stay in the UK, you can hardly blame a cab driver for similarly seeking some advantage from the system. Or do those kinds of criticisms only apply to the little people?
Clearly people will try and gain some advantage from whatever system is in place, but this means that you have to make policy accordingly. Something like citizenship should necessitate a strong degree of commitment to it. Talking to the taxi driver I was really unimpressed in this respect, but it was a brief encounter and perhaps I am judging him harshly. Obviously though the same criticism could be applied to the very wealthy, for instance those that promote 'passport collecting' as a way to a avoid tax.
Sunak and his wife have spent a decade in public service, when they could have done far more profitable things, so his commitment to the UK can hardly be doubted.
His wife has literally told HMRC that she doesn't plan to live here long term, so your absence of doubt is admirable.
She isn't a British citizen though, she is an Indian citizen. She isn't a dual national. So your comparison is wrong.
I can't work out what your point is about Rishi Sunak. He was once a permanent resident in the USA. Are you suggesting that this somehow dilutes his British citizenship?
The Green Card is a pathway to US citizenship, which Sunak held onto while he was UK Chancellor. He only gave it up when he travelled to the US as Chancellor and the US authorities advised him to return it. I'm all in favour of keeping one's options open, but I think if you're in charge of the nation's finances you shouldn't still be looking at becoming a citizen of another country and you certainly should be up front about it. Sunak's wife holds non dom status as she has told HMRC that she does not plan to live in the UK long term. Doesnt that rather suggest to you that he doesn't either? Or are they planning to transition to a long distance relationship? I find it a bit odd that you take umbrage at some poor taxi driver trying to game the system to his advantage but are totally fine with the PM doing the same while his wife avoids a hefty tax bill by claiming she plans to leave the country in a few years. I'm a bit of a Citizen of Nowhere myself but even I find this kind of behaviour a bit distasteful.
You seem to be in error over Sunak's wife's non dom status
This is her statement on the matter:
British Chancellor Rishi Sunak’s wife Akshata Murty has given up her non-domiciled tax status after a public outcry.
Murty insisted that the move, which means she will now pay UK tax on all her overseas earnings, was voluntary as her non-domicile status was “entirely legal”.
In a statement, she said: “It has become clear that many do not feel it (non-dom status) is compatible with my husband’s role as Chancellor. I understand and appreciate the British sense of fairness and I do not wish my tax status to be a distraction for my husband or to affect my family.”
“This means I will now pay UK tax on an arising basis on all my worldwide income, including dividends and capital gains, wherever in the world that income arises. I do this because I want to, not because the rules require me to,” she added.
The decision will take effect immediately and apply to the previous tax year as well as all future ones.
She went on to say: “My decision to pay UK tax on all my worldwide income will not change the fact that India remains the country of my birth, citizenship, parents’ home and place of domicile. But I love the UK too. In my time here I have invested in British businesses and supported British causes. My daughters are British. They are growing up in the UK. I am so proud to be here.”
Comments
Items from aircraft carrier, whose proposed visit to US was cancelled last year after mechanical failure, used to repair sister vessel
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/04/23/3bn-warship-hms-prince-of-wales-stripped-for-parts/ (£££)
I remember the Beiderbecke trilogy as excellent, but haven't seen it in 30+ years: time to dig it out.
The position in these Sudan situations seems always the same, the the UK government politically stuck in the worst possible place.
I doubt if there is a well known general policy about these situations. Every time the government (Mitchell today, someone else under the next government) says that they are working 24/7 to do stuff for UK citizens, the BBC interviews the trapped on shaky connections, who all say the same thing - no-one has been in touch.
Government should be clearer at all times what its limits are. Palmerstonian expectations (sadly) are misplaced. Beyond those in country X for state reasons (forces, diplomats etc) it is hard to see how the duty can arise.
Only NATO or the UN would be big enough bodies to even think about real protection of all foreign nationals in failed states 10 times the size of the UK. I don't think they want the job.
Given the RSF are loosely, supposedly, Wagner allies I do wonder if we won’t see a bit of NATO special military operation.
Australia's spending quite a lot on missiles:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-65370284
I’d expect the gap to narrow to ten-ish percent before the election.
The last few years have not been great for these two rather shaky foundations. By far the greatest change is the real issue of authoritarianism, Trump and Trumpism, and isolationism in the USA, but the list of states darkening rather than otherwise is growing fast. Is a tipping point coming?
Edit: that said, the RSF do seem the "worse guys" if this account is correct (I generally trust Cooper to get things right): https://xxtomcooperxx.substack.com/p/sudan-war-24-april-2023?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
https://youtu.be/3ldiIix1vf4
First is that, so far, polls are mostly picking up disgruntled ex-Conservatives returning from Don't Know to the blue column. They're the low hanging fruit for Sunak, but they're only enough to turn disaster into defeat. He might be able to move onto the next tranche, but that will be harder.
Second, one of the things that happened in Spring '97 was churn from Labour to Lib Dem. That looks like a narrowing of the polls, but depending on where it happens, it's got the potential to be really bad news for the Conservatives.
Bear in the mind the next tasking for the PoW is meant to be Flight Deck quals, the schedule of which is entirely in the gift of the US 2nd Fleet. We've already fucked them around and cancelled on them twice at the last minute. The first time was when somebody flooded the ship and blew up the IEP by not understanding how the fire suppression system worked and the second time was this propeller falling off business. They knew it was fucked from the dock trials but insisted on trying to limp it across the Atlantic due to the embarrassment of the first cancellation. This plan lasted as long as it took to get to with hailing distance of Egypt Point.
Abandoning traditional empire we have tried to destruction other approaches. Western liberals have yet to come to terms with the fact that other powers have neither abandoned empire, nor necessarily care about the world becoming better or more democratic or more liberal.
In the USA the Republican party is massively in the hands of people who do not trust liberalism, democracy or the rule of law. This is the beginnings of fascism; interestingly it seems to me that defensive forms of fascism are where people will turn when the liberal project is no longer convincing.
One paradox that I found is that the government want to reduce immigration and asylum seekers but perversely make it quite easy to become a naturalised citizen, it is a few years of law abiding living, form filling, some language tests, and then a pretty hefty fee.
I mentioned before that I once had a taxi driver who just boasted about having several different citizenships - In some cases, the concept of citizenship to something that is about private advantage.
Second rule of working abroad, if you’re thinking about discussing when it might be time to leave, then you’re already too late. Many others will be in the same situation.
Diplomats and government workers might be able to get rescued by the Hereford Boat Club, but the rest of us won’t be so lucky.
I remember John Major once saying his fave book was A Small House at Allington'. Suddenly his rating soared. Only a decent man could say that. Let me guess: Putin, Xi and Trump don't read Trollope.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Ford_(journalist)
TSE will like the sixth law.
Launched Alan Rickman's career. Fantastic cast.
Putin or at least not pro Zelensky.
Though of course if Trump and Le Pen won the next US and French Presidential elections as polls suggest is not impossible that would massively shift the western world back away from long dominant liberalism towards authoritarianism
Impressive even by MOD/FO standards.
Also refuses to commit to auditors being in place in time for end of May deadline to submit audited accounts to Westminster authorities.
Failing to do this will result in monthly payments of Short Money (£1m+ a year) stopping immediately, putting staff jobs at risk.
https://twitter.com/Mike_Blackley/status/1650407948173049856?s=20
However, on topic, running the country with moderate seriousness and competence may well be enough to get the Labour lead down to single digits, as Starmer hasn't set out such a vision either, and, as observed downthread, there are probably enough people who lean Tory to get them to 30-35% if they can avoid screwups. But it is much more difficult to see them back in the lead without knowing where they want to take the country, after 13 years of office (if not of power).
I spent one of the first 2 years of my life in Port Sudan as it happens. My memories of it are somewhat vague but that makes me a 5* Sudani Expert in PB World.
South Korea would be an option with maybe T-50s, Hyundai Ioniqs and other assorted hardware going the other way.
And they could probably build one cheaper; certainly more seaworthy.
Sunak and his wife have spent a decade in public service, when they could have done far more profitable things, so his commitment to the UK can hardly be doubted.
Going from the Wikiworm average, EdM's best was about L43C32, which turned out to be insufficient when 2015 came around.
Dave in Opposition got to C46L26 in the aftermath of the Global Financial Crisis (what happened in October 2008ish to cause a biggish closing of the gap?) and C38L23 during the 2009 Euro elections UKIP surge. That was enough for Labour to lose in 2010, but not for the Conservatives to win.
Before 2005 and 2001, there were only spasmodic Conservative leads.
Jez's lead was never more than a couple of points.
The gap is closing, but it's still awfully big in terms of recent history.
https://twitter.com/EmbSpainUK/status/1650421394163789825
Off the top of my head, it's hard to think of anything that Rickman wasn't good in.
It is amazing to think about how many people are still in China despite the many, many warning signs. There are also people still in Russia.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2023/03/south-korea-eyeing-larger-aircraft-carrier-for-its-cvx-program/
Only dealing with these matters individually (usually about more expenditure) is the special domain of R4 Today programme contributors and should not be added to.
https://twitter.com/nurdogandiyorki/status/1650152518591168514
*Presumably Turkish Twitter history ?
I can't work out what your point is about Rishi Sunak. He was once a permanent resident in the USA. Are you suggesting that this somehow dilutes his British citizenship?
HY said he would do well in the debates - does being taken apart because you promised stuff you haven't delivered work for late polling surges?
The pandemic should also make us think what can happen, and where we want to be if it does.
Most of all, have options. If half a million people turn up at the same airport, it’s going to be a long wait. Escaping over land might be easier, if there’s a safe country close by for which you don’t need a visa. Oh, and cash. A few friends called Benjamin can be very useful in such a situation!
I think a lot of Dennis Potter's works were in the 80's right? Singing Detective? So really whoever said TV drama in the 80's was bad, was talking nonsense.
I think period drama in the 80's was OK, but was often recorded on videotape, so has a murky, fuzzy quality. The 90's ones have aged better.
AstraZeneca overtakes Pfizer as crunch week for UK pharma looms
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/apr/24/astrazeneca-overtakes-pfizer-as-crunch-week-for-uk-pharma-looms
...In a week when AstraZeneca and Britain’s second-biggest pharma firm GSK release their latest quarterly results and the main industry body, the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry holds its annual conference, all eyes will be on what pharma executives say about the UK as a place to operate and invest in.
GSK’s chief executive, Emma Walmsley, recently said that life sciences were at a “tipping point,” saying the UK needed to reverse the decline in clinical trials, speed up approvals of new drugs and deploy the latest medicines more quickly.
Her counterpart at AstraZeneca, Pascal Soriot, also took a shot at the business climate, saying less favourable tax rates had prompted the firm to build a new factory in Ireland rather than the UK. The industry is locked in a battle with the government over the soaring rebates it pays to the National Health Service, which are designed to limit the NHS’s medicines bill...
There's probably no immediate threat to UK life sciences, but there's certainly a prospect of long slow decline, if not addressed by government.
I recently saw the early episodes of The Professionals. Broadcast on TV they are fuzzy and washed out. On a streaming service they are pinsharp, so I guess the original films survive.
Not entirely true. The LibDems are going to take 10+ seats from the tories, possibly 20.
The more tory seats are lost to others, the fewer gains Labour need for a majority.
And, of course, the more SNP seats go to Labour (20+ now possible), the more likely their outright majority as opposed to a coalition.
https://www.government.nl/latest/news/2023/04/24/the-netherlands-and-uk-expand-energy-collaboration-with-new-electricity-link
If he had come out with a vision immediately after being appointed then he would have been ignored. Now people will listen, may be.
Not much time though
Sunak can't deliver the party. They are just tainted. SKS intends to deliver leader+ party to the disaffected Tory voters. If he does I think he will be next PM.
Scotland (barring a Tory miracle) makes little difference to next PM. There has to be one. The SNP will not enable a Tory PM. By default it will enable a Labour one.
With the exception of 'Stop the boats', his 5 pledges were all flimsy nonsense that he calculated would hapoen anyway. Had we got Liz's economic plans, no CT rise etc., the economy would look very different.
Sunak's wife holds non dom status as she has told HMRC that she does not plan to live in the UK long term. Doesnt that rather suggest to you that he doesn't either? Or are they planning to transition to a long distance relationship?
I find it a bit odd that you take umbrage at some poor taxi driver trying to game the system to his advantage but are totally fine with the PM doing the same while his wife avoids a hefty tax bill by claiming she plans to leave the country in a few years. I'm a bit of a Citizen of Nowhere myself but even I find this kind of behaviour a bit distasteful.
Maybe less complacency and hubris would be wise
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/tv/strictly-come-dancing-judge-len-goodman-dies-aged-78/ar-AA1afhnN?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=2c6fe3f18ec444608c9942f573d88666&ei=8
I am still convinced the Tory rating drops back in May after a good April, just like it did for Boris last year. Council tax and mortgages might be the reason for it.
To answer Mikes question we might not see a single digit lead this side of an election. But surely it’s the monthly average of polls that really matters, not a rogue one from favourite pollster, and that’s still a huge 14% or more
This is her statement on the matter:
British Chancellor Rishi Sunak’s wife Akshata Murty has given up her non-domiciled tax status after a public outcry.
Murty insisted that the move, which means she will now pay UK tax on all her overseas earnings, was voluntary as her non-domicile status was “entirely legal”.
In a statement, she said: “It has become clear that many do not feel it (non-dom status) is compatible with my husband’s role as Chancellor. I understand and appreciate the British sense of fairness and I do not wish my tax status to be a distraction for my husband or to affect my family.”
“This means I will now pay UK tax on an arising basis on all my worldwide income, including dividends and capital gains, wherever in the world that income arises. I do this because I want to, not because the rules require me to,” she added.
The decision will take effect immediately and apply to the previous tax year as well as all future ones.
She went on to say: “My decision to pay UK tax on all my worldwide income will not change the fact that India remains the country of my birth, citizenship, parents’ home and place of domicile. But I love the UK too. In my time here I have invested in British businesses and supported British causes. My daughters are British. They are growing up in the UK. I am so proud to be here.”