The new government is about to eat its first bowl of shit. The "Titanic" shipyard is asking for £200m in loan guarantees to start a new defence project, they say without it the shipyard is unsustainable. The treasury says that the loan guarantee will just help the owners pay itself a big dividend from the shipyard and they're probably right.
If the government refuses there's a very real chance the shipyard goes under and all the jobs/skills are lost and if they do the subsidy scheme there's a very good chance the shareholders will immediately suck that cash out of the business anyway and leave the taxpayer on the hook for £200m.
So best to let it go bankrupt and then lend the administrators the money to keep projects going..
But as with many things when these issues are involved no easy answers.
Worth saying that Short Brothers next door has similar issues, Airbus has "bought" it from Boeing but the vast majority of it's production is for none Airbus products and they don't want those parts and seemingly nor does Bombardier.
Rachel Reeves has decisions to make. What with Mad Ed Miliband trying to kill off 200,000 jobs in the North Sea and the major manufacturers in Belfast looking shakey, this is where we see if she has an industrial policy.
Put in into administration first. Whatever government decides, paying the owners a large dividend is going to make funding any solution more difficult, not easier.
Possibly, but having experience of how administrators work you can guarantee nothing. I rather suspect, despite her cries over the years, Reeves doesnt actually have an industrial strategy.
I'm agnostic on that. And I don't think a forced decision on this shipyard is particularly dispositive on the issue,
You're right about the risks of administration, but there are no perfect, or even good solutions here. There's considerable risk involved if it were to be bailed out.
The new government is about to eat its first bowl of shit. The "Titanic" shipyard is asking for £200m in loan guarantees to start a new defence project, they say without it the shipyard is unsustainable. The treasury says that the loan guarantee will just help the owners pay itself a big dividend from the shipyard and they're probably right.
If the government refuses there's a very real chance the shipyard goes under and all the jobs/skills are lost and if they do the subsidy scheme there's a very good chance the shareholders will immediately suck that cash out of the business anyway and leave the taxpayer on the hook for £200m.
So best to let it go bankrupt and then lend the administrators the money to keep projects going..
But as with many things when these issues are involved no easy answers.
Worth saying that Short Brothers next door has similar issues, Airbus has "bought" it from Boeing but the vast majority of it's production is for none Airbus products and they don't want those parts and seemingly nor does Bombardier.
Rachel Reeves has decisions to make. What with Mad Ed Miliband trying to kill off 200,000 jobs in the North Sea and the major manufacturers in Belfast looking shakey, this is where we see if she has an industrial policy.
Where is your North Sea jobs figure from - that feels incredibly high..
Direct employent/contracting in UK Oil and gas exploration is between 35,000 and 40,000 jobs. There are an additional 100,000 jobs in companies directy supporting the oil and gas industry through manufacturing and direct supply of goods, materials and services. In addition there are around 80,000 jobs which are in services not directly related to the oil industry in the NE but which would suffer some loss due to a downturn in the region.
These numbers are pretty well known because of the experience of previous downturns.
Realistically I would assume that the 40K direct jobs are at risk and a reasonable proportion of the 100K directly supporting jobs. I don't know how you could or should quantify the 80K jobs which might be affected by a regional downturn.
So whilst there are more than 200,000 jobs in the UK being supported by the O&G sector, not all of those would be at risk. Maybe half of them? But that would depend a lot on the wider economy.
I dont see why any of them have to be shut down early. Its a mad decision. I will probably have to close a factory next year if this goes ahead. A small sub contractor 80% dependent on the North Sea. You cant keep the place open on the 20% thats left. So 12 decent and hardworking people get shot because idiots like Miliband want to grandstand.
Climate change is real and a serious problem. We need to transition the economy away from fossil fuels. We can't just ignore that reality because there will be individual job losses.
Thatcher knew that we had to close the coal mines, which also saw decent and hardworking people out of work, more than 200,000 of them. We can do better than Thatcher by supporting the transition better.
This does nothing to 'transition the economy away' from fossil fuels, it simply means those fossil fuels are imported, at great monetary and environmental cost.
No person who believed sincerely in minimising carbon emissions, as opposed to being on a sociopathic mission to destroy Britain's economy, would welcome this sort of move.
Well, I didn't have 'sociopathic mission to destroy the economy' on the first 100 days bingo card...
Ignoring the hysterical hyperbole, those 12 jobs to be set against the literally thousands of new jobs, investment returns and export potential of leading on renewables and transitioning away from fossil fuels.
(All the Rosebank oil will be exported incidentally. Ebbs and flows of oil stocks plus different grades of crude)
You an have all the new jobs as well as the existing ones. I thought "growth " was the big thing ?
I don't think we're closing down O&G tomorrow are we? We'll have fossil fuels for quite some time. But the direction of travel has changed and that's key.
If reports on Miliband are correct we are. The NS will close down eventually anyway, there is no value to the UK in accelerating the end date.
Sorry. What reports are those? Genuinely interested to know more about this. There is a stated end date?
One of Germany’s main rail corridors is to be closed for months as part of a major overhaul of the ailing train network of Europe’s largest economy that is expected to last until the end of the decade.
Years of underinvestment and lack of political direction are being blamed for the state of the German railways, which have in recent years been beset by a massive increase in breakdowns, delays, cancellations and other major technical mishaps and led to unflattering comparisons with infrastructure in the developing world.
Deutsche Bahn, the national railway company of Germany, a state-owned enterprise under the control of the German government, has also become the butt of international jokes at the Euro 2024 football championships.
Over the four-week tournament, football fans from England to Georgia discovered often to their surprise just how unreliable the trains were. “If it wasn’t already clear, the [experience during the] Euros showed just what a problem Deutsche Bahn has with reliability and punctuality,” wrote Die Zeit on Monday.
One of Germany’s main rail corridors is to be closed for months as part of a major overhaul of the ailing train network of Europe’s largest economy that is expected to last until the end of the decade.
Years of underinvestment and lack of political direction are being blamed for the state of the German railways, which have in recent years been beset by a massive increase in breakdowns, delays, cancellations and other major technical mishaps and led to unflattering comparisons with infrastructure in the developing world.
Deutsche Bahn, the national railway company of Germany, a state-owned enterprise under the control of the German government, has also become the butt of international jokes at the Euro 2024 football championships.
Over the four-week tournament, football fans from England to Georgia discovered often to their surprise just how unreliable the trains were. “If it wasn’t already clear, the [experience during the] Euros showed just what a problem Deutsche Bahn has with reliability and punctuality,” wrote Die Zeit on Monday.
The new government is about to eat its first bowl of shit. The "Titanic" shipyard is asking for £200m in loan guarantees to start a new defence project, they say without it the shipyard is unsustainable. The treasury says that the loan guarantee will just help the owners pay itself a big dividend from the shipyard and they're probably right.
If the government refuses there's a very real chance the shipyard goes under and all the jobs/skills are lost and if they do the subsidy scheme there's a very good chance the shareholders will immediately suck that cash out of the business anyway and leave the taxpayer on the hook for £200m.
So best to let it go bankrupt and then lend the administrators the money to keep projects going..
But as with many things when these issues are involved no easy answers.
Worth saying that Short Brothers next door has similar issues, Airbus has "bought" it from Boeing but the vast majority of it's production is for none Airbus products and they don't want those parts and seemingly nor does Bombardier.
The government should insist on an equity stake, and a place on the board, when lending like this.
The new government is about to eat its first bowl of shit. The "Titanic" shipyard is asking for £200m in loan guarantees to start a new defence project, they say without it the shipyard is unsustainable. The treasury says that the loan guarantee will just help the owners pay itself a big dividend from the shipyard and they're probably right.
If the government refuses there's a very real chance the shipyard goes under and all the jobs/skills are lost and if they do the subsidy scheme there's a very good chance the shareholders will immediately suck that cash out of the business anyway and leave the taxpayer on the hook for £200m.
So best to let it go bankrupt and then lend the administrators the money to keep projects going..
But as with many things when these issues are involved no easy answers.
Worth saying that Short Brothers next door has similar issues, Airbus has "bought" it from Boeing but the vast majority of it's production is for none Airbus products and they don't want those parts and seemingly nor does Bombardier.
Rachel Reeves has decisions to make. What with Mad Ed Miliband trying to kill off 200,000 jobs in the North Sea and the major manufacturers in Belfast looking shakey, this is where we see if she has an industrial policy.
Put in into administration first. Whatever government decides, paying the owners a large dividend is going to make funding any solution more difficult, not easier.
Possibly, but having experience of how administrators work you can guarantee nothing. I rather suspect, despite her cries over the years, Reeves doesnt actually have an industrial strategy.
I'm agnostic on that. And I don't think a forced decision on this shipyard is particularly dispositive on the issue,
You're right about the risks of administration, but there are no perfect, or even good solutions here. There's considerable risk involved if it were to be bailed out.
The new government is about to eat its first bowl of shit. The "Titanic" shipyard is asking for £200m in loan guarantees to start a new defence project, they say without it the shipyard is unsustainable. The treasury says that the loan guarantee will just help the owners pay itself a big dividend from the shipyard and they're probably right.
If the government refuses there's a very real chance the shipyard goes under and all the jobs/skills are lost and if they do the subsidy scheme there's a very good chance the shareholders will immediately suck that cash out of the business anyway and leave the taxpayer on the hook for £200m.
So best to let it go bankrupt and then lend the administrators the money to keep projects going..
But as with many things when these issues are involved no easy answers.
Worth saying that Short Brothers next door has similar issues, Airbus has "bought" it from Boeing but the vast majority of it's production is for none Airbus products and they don't want those parts and seemingly nor does Bombardier.
Rachel Reeves has decisions to make. What with Mad Ed Miliband trying to kill off 200,000 jobs in the North Sea and the major manufacturers in Belfast looking shakey, this is where we see if she has an industrial policy.
Where is your North Sea jobs figure from - that feels incredibly high..
Direct employent/contracting in UK Oil and gas exploration is between 35,000 and 40,000 jobs. There are an additional 100,000 jobs in companies directy supporting the oil and gas industry through manufacturing and direct supply of goods, materials and services. In addition there are around 80,000 jobs which are in services not directly related to the oil industry in the NE but which would suffer some loss due to a downturn in the region.
These numbers are pretty well known because of the experience of previous downturns.
Realistically I would assume that the 40K direct jobs are at risk and a reasonable proportion of the 100K directly supporting jobs. I don't know how you could or should quantify the 80K jobs which might be affected by a regional downturn.
So whilst there are more than 200,000 jobs in the UK being supported by the O&G sector, not all of those would be at risk. Maybe half of them? But that would depend a lot on the wider economy.
I dont see why any of them have to be shut down early. Its a mad decision. I will probably have to close a factory next year if this goes ahead. A small sub contractor 80% dependent on the North Sea. You cant keep the place open on the 20% thats left. So 12 decent and hardworking people get shot because idiots like Miliband want to grandstand.
Climate change is real and a serious problem. We need to transition the economy away from fossil fuels. We can't just ignore that reality because there will be individual job losses.
Thatcher knew that we had to close the coal mines, which also saw decent and hardworking people out of work, more than 200,000 of them. We can do better than Thatcher by supporting the transition better.
There was more support for redundant miners and mining communities in the 1980s than there had been at any time during the previous 70 years - UK coal production had been in decline since 1913.
The problem was the wider industrial changes and resulting high unemployment - something which happened in all industrial economies at that time.
The new government is about to eat its first bowl of shit. The "Titanic" shipyard is asking for £200m in loan guarantees to start a new defence project, they say without it the shipyard is unsustainable. The treasury says that the loan guarantee will just help the owners pay itself a big dividend from the shipyard and they're probably right.
If the government refuses there's a very real chance the shipyard goes under and all the jobs/skills are lost and if they do the subsidy scheme there's a very good chance the shareholders will immediately suck that cash out of the business anyway and leave the taxpayer on the hook for £200m.
So best to let it go bankrupt and then lend the administrators the money to keep projects going..
But as with many things when these issues are involved no easy answers.
Worth saying that Short Brothers next door has similar issues, Airbus has "bought" it from Boeing but the vast majority of it's production is for none Airbus products and they don't want those parts and seemingly nor does Bombardier.
Rachel Reeves has decisions to make. What with Mad Ed Miliband trying to kill off 200,000 jobs in the North Sea and the major manufacturers in Belfast looking shakey, this is where we see if she has an industrial policy.
Put in into administration first. Whatever government decides, paying the owners a large dividend is going to make funding any solution more difficult, not easier.
Possibly, but having experience of how administrators work you can guarantee nothing. I rather suspect, despite her cries over the years, Reeves doesnt actually have an industrial strategy.
I'm agnostic on that. And I don't think a forced decision on this shipyard is particularly dispositive on the issue,
You're right about the risks of administration, but there are no perfect, or even good solutions here. There's considerable risk involved if it were to be bailed out.
The new government is about to eat its first bowl of shit. The "Titanic" shipyard is asking for £200m in loan guarantees to start a new defence project, they say without it the shipyard is unsustainable. The treasury says that the loan guarantee will just help the owners pay itself a big dividend from the shipyard and they're probably right.
If the government refuses there's a very real chance the shipyard goes under and all the jobs/skills are lost and if they do the subsidy scheme there's a very good chance the shareholders will immediately suck that cash out of the business anyway and leave the taxpayer on the hook for £200m.
So best to let it go bankrupt and then lend the administrators the money to keep projects going..
But as with many things when these issues are involved no easy answers.
Worth saying that Short Brothers next door has similar issues, Airbus has "bought" it from Boeing but the vast majority of it's production is for none Airbus products and they don't want those parts and seemingly nor does Bombardier.
Rachel Reeves has decisions to make. What with Mad Ed Miliband trying to kill off 200,000 jobs in the North Sea and the major manufacturers in Belfast looking shakey, this is where we see if she has an industrial policy.
Where is your North Sea jobs figure from - that feels incredibly high..
Direct employent/contracting in UK Oil and gas exploration is between 35,000 and 40,000 jobs. There are an additional 100,000 jobs in companies directy supporting the oil and gas industry through manufacturing and direct supply of goods, materials and services. In addition there are around 80,000 jobs which are in services not directly related to the oil industry in the NE but which would suffer some loss due to a downturn in the region.
These numbers are pretty well known because of the experience of previous downturns.
Realistically I would assume that the 40K direct jobs are at risk and a reasonable proportion of the 100K directly supporting jobs. I don't know how you could or should quantify the 80K jobs which might be affected by a regional downturn.
So whilst there are more than 200,000 jobs in the UK being supported by the O&G sector, not all of those would be at risk. Maybe half of them? But that would depend a lot on the wider economy.
I dont see why any of them have to be shut down early. Its a mad decision. I will probably have to close a factory next year if this goes ahead. A small sub contractor 80% dependent on the North Sea. You cant keep the place open on the 20% thats left. So 12 decent and hardworking people get shot because idiots like Miliband want to grandstand.
Climate change is real and a serious problem. We need to transition the economy away from fossil fuels. We can't just ignore that reality because there will be individual job losses.
Thatcher knew that we had to close the coal mines, which also saw decent and hardworking people out of work, more than 200,000 of them. We can do better than Thatcher by supporting the transition better.
There was more support for redundant miners and mining communities in the 1980s than there had been at any time during the previous 70 years - UK coal production had been in decline since 1913.
The problem was the wider industrial changes and resulting high unemployment - something which happened in all industrial economies at that time.
Added to which, dependency on coal undermined energy security due to the NUM. Nowadays, the shoe is on the other foot, and dependency on imported oil and gas threatens energy security.
"Hundreds of years ago, pre-Enlightenment, Europeans discovered that they didn’t really agree on the nature of Christianity. Some were Catholic and followed the pope. Others were defecting to newer, hipper versions of Protestantism. Their solution to this problem was to murder each other."
"Catholics and Protestants still didn’t like each other much, and often tried to harass or discriminate against each other. Over time, liberalism developed norms to prevent that as well - political freedoms, tolerance, equal treatment before the law, basic human rights, etc."
The new government is about to eat its first bowl of shit. The "Titanic" shipyard is asking for £200m in loan guarantees to start a new defence project, they say without it the shipyard is unsustainable. The treasury says that the loan guarantee will just help the owners pay itself a big dividend from the shipyard and they're probably right.
If the government refuses there's a very real chance the shipyard goes under and all the jobs/skills are lost and if they do the subsidy scheme there's a very good chance the shareholders will immediately suck that cash out of the business anyway and leave the taxpayer on the hook for £200m.
So best to let it go bankrupt and then lend the administrators the money to keep projects going..
But as with many things when these issues are involved no easy answers.
Worth saying that Short Brothers next door has similar issues, Airbus has "bought" it from Boeing but the vast majority of it's production is for none Airbus products and they don't want those parts and seemingly nor does Bombardier.
Rachel Reeves has decisions to make. What with Mad Ed Miliband trying to kill off 200,000 jobs in the North Sea and the major manufacturers in Belfast looking shakey, this is where we see if she has an industrial policy.
Put in into administration first. Whatever government decides, paying the owners a large dividend is going to make funding any solution more difficult, not easier.
Possibly, but having experience of how administrators work you can guarantee nothing. I rather suspect, despite her cries over the years, Reeves doesnt actually have an industrial strategy.
I'm agnostic on that. And I don't think a forced decision on this shipyard is particularly dispositive on the issue,
You're right about the risks of administration, but there are no perfect, or even good solutions here. There's considerable risk involved if it were to be bailed out.
The main risk is Reeves runs out of money to fund her other projects like rail privatisation or water, You could keep Harland going as the customer is ultimately HMG. But aircraft wings thats a much harder propsect as it depends on commercial contracts.
Yes, and the defence review is going to be at least six months, probably a year to complete, so any planning to repurpose Shorts for military procurement isn't really a present option.
Not unless they can shift a lot of jobs to the missile makers across the road. We sort of need lots of missiles atm.
I'd go along with that. It's one thing which won't obsolete all that quickly.
(Though I note S Korea , like us, has also deployed its first anti flying vehicle laser system.)
Sec.Serv. doctrine is to get the principal away from the scene asap, as there's always the possibility of a second shooter. "No risk" is an after the fact judgment.
They didn't get the principal away asap. The principal stopped them for 10 seconds so he could stick his head above the security cordon, and have his photo taken.
"Shooter down" repeatd multiple times is pretty conclusive.
Somewhat reminiscent of Theordore Roosevelt in 1912, when the ex-President was shot by a would-be assassin, and refused medical treatment in favor of giving his speech.
TR did it because he thought it his BIG opportunity to win re-election.
DJT's motivation, which led to The Picture, may have been similar, and also instinctive (ditto Teddy).
Also, he'd been bundled off the stage at an earlier event after an alert. Possibly determined not to let that happen again.
The new government is about to eat its first bowl of shit. The "Titanic" shipyard is asking for £200m in loan guarantees to start a new defence project, they say without it the shipyard is unsustainable. The treasury says that the loan guarantee will just help the owners pay itself a big dividend from the shipyard and they're probably right.
If the government refuses there's a very real chance the shipyard goes under and all the jobs/skills are lost and if they do the subsidy scheme there's a very good chance the shareholders will immediately suck that cash out of the business anyway and leave the taxpayer on the hook for £200m.
So best to let it go bankrupt and then lend the administrators the money to keep projects going..
But as with many things when these issues are involved no easy answers.
Worth saying that Short Brothers next door has similar issues, Airbus has "bought" it from Boeing but the vast majority of it's production is for none Airbus products and they don't want those parts and seemingly nor does Bombardier.
Rachel Reeves has decisions to make. What with Mad Ed Miliband trying to kill off 200,000 jobs in the North Sea and the major manufacturers in Belfast looking shakey, this is where we see if she has an industrial policy.
Put in into administration first. Whatever government decides, paying the owners a large dividend is going to make funding any solution more difficult, not easier.
Possibly, but having experience of how administrators work you can guarantee nothing. I rather suspect, despite her cries over the years, Reeves doesnt actually have an industrial strategy.
I'm agnostic on that. And I don't think a forced decision on this shipyard is particularly dispositive on the issue,
You're right about the risks of administration, but there are no perfect, or even good solutions here. There's considerable risk involved if it were to be bailed out.
The new government is about to eat its first bowl of shit. The "Titanic" shipyard is asking for £200m in loan guarantees to start a new defence project, they say without it the shipyard is unsustainable. The treasury says that the loan guarantee will just help the owners pay itself a big dividend from the shipyard and they're probably right.
If the government refuses there's a very real chance the shipyard goes under and all the jobs/skills are lost and if they do the subsidy scheme there's a very good chance the shareholders will immediately suck that cash out of the business anyway and leave the taxpayer on the hook for £200m.
So best to let it go bankrupt and then lend the administrators the money to keep projects going..
But as with many things when these issues are involved no easy answers.
Worth saying that Short Brothers next door has similar issues, Airbus has "bought" it from Boeing but the vast majority of it's production is for none Airbus products and they don't want those parts and seemingly nor does Bombardier.
Rachel Reeves has decisions to make. What with Mad Ed Miliband trying to kill off 200,000 jobs in the North Sea and the major manufacturers in Belfast looking shakey, this is where we see if she has an industrial policy.
Where is your North Sea jobs figure from - that feels incredibly high..
Direct employent/contracting in UK Oil and gas exploration is between 35,000 and 40,000 jobs. There are an additional 100,000 jobs in companies directy supporting the oil and gas industry through manufacturing and direct supply of goods, materials and services. In addition there are around 80,000 jobs which are in services not directly related to the oil industry in the NE but which would suffer some loss due to a downturn in the region.
These numbers are pretty well known because of the experience of previous downturns.
Realistically I would assume that the 40K direct jobs are at risk and a reasonable proportion of the 100K directly supporting jobs. I don't know how you could or should quantify the 80K jobs which might be affected by a regional downturn.
So whilst there are more than 200,000 jobs in the UK being supported by the O&G sector, not all of those would be at risk. Maybe half of them? But that would depend a lot on the wider economy.
I dont see why any of them have to be shut down early. Its a mad decision. I will probably have to close a factory next year if this goes ahead. A small sub contractor 80% dependent on the North Sea. You cant keep the place open on the 20% thats left. So 12 decent and hardworking people get shot because idiots like Miliband want to grandstand.
Climate change is real and a serious problem. We need to transition the economy away from fossil fuels. We can't just ignore that reality because there will be individual job losses.
Thatcher knew that we had to close the coal mines, which also saw decent and hardworking people out of work, more than 200,000 of them. We can do better than Thatcher by supporting the transition better.
This does nothing to 'transition the economy away' from fossil fuels, it simply means those fossil fuels are imported, at great monetary and environmental cost.
No person who believed sincerely in minimising carbon emissions, as opposed to being on a sociopathic mission to destroy Britain's economy, would welcome this sort of move.
Well, I didn't have 'sociopathic mission to destroy the economy' on the first 100 days bingo card...
Ignoring the hysterical hyperbole, those 12 jobs to be set against the literally thousands of new jobs, investment returns and export potential of leading on renewables and transitioning away from fossil fuels.
(All the Rosebank oil will be exported incidentally. Ebbs and flows of oil stocks plus different grades of crude)
You an have all the new jobs as well as the existing ones. I thought "growth " was the big thing ?
I don't think we're closing down O&G tomorrow are we? We'll have fossil fuels for quite some time. But the direction of travel has changed and that's key.
If reports on Miliband are correct we are. The NS will close down eventually anyway, there is no value to the UK in accelerating the end date.
Sorry. What reports are those? Genuinely interested to know more about this. There is a stated end date?
The new government is about to eat its first bowl of shit. The "Titanic" shipyard is asking for £200m in loan guarantees to start a new defence project, they say without it the shipyard is unsustainable. The treasury says that the loan guarantee will just help the owners pay itself a big dividend from the shipyard and they're probably right.
If the government refuses there's a very real chance the shipyard goes under and all the jobs/skills are lost and if they do the subsidy scheme there's a very good chance the shareholders will immediately suck that cash out of the business anyway and leave the taxpayer on the hook for £200m.
So best to let it go bankrupt and then lend the administrators the money to keep projects going..
But as with many things when these issues are involved no easy answers.
Worth saying that Short Brothers next door has similar issues, Airbus has "bought" it from Boeing but the vast majority of it's production is for none Airbus products and they don't want those parts and seemingly nor does Bombardier.
Rachel Reeves has decisions to make. What with Mad Ed Miliband trying to kill off 200,000 jobs in the North Sea and the major manufacturers in Belfast looking shakey, this is where we see if she has an industrial policy.
Put in into administration first. Whatever government decides, paying the owners a large dividend is going to make funding any solution more difficult, not easier.
Possibly, but having experience of how administrators work you can guarantee nothing. I rather suspect, despite her cries over the years, Reeves doesnt actually have an industrial strategy.
I'm agnostic on that. And I don't think a forced decision on this shipyard is particularly dispositive on the issue,
You're right about the risks of administration, but there are no perfect, or even good solutions here. There's considerable risk involved if it were to be bailed out.
The new government is about to eat its first bowl of shit. The "Titanic" shipyard is asking for £200m in loan guarantees to start a new defence project, they say without it the shipyard is unsustainable. The treasury says that the loan guarantee will just help the owners pay itself a big dividend from the shipyard and they're probably right.
If the government refuses there's a very real chance the shipyard goes under and all the jobs/skills are lost and if they do the subsidy scheme there's a very good chance the shareholders will immediately suck that cash out of the business anyway and leave the taxpayer on the hook for £200m.
So best to let it go bankrupt and then lend the administrators the money to keep projects going..
But as with many things when these issues are involved no easy answers.
Worth saying that Short Brothers next door has similar issues, Airbus has "bought" it from Boeing but the vast majority of it's production is for none Airbus products and they don't want those parts and seemingly nor does Bombardier.
Rachel Reeves has decisions to make. What with Mad Ed Miliband trying to kill off 200,000 jobs in the North Sea and the major manufacturers in Belfast looking shakey, this is where we see if she has an industrial policy.
Where is your North Sea jobs figure from - that feels incredibly high..
Direct employent/contracting in UK Oil and gas exploration is between 35,000 and 40,000 jobs. There are an additional 100,000 jobs in companies directy supporting the oil and gas industry through manufacturing and direct supply of goods, materials and services. In addition there are around 80,000 jobs which are in services not directly related to the oil industry in the NE but which would suffer some loss due to a downturn in the region.
These numbers are pretty well known because of the experience of previous downturns.
Realistically I would assume that the 40K direct jobs are at risk and a reasonable proportion of the 100K directly supporting jobs. I don't know how you could or should quantify the 80K jobs which might be affected by a regional downturn.
So whilst there are more than 200,000 jobs in the UK being supported by the O&G sector, not all of those would be at risk. Maybe half of them? But that would depend a lot on the wider economy.
I dont see why any of them have to be shut down early. Its a mad decision. I will probably have to close a factory next year if this goes ahead. A small sub contractor 80% dependent on the North Sea. You cant keep the place open on the 20% thats left. So 12 decent and hardworking people get shot because idiots like Miliband want to grandstand.
Climate change is real and a serious problem. We need to transition the economy away from fossil fuels. We can't just ignore that reality because there will be individual job losses.
Thatcher knew that we had to close the coal mines, which also saw decent and hardworking people out of work, more than 200,000 of them. We can do better than Thatcher by supporting the transition better.
This does nothing to 'transition the economy away' from fossil fuels, it simply means those fossil fuels are imported, at great monetary and environmental cost.
No person who believed sincerely in minimising carbon emissions, as opposed to being on a sociopathic mission to destroy Britain's economy, would welcome this sort of move.
Well, I didn't have 'sociopathic mission to destroy the economy' on the first 100 days bingo card...
Ignoring the hysterical hyperbole, those 12 jobs to be set against the literally thousands of new jobs, investment returns and export potential of leading on renewables and transitioning away from fossil fuels.
(All the Rosebank oil will be exported incidentally. Ebbs and flows of oil stocks plus different grades of crude)
You an have all the new jobs as well as the existing ones. I thought "growth " was the big thing ?
I don't think we're closing down O&G tomorrow are we? We'll have fossil fuels for quite some time. But the direction of travel has changed and that's key.
If reports on Miliband are correct we are. The NS will close down eventually anyway, there is no value to the UK in accelerating the end date.
Sorry. What reports are those? Genuinely interested to know more about this. There is a stated end date?
I suspect Labour wanted to spin their more coherent Net Zero plan around the same time Roger Hallam and Just Stop Oil campaigners are being sentenced.
We are at the PR tussle stage. However I have little doubt Miliband will push forward on his crusade irrespective of the facts. He is an ideologue and will not worry about the cost.
"Hundreds of years ago, pre-Enlightenment, Europeans discovered that they didn’t really agree on the nature of Christianity. Some were Catholic and followed the pope. Others were defecting to newer, hipper versions of Protestantism. Their solution to this problem was to murder each other."
"Catholics and Protestants still didn’t like each other much, and often tried to harass or discriminate against each other. Over time, liberalism developed norms to prevent that as well - political freedoms, tolerance, equal treatment before the law, basic human rights, etc."
But alas it didn't work in NornIron....
NI was removed from the rest of Ireland by national strife - the religious angle being the preferred line when writing it off as a mere civil war.
The new government is about to eat its first bowl of shit. The "Titanic" shipyard is asking for £200m in loan guarantees to start a new defence project, they say without it the shipyard is unsustainable. The treasury says that the loan guarantee will just help the owners pay itself a big dividend from the shipyard and they're probably right.
If the government refuses there's a very real chance the shipyard goes under and all the jobs/skills are lost and if they do the subsidy scheme there's a very good chance the shareholders will immediately suck that cash out of the business anyway and leave the taxpayer on the hook for £200m.
So best to let it go bankrupt and then lend the administrators the money to keep projects going..
But as with many things when these issues are involved no easy answers.
Worth saying that Short Brothers next door has similar issues, Airbus has "bought" it from Boeing but the vast majority of it's production is for none Airbus products and they don't want those parts and seemingly nor does Bombardier.
Rachel Reeves has decisions to make. What with Mad Ed Miliband trying to kill off 200,000 jobs in the North Sea and the major manufacturers in Belfast looking shakey, this is where we see if she has an industrial policy.
Put in into administration first. Whatever government decides, paying the owners a large dividend is going to make funding any solution more difficult, not easier.
Possibly, but having experience of how administrators work you can guarantee nothing. I rather suspect, despite her cries over the years, Reeves doesnt actually have an industrial strategy.
I'm agnostic on that. And I don't think a forced decision on this shipyard is particularly dispositive on the issue,
You're right about the risks of administration, but there are no perfect, or even good solutions here. There's considerable risk involved if it were to be bailed out.
The new government is about to eat its first bowl of shit. The "Titanic" shipyard is asking for £200m in loan guarantees to start a new defence project, they say without it the shipyard is unsustainable. The treasury says that the loan guarantee will just help the owners pay itself a big dividend from the shipyard and they're probably right.
If the government refuses there's a very real chance the shipyard goes under and all the jobs/skills are lost and if they do the subsidy scheme there's a very good chance the shareholders will immediately suck that cash out of the business anyway and leave the taxpayer on the hook for £200m.
So best to let it go bankrupt and then lend the administrators the money to keep projects going..
But as with many things when these issues are involved no easy answers.
Worth saying that Short Brothers next door has similar issues, Airbus has "bought" it from Boeing but the vast majority of it's production is for none Airbus products and they don't want those parts and seemingly nor does Bombardier.
Rachel Reeves has decisions to make. What with Mad Ed Miliband trying to kill off 200,000 jobs in the North Sea and the major manufacturers in Belfast looking shakey, this is where we see if she has an industrial policy.
Where is your North Sea jobs figure from - that feels incredibly high..
Direct employent/contracting in UK Oil and gas exploration is between 35,000 and 40,000 jobs. There are an additional 100,000 jobs in companies directy supporting the oil and gas industry through manufacturing and direct supply of goods, materials and services. In addition there are around 80,000 jobs which are in services not directly related to the oil industry in the NE but which would suffer some loss due to a downturn in the region.
These numbers are pretty well known because of the experience of previous downturns.
Realistically I would assume that the 40K direct jobs are at risk and a reasonable proportion of the 100K directly supporting jobs. I don't know how you could or should quantify the 80K jobs which might be affected by a regional downturn.
So whilst there are more than 200,000 jobs in the UK being supported by the O&G sector, not all of those would be at risk. Maybe half of them? But that would depend a lot on the wider economy.
I dont see why any of them have to be shut down early. Its a mad decision. I will probably have to close a factory next year if this goes ahead. A small sub contractor 80% dependent on the North Sea. You cant keep the place open on the 20% thats left. So 12 decent and hardworking people get shot because idiots like Miliband want to grandstand.
Climate change is real and a serious problem. We need to transition the economy away from fossil fuels. We can't just ignore that reality because there will be individual job losses.
Thatcher knew that we had to close the coal mines, which also saw decent and hardworking people out of work, more than 200,000 of them. We can do better than Thatcher by supporting the transition better.
This does nothing to 'transition the economy away' from fossil fuels, it simply means those fossil fuels are imported, at great monetary and environmental cost.
No person who believed sincerely in minimising carbon emissions, as opposed to being on a sociopathic mission to destroy Britain's economy, would welcome this sort of move.
Well, I didn't have 'sociopathic mission to destroy the economy' on the first 100 days bingo card...
Ignoring the hysterical hyperbole, those 12 jobs to be set against the literally thousands of new jobs, investment returns and export potential of leading on renewables and transitioning away from fossil fuels.
(All the Rosebank oil will be exported incidentally. Ebbs and flows of oil stocks plus different grades of crude)
You an have all the new jobs as well as the existing ones. I thought "growth " was the big thing ?
I don't think we're closing down O&G tomorrow are we? We'll have fossil fuels for quite some time. But the direction of travel has changed and that's key.
If reports on Miliband are correct we are. The NS will close down eventually anyway, there is no value to the UK in accelerating the end date.
Sorry. What reports are those? Genuinely interested to know more about this. There is a stated end date?
I suspect Labour wanted to spin their more coherent Net Zero plan around the same time Roger Hallam and Just Stop Oil campaigners are being sentenced.
We are at the PR tussle stage. However I have little doubt Miliband will push forward on his crusade irrespective of the facts. He is an ideologue and will not worry about the cost.
My hope is that he's an early sacking as Keir goes for a 'growth reset'.
Donald Trump’s criminal case on charges that he illegally retained classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago club was dismissed on Monday by the presiding judge, ruling that the special counsel who brought the case was unlawfully appointed and funded under the US constitution.
To every neutral American this now looks like a dedicated attempt by the powers-that-be, to take out Trump, by any and all means, up to and including murder
Trump appointed judge dismisses case against Trump on an irrelevant technicality.
You don't need to be super partisan to smell a rat here.
How's that different from Dem appointed prosecutor cobbles together questionable charges and takes them to Dem judge ?
If youre going to mess around with the legal system stop whingeing if the other side follows your lead.
The idea of the law being applied objectively and without favour is so impossibly naive that anyone so deluded must necessarily have an agenda themselves, it seems.
A friend of mine, not a Trumpite, said to me yesterday
"My God, that photo, made me want to vote for him"
Given that he lives in Truro, Cornwall this should not unduly influence the US elex - he hasn't got a vote; but I thought it was an interesting reaction. And it supports your thesis
How odd. None of my friends have said anything like that. However Pulpstar is not wrong. The assassination attempt does help Donald Trump. It helps in several ways:
The 'heroic' image as discussed. Personally I think he looks a bit of a bellend there but there will be those who are stirred by it. It adds something to his brand which was previously missing. Physical courage. Up to now he's tended to come across as what he is - flabby, vain and cowardly. It's the vanity that has driven this response/photo but it can look like courage. To some it will.
It throttles the DEM's main line of attack - the warning that he's a threat to democracy and the constitution. This charge, although entirely justified, can now be painted as a demonisation exercise that has led to him almost being murdered. It provides the GOP with their own iconic date (13th July) to play against the DEM's Jan 6th. There's no equivalence, Jan 6th was instigated by Trump and perpetrated by his followers, whereas July 13th was a lone nutcase and zero to do with Biden, but this will only matter to people who can think properly. Plenty can't.
Finally, icing on the cake, it likely cements Joe Biden in place as the DEM candidate, gifting Trump with an opponent too frail to campaign effectively and clearly too frail to serve a second term.
So, all told, the catastrophic prospect of Trump2 has been rendered more likely by this dreadful event. Thank you, Thomas Matthew Crooks, thanks a bunch.
It might be as desperate as you suggest. Alternatively you might have been reading too much @Leon .
Let us see how the land lies by the Dem Convention. Although that probably means another month of Leon spamming the site with his ejaculations over the Presidential Election.
Ah no, hang on. It makes Trump2 more likely but it's far from a done deal. He's a sell not a buy imo at current prices.
"Britain will remain dependent on gas for years, warns National Grid New forecasts predict higher than expected demand in 2030 in blow to Starmer’s green energy ambitions
By Matt Oliver INDUSTRY EDITOR
Britain will be forced to rely on natural gas for years to come, in a blow to Sir Keir Starmer’s green energy ambitions, National Grid has said.
Demand for gas is now expected to be between 642 and 724 terawatt hours in 2030, according to the National Grid Electricity System Operator (ESO).
That is at least a fifth higher than the previous minimum and at the top end of what was predicted just a year ago.
The minimum predicted demand for gas in 2035 has also shifted upwards, from 331 terawatt hours to at least 433 terawatt hours....."
"Britain will remain dependent on gas for years, warns National Grid New forecasts predict higher than expected demand in 2030 in blow to Starmer’s green energy ambitions
By Matt Oliver INDUSTRY EDITOR
Britain will be forced to rely on natural gas for years to come, in a blow to Sir Keir Starmer’s green energy ambitions, National Grid has said.
Demand for gas is now expected to be between 642 and 724 terawatt hours in 2030, according to the National Grid Electricity System Operator (ESO).
That is at least a fifth higher than the previous minimum and at the top end of what was predicted just a year ago.
The minimum predicted demand for gas in 2035 has also shifted upwards, from 331 terawatt hours to at least 433 terawatt hours....."
The only way we could not be dependent on natural gas is if we build lots of raised reservoirs in order to provide hydro-power when there's no wind or sun.
A friend of mine, not a Trumpite, said to me yesterday
"My God, that photo, made me want to vote for him"
Given that he lives in Truro, Cornwall this should not unduly influence the US elex - he hasn't got a vote; but I thought it was an interesting reaction. And it supports your thesis
How odd. None of my friends have said anything like that. However Pulpstar is not wrong. The assassination attempt does help Donald Trump. It helps in several ways:
The 'heroic' image as discussed. Personally I think he looks a bit of a bellend there but there will be those who are stirred by it. It adds something to his brand which was previously missing. Physical courage. Up to now he's tended to come across as what he is - flabby, vain and cowardly. It's the vanity that has driven this response/photo but it can look like courage. To some it will.
It throttles the DEM's main line of attack - the warning that he's a threat to democracy and the constitution. This charge, although entirely justified, can now be painted as a demonisation exercise that has led to him almost being murdered. It provides the GOP with their own iconic date (13th July) to play against the DEM's Jan 6th. There's no equivalence, Jan 6th was instigated by Trump and perpetrated by his followers, whereas July 13th was a lone nutcase and zero to do with Biden, but this will only matter to people who can think properly. Plenty can't.
Finally, icing on the cake, it likely cements Joe Biden in place as the DEM candidate, gifting Trump with an opponent too frail to campaign effectively and clearly too frail to serve a second term.
So, all told, the catastrophic prospect of Trump2 has been rendered more likely by this dreadful event. Thank you, Thomas Matthew Crooks, thanks a bunch.
Trump is having an astonishingly good few days.
A judge threw out another case earlier to add to his momentum.
He looks unstoppable now frankly, but my view is that he won anyway on the evening Biden did debate and showed everyone he was too old to govern any longer.
Things sure have fallen his way recently. But he's not unstoppable imo. He's despised by as many who love him. And lots can happen between now and November.
Perhaps most infamously, 'Supertram', put forward in the 1990s, was the next major scheme designed to better connect the city in the form of light rail. Originally backed by the New Labour government and due to start in 2004, spiralling costs too saw this project cancelled.
However, work to construct the system that was due to start in earnest in 2004 was suspended because of costs that were originally £500 million had risen far above this level to figures around £1 billion. This had resulted in a cut back to the system that would have seen Line 1 only go from the city centre to the park and ride site at Stourton and this would have saved £250 million from the construction of the scheme and efforts were made to lower development costs along the other planned routes. However despite this in late 2005, Transport Minister Alistair Darling said that he would not give the go-ahead for the scheme, despite £40 million having already been spent into the development of the scheme.
So in twenty years predicted costs have gone from 500m to £1bn to £2.5bn for a much smaller system.
"Donald Trump on course to win 2024 election, Times poll suggests exclusive YouGov survey — undertaken before Saturday’s assassination attempt — puts the former president ahead of Joe Biden in seven swing states"
It throttles the DEM's main line of attack - the warning that he's a threat to democracy and the constitution. This charge, although entirely justified, can now be painted as a demonisation exercise that has led to him almost being murdered.
The problem is trying to have it both ways, as you are doing here.
If he's an American Hitler then why is assassination a step too far? They can't distance themselves from their own rhetoric without revealing that they don't really believe it and never have done.
That's just a piece of facile cleverdickery. Think Leon aired it earlier. Is it from right wing twitter?
One of Germany’s main rail corridors is to be closed for months as part of a major overhaul of the ailing train network of Europe’s largest economy that is expected to last until the end of the decade.
Years of underinvestment and lack of political direction are being blamed for the state of the German railways, which have in recent years been beset by a massive increase in breakdowns, delays, cancellations and other major technical mishaps and led to unflattering comparisons with infrastructure in the developing world.
Deutsche Bahn, the national railway company of Germany, a state-owned enterprise under the control of the German government, has also become the butt of international jokes at the Euro 2024 football championships.
Over the four-week tournament, football fans from England to Georgia discovered often to their surprise just how unreliable the trains were. “If it wasn’t already clear, the [experience during the] Euros showed just what a problem Deutsche Bahn has with reliability and punctuality,” wrote Die Zeit on Monday.
Yet we've been continually told that nationalised railways are so much better.
It's hardly as if Avanti West Coast, for example, provides a sterling service fit for the 21st century though, is it?
Privatised monopolies like this are all about inflicting a bad product on a captive market for excessive prices, then siphoning off as much of the profit as possible to the shareholders. See also: the water businesses in England and Wales.
"Hundreds of years ago, pre-Enlightenment, Europeans discovered that they didn’t really agree on the nature of Christianity. Some were Catholic and followed the pope. Others were defecting to newer, hipper versions of Protestantism. Their solution to this problem was to murder each other."
"Catholics and Protestants still didn’t like each other much, and often tried to harass or discriminate against each other. Over time, liberalism developed norms to prevent that as well - political freedoms, tolerance, equal treatment before the law, basic human rights, etc."
But alas it didn't work in NornIron....
NI was removed from the rest of Ireland by national strife - the religious angle being the preferred line when writing it off as a mere civil war.
Preferred by just about everybody.
Mind you, Orange Parades are now much more entertaining featuring scantily clad marchers flashing their boobs.
Tidal power - works on 4 generating cycles a day - on incoming and outgoing tide twice a day. You only need an offset in tides between two locations of 3-4 hours to balance power generation. Cardiff and Colwyn Bay have been proposed for this reason.
Further, you can add storage capacity to use it as pumped storage for other power generators, when they are in surplus.
Donald Trump’s criminal case on charges that he illegally retained classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago club was dismissed on Monday by the presiding judge, ruling that the special counsel who brought the case was unlawfully appointed and funded under the US constitution.
To every neutral American this now looks like a dedicated attempt by the powers-that-be, to take out Trump, by any and all means, up to and including murder
Trump appointed judge dismisses case against Trump on an irrelevant technicality.
You don't need to be super partisan to smell a rat here.
How's that different from Dem appointed prosecutor cobbles together questionable charges and takes them to Dem judge ?
If youre going to mess around with the legal system stop whingeing if the other side follows your lead.
You might not have noticed, but Cannon is not an appeal court judge. She just directly contradicted recent decisions by Trump appointed circuit court appeal judges, and three Trump appointed judges on the Supreme Court itself.
Tidal power - works on 4 generating cycles a day - on incoming and outgoing tide twice a day. You only need an offset in tides between two locations of 3-4 hours to balance power generation. Cardiff and Colwyn Bay have been proposed for this reason.
It was mentioned in the Labour manifesto, but not prominently. Pity MarqueeMark isn't here no to proselytise
Swansea bay could have been up and running by now.
Yes it was very expensive but most of that was the civil engineering works which would have lasted a century or more (far more if maintained well).
My worry about tidal is wildlife: estuaries tend to be pretty valuable habitats. How do you not destroy that? How, for example, do you allow fish access/egress through a big dam you've put across the mouth of the estuary? Presumably it can be done?
I understand but, I don't think we have a choice.
If we are not to regress to the 19th Century or earlier, then with current scientific knowledge and technology we have to be destructive of some environments.
No one ever wants it to be their local one though.
Although things like migrating fish getting past a dam assume someone has come up with some solution. A chain of weirs bypassing the dam perhaps?
Some of the designs are complete tidal ponds - as in a circular earth and rock dam. You build this on a suitable piece of tidal estuary.
Because they don't block the estuary, and will be quickly colonised by birds etc, the impact on wildlife would probably be much lower.
Perhaps most infamously, 'Supertram', put forward in the 1990s, was the next major scheme designed to better connect the city in the form of light rail. Originally backed by the New Labour government and due to start in 2004, spiralling costs too saw this project cancelled.
However, work to construct the system that was due to start in earnest in 2004 was suspended because of costs that were originally £500 million had risen far above this level to figures around £1 billion. This had resulted in a cut back to the system that would have seen Line 1 only go from the city centre to the park and ride site at Stourton and this would have saved £250 million from the construction of the scheme and efforts were made to lower development costs along the other planned routes. However despite this in late 2005, Transport Minister Alistair Darling said that he would not give the go-ahead for the scheme, despite £40 million having already been spent into the development of the scheme.
So in twenty years predicted costs have gone from 500m to £1bn to £2.5bn for a much smaller system.
A lesson there. If you don't build infrastructure projects when borrowing rates for government are 0.5%, then you're utterly stupid.
That's not a party political point, as both Tory and Labour governments are to blame.
Huge missed opportunities - tidal power being one.
Perhaps most infamously, 'Supertram', put forward in the 1990s, was the next major scheme designed to better connect the city in the form of light rail. Originally backed by the New Labour government and due to start in 2004, spiralling costs too saw this project cancelled.
However, work to construct the system that was due to start in earnest in 2004 was suspended because of costs that were originally £500 million had risen far above this level to figures around £1 billion. This had resulted in a cut back to the system that would have seen Line 1 only go from the city centre to the park and ride site at Stourton and this would have saved £250 million from the construction of the scheme and efforts were made to lower development costs along the other planned routes. However despite this in late 2005, Transport Minister Alistair Darling said that he would not give the go-ahead for the scheme, despite £40 million having already been spent into the development of the scheme.
So in twenty years predicted costs have gone from 500m to £1bn to £2.5bn for a much smaller system.
Darling hated trams. He plugholed the Liverpool and Portsmouth schemes too, and did his best to cancel Edinburgh and stop Manchester and Nottingham extensions.
On leaving the Nottingham Tram system formal opening celebrations he "apparently muttered to his advisors that he hoped this was the last opening of an overpriced, over-budget system that he would have to attend."
"The difference between births and deaths in England and Wales fell to its lowest level in 45 years last year, with fewer people having children. The Office for National Statistics said that from mid-2022 to mid-2023 there were 598,400 births, a decrease of 21,900 compared with the previous year and the lowest since 2002. There were 598,000 deaths over the period, an increase of 24,000 and in line with the UK’s ageing population, the ONS said. The natural change, or the difference between births and deaths, was just 400 in 2023, the lowest since 1978. An increase in migration drove the population of England and Wales to grow by 610,000, the highest for at least 75 years, taking the total to 60.9 million."
One of Germany’s main rail corridors is to be closed for months as part of a major overhaul of the ailing train network of Europe’s largest economy that is expected to last until the end of the decade.
Years of underinvestment and lack of political direction are being blamed for the state of the German railways, which have in recent years been beset by a massive increase in breakdowns, delays, cancellations and other major technical mishaps and led to unflattering comparisons with infrastructure in the developing world.
Deutsche Bahn, the national railway company of Germany, a state-owned enterprise under the control of the German government, has also become the butt of international jokes at the Euro 2024 football championships.
Over the four-week tournament, football fans from England to Georgia discovered often to their surprise just how unreliable the trains were. “If it wasn’t already clear, the [experience during the] Euros showed just what a problem Deutsche Bahn has with reliability and punctuality,” wrote Die Zeit on Monday.
Yet we've been continually told that nationalised railways are so much better.
It's hardly as if Avanti West Coast, for example, provides a sterling service fit for the 21st century though, is it?
Privatised monopolies like this are all about inflicting a bad product on a captive market for excessive prices, then siphoning off as much of the profit as possible to the shareholders. See also: the water businesses in England and Wales.
But in the case of rail, that's bullshit. And as the article shows, in Germany the *nationalised* DB is not doing well.
The ownership structure is often unimportant to success or failure. What matters is the management of the system, and in the case of rail in England, the DfT plays much more of a role in success or failure than the franchises or concessions.
One of Germany’s main rail corridors is to be closed for months as part of a major overhaul of the ailing train network of Europe’s largest economy that is expected to last until the end of the decade.
Years of underinvestment and lack of political direction are being blamed for the state of the German railways, which have in recent years been beset by a massive increase in breakdowns, delays, cancellations and other major technical mishaps and led to unflattering comparisons with infrastructure in the developing world.
Deutsche Bahn, the national railway company of Germany, a state-owned enterprise under the control of the German government, has also become the butt of international jokes at the Euro 2024 football championships.
Over the four-week tournament, football fans from England to Georgia discovered often to their surprise just how unreliable the trains were. “If it wasn’t already clear, the [experience during the] Euros showed just what a problem Deutsche Bahn has with reliability and punctuality,” wrote Die Zeit on Monday.
Yet we've been continually told that nationalised railways are so much better.
It's hardly as if Avanti West Coast, for example, provides a sterling service fit for the 21st century though, is it?
Privatised monopolies like this are all about inflicting a bad product on a captive market for excessive prices, then siphoning off as much of the profit as possible to the shareholders. See also: the water businesses in England and Wales.
It doesn't matter who runs the railways - the infrastructure needs to be properly maintained and trying to avoid that maintenace and resulting expense doesn't end well. Much of the UK rail network still runs on 19th century infrastructure so needs frequent repair and maintenance.
Poor maintenace doesn't just cause delays as we know and one of the achievements of the last decade is how much safer our railways have become. Yes, incidents still happen but overall travelling by rail, while not always enjoyable or comfortable or value for money, is safe.
"Hundreds of years ago, pre-Enlightenment, Europeans discovered that they didn’t really agree on the nature of Christianity. Some were Catholic and followed the pope. Others were defecting to newer, hipper versions of Protestantism. Their solution to this problem was to murder each other."
"Catholics and Protestants still didn’t like each other much, and often tried to harass or discriminate against each other. Over time, liberalism developed norms to prevent that as well - political freedoms, tolerance, equal treatment before the law, basic human rights, etc."
But alas it didn't work in NornIron....
NI was removed from the rest of Ireland by national strife - the religious angle being the preferred line when writing it off as a mere civil war.
Yup - consider this rum blossom
then imagine debating, with him, the concept of transubstantiation. Or getting him to spell it.
"Britain will remain dependent on gas for years, warns National Grid New forecasts predict higher than expected demand in 2030 in blow to Starmer’s green energy ambitions
By Matt Oliver INDUSTRY EDITOR
Britain will be forced to rely on natural gas for years to come, in a blow to Sir Keir Starmer’s green energy ambitions, National Grid has said.
Demand for gas is now expected to be between 642 and 724 terawatt hours in 2030, according to the National Grid Electricity System Operator (ESO).
That is at least a fifth higher than the previous minimum and at the top end of what was predicted just a year ago.
The minimum predicted demand for gas in 2035 has also shifted upwards, from 331 terawatt hours to at least 433 terawatt hours....."
I think from a quick squint at the National Grid report most of this gas demand comes from domestic and industrial boilers. Clearly most of those boilers won't be replaced in the next five years.
Tidal power - works on 4 generating cycles a day - on incoming and outgoing tide twice a day. You only need an offset in tides between two locations of 3-4 hours to balance power generation. Cardiff and Colwyn Bay have been proposed for this reason.
It was mentioned in the Labour manifesto, but not prominently. Pity MarqueeMark isn't here no to proselytise
Swansea bay could have been up and running by now.
Yes it was very expensive but most of that was the civil engineering works which would have lasted a century or more (far more if maintained well).
My worry about tidal is wildlife: estuaries tend to be pretty valuable habitats. How do you not destroy that? How, for example, do you allow fish access/egress through a big dam you've put across the mouth of the estuary? Presumably it can be done?
I understand but, I don't think we have a choice.
If we are not to regress to the 19th Century or earlier, then with current scientific knowledge and technology we have to be destructive of some environments.
No one ever wants it to be their local one though.
Although things like migrating fish getting past a dam assume someone has come up with some solution. A chain of weirs bypassing the dam perhaps?
Some of the designs are complete tidal ponds - as in a circular earth and rock dam. You build this on a suitable piece of tidal estuary.
Because they don't block the estuary, and will be quickly colonised by birds etc, the impact on wildlife would probably be much lower.
Problem is that even if Miliband decided to go for it, it would be about 12 years before the first one came online for both Process State reasons and finding sufficient trained people to build them in any quantity, by which time two general elections would have taken place and the overruning costs and delays (see process state) would result in all but the half built protoype being canned.
Perhaps most infamously, 'Supertram', put forward in the 1990s, was the next major scheme designed to better connect the city in the form of light rail. Originally backed by the New Labour government and due to start in 2004, spiralling costs too saw this project cancelled.
However, work to construct the system that was due to start in earnest in 2004 was suspended because of costs that were originally £500 million had risen far above this level to figures around £1 billion. This had resulted in a cut back to the system that would have seen Line 1 only go from the city centre to the park and ride site at Stourton and this would have saved £250 million from the construction of the scheme and efforts were made to lower development costs along the other planned routes. However despite this in late 2005, Transport Minister Alistair Darling said that he would not give the go-ahead for the scheme, despite £40 million having already been spent into the development of the scheme.
So in twenty years predicted costs have gone from 500m to £1bn to £2.5bn for a much smaller system.
A lesson there. If you don't build infrastructure projects when borrowing rates for government are 0.5%, then you're utterly stupid.
That's not a party political point, as both Tory and Labour governments are to blame.
Huge missed opportunities - tidal power being one.
Borrowing rates don't stay at 0.5% forever as we've now discovered.
I do have some sympathies with politicians over not investing in infrastructure as who wants to deal with the inevitable and endless costs increases and timescale overruns.
Its easier to spend money on a pay rise or tax cut or an extra subsidy which has an immediate effect - its what the voters prefer after all.
One of Germany’s main rail corridors is to be closed for months as part of a major overhaul of the ailing train network of Europe’s largest economy that is expected to last until the end of the decade.
Years of underinvestment and lack of political direction are being blamed for the state of the German railways, which have in recent years been beset by a massive increase in breakdowns, delays, cancellations and other major technical mishaps and led to unflattering comparisons with infrastructure in the developing world.
Deutsche Bahn, the national railway company of Germany, a state-owned enterprise under the control of the German government, has also become the butt of international jokes at the Euro 2024 football championships.
Over the four-week tournament, football fans from England to Georgia discovered often to their surprise just how unreliable the trains were. “If it wasn’t already clear, the [experience during the] Euros showed just what a problem Deutsche Bahn has with reliability and punctuality,” wrote Die Zeit on Monday.
Yet we've been continually told that nationalised railways are so much better.
It's hardly as if Avanti West Coast, for example, provides a sterling service fit for the 21st century though, is it?
Privatised monopolies like this are all about inflicting a bad product on a captive market for excessive prices, then siphoning off as much of the profit as possible to the shareholders. See also: the water businesses in England and Wales.
So nationalised railways are bad and privatised railways are bad ?
Perhaps most infamously, 'Supertram', put forward in the 1990s, was the next major scheme designed to better connect the city in the form of light rail. Originally backed by the New Labour government and due to start in 2004, spiralling costs too saw this project cancelled.
However, work to construct the system that was due to start in earnest in 2004 was suspended because of costs that were originally £500 million had risen far above this level to figures around £1 billion. This had resulted in a cut back to the system that would have seen Line 1 only go from the city centre to the park and ride site at Stourton and this would have saved £250 million from the construction of the scheme and efforts were made to lower development costs along the other planned routes. However despite this in late 2005, Transport Minister Alistair Darling said that he would not give the go-ahead for the scheme, despite £40 million having already been spent into the development of the scheme.
So in twenty years predicted costs have gone from 500m to £1bn to £2.5bn for a much smaller system.
A lesson there. If you don't build infrastructure projects when borrowing rates for government are 0.5%, then you're utterly stupid.
That's not a party political point, as both Tory and Labour governments are to blame.
Huge missed opportunities - tidal power being one.
Borrowing rates don't stay at 0.5% forever as we've now discovered.
I do have some sympathies with politicians over not investing in infrastructure as who wants to deal with the inevitable and endless costs increases and timescale overruns.
Its easier to spend money on a pay rise or tax cut or an extra subsidy which has an immediate effect - its what the voters prefer after all.
There was a point when we could borrow 20 or 30 year money at absurdly low rates. We used the privilege mainly for current spending and not investment. Crackers.
It throttles the DEM's main line of attack - the warning that he's a threat to democracy and the constitution. This charge, although entirely justified, can now be painted as a demonisation exercise that has led to him almost being murdered.
The problem is trying to have it both ways, as you are doing here.
If he's an American Hitler then why is assassination a step too far? They can't distance themselves from their own rhetoric without revealing that they don't really believe it and never have done.
That's just a piece of facile cleverdickery. Think Leon aired it earlier. Is it from right wing twitter?
Perhaps most infamously, 'Supertram', put forward in the 1990s, was the next major scheme designed to better connect the city in the form of light rail. Originally backed by the New Labour government and due to start in 2004, spiralling costs too saw this project cancelled.
However, work to construct the system that was due to start in earnest in 2004 was suspended because of costs that were originally £500 million had risen far above this level to figures around £1 billion. This had resulted in a cut back to the system that would have seen Line 1 only go from the city centre to the park and ride site at Stourton and this would have saved £250 million from the construction of the scheme and efforts were made to lower development costs along the other planned routes. However despite this in late 2005, Transport Minister Alistair Darling said that he would not give the go-ahead for the scheme, despite £40 million having already been spent into the development of the scheme.
So in twenty years predicted costs have gone from 500m to £1bn to £2.5bn for a much smaller system.
A lesson there. If you don't build infrastructure projects when borrowing rates for government are 0.5%, then you're utterly stupid.
That's not a party political point, as both Tory and Labour governments are to blame.
Huge missed opportunities - tidal power being one.
Borrowing rates don't stay at 0.5% forever as we've now discovered.
I do have some sympathies with politicians over not investing in infrastructure as who wants to deal with the inevitable and endless costs increases and timescale overruns.
Its easier to spend money on a pay rise or tax cut or an extra subsidy which has an immediate effect - its what the voters prefer after all.
Local councils borrowed extensively from the Public Works Loan Board (PWLB) to fund capital projects such as school extensions but also to invest in property acquisitions when the rules were relaxed by the Coalition in 2010.
It may be fortunate additional school places were added given what may be a wave of new children coming over from the Independent sector but the real issue is Special Educational Needs accommodation. This was an issue the LDs mentioned in the GE and it'll be interesting to see how Philippson responds.
Perhaps most infamously, 'Supertram', put forward in the 1990s, was the next major scheme designed to better connect the city in the form of light rail. Originally backed by the New Labour government and due to start in 2004, spiralling costs too saw this project cancelled.
However, work to construct the system that was due to start in earnest in 2004 was suspended because of costs that were originally £500 million had risen far above this level to figures around £1 billion. This had resulted in a cut back to the system that would have seen Line 1 only go from the city centre to the park and ride site at Stourton and this would have saved £250 million from the construction of the scheme and efforts were made to lower development costs along the other planned routes. However despite this in late 2005, Transport Minister Alistair Darling said that he would not give the go-ahead for the scheme, despite £40 million having already been spent into the development of the scheme.
So in twenty years predicted costs have gone from 500m to £1bn to £2.5bn for a much smaller system.
A lesson there. If you don't build infrastructure projects when borrowing rates for government are 0.5%, then you're utterly stupid.
That's not a party political point, as both Tory and Labour governments are to blame.
Huge missed opportunities - tidal power being one.
Borrowing rates don't stay at 0.5% forever as we've now discovered.
I do have some sympathies with politicians over not investing in infrastructure as who wants to deal with the inevitable and endless costs increases and timescale overruns.
Its easier to spend money on a pay rise or tax cut or an extra subsidy which has an immediate effect - its what the voters prefer after all.
Cost increases and delays are not inevitable. Plenty of infrastructure projects are delivered on budget and time - it's just not newsworthy to say: "Project on time and budget!!!!"
As an example, the £1.5 billion new A14 between the A1 and Cambridge was delivered on budget, and half a year early. The Borders Railway was also delivered on time and budget. There are many other examples.
It's interesting to consider why some projects are delivered on time and budget, whilst others are not. I don't think it's a simple answer.
(As ever, 'on budget' depends on how inflation was factored in as well.)
One of Germany’s main rail corridors is to be closed for months as part of a major overhaul of the ailing train network of Europe’s largest economy that is expected to last until the end of the decade.
Years of underinvestment and lack of political direction are being blamed for the state of the German railways, which have in recent years been beset by a massive increase in breakdowns, delays, cancellations and other major technical mishaps and led to unflattering comparisons with infrastructure in the developing world.
Deutsche Bahn, the national railway company of Germany, a state-owned enterprise under the control of the German government, has also become the butt of international jokes at the Euro 2024 football championships.
Over the four-week tournament, football fans from England to Georgia discovered often to their surprise just how unreliable the trains were. “If it wasn’t already clear, the [experience during the] Euros showed just what a problem Deutsche Bahn has with reliability and punctuality,” wrote Die Zeit on Monday.
Yet we've been continually told that nationalised railways are so much better.
It's hardly as if Avanti West Coast, for example, provides a sterling service fit for the 21st century though, is it?
Privatised monopolies like this are all about inflicting a bad product on a captive market for excessive prices, then siphoning off as much of the profit as possible to the shareholders. See also: the water businesses in England and Wales.
But in the case of rail, that's bullshit. And as the article shows, in Germany the *nationalised* DB is not doing well.
The ownership structure is often unimportant to success or failure. What matters is the management of the system, and in the case of rail in England, the DfT plays much more of a role in success or failure than the franchises or concessions.
The frequency of service and speed (125mph) on "classic" lines are unmatched pretty well anywhere else in the world.
4per hour to Birmingham. 3 per hour to Manchester (at clockface 20 min intervals) Hourly to Liverpool, Glasgow and Crewe via Stoke.
Still catching up on the election - East Ham is now the 52nd safest Labour seat after July 4th.
The safest in London and seventh safest overall is Lewisham West. East Ham ranks 22nd safest of the 59 Labour seats in London.
By contrast Lewisham North is now a little closer. Majority of 16,000 vs 33,000 (nominal) last time. All thanks to the Greens soaring from 5.5% to 21.9%.
Reform made a paltry 4.5% this time, behind the Tories’ 6%.
One of Germany’s main rail corridors is to be closed for months as part of a major overhaul of the ailing train network of Europe’s largest economy that is expected to last until the end of the decade.
Years of underinvestment and lack of political direction are being blamed for the state of the German railways, which have in recent years been beset by a massive increase in breakdowns, delays, cancellations and other major technical mishaps and led to unflattering comparisons with infrastructure in the developing world.
Deutsche Bahn, the national railway company of Germany, a state-owned enterprise under the control of the German government, has also become the butt of international jokes at the Euro 2024 football championships.
Over the four-week tournament, football fans from England to Georgia discovered often to their surprise just how unreliable the trains were. “If it wasn’t already clear, the [experience during the] Euros showed just what a problem Deutsche Bahn has with reliability and punctuality,” wrote Die Zeit on Monday.
Yet we've been continually told that nationalised railways are so much better.
It's hardly as if Avanti West Coast, for example, provides a sterling service fit for the 21st century though, is it?
Privatised monopolies like this are all about inflicting a bad product on a captive market for excessive prices, then siphoning off as much of the profit as possible to the shareholders. See also: the water businesses in England and Wales.
But in the case of rail, that's bullshit. And as the article shows, in Germany the *nationalised* DB is not doing well.
The ownership structure is often unimportant to success or failure. What matters is the management of the system, and in the case of rail in England, the DfT plays much more of a role in success or failure than the franchises or concessions.
The frequency of service and speed (125mph) on "classic" lines are unmatched pretty well anywhere else in the world.
4per hour to Birmingham. 3 per hour to Manchester (at clockface 20 min intervals) Hourly to Liverpool, Glasgow and Crewe via Stoke.
etc
Yeah, I've made that point many times before: our railways can be absolutely brilliant given the constraints they work under. Yes, there are problems, but generally it works quite well. Which is why people use them.
The new government is about to eat its first bowl of shit. The "Titanic" shipyard is asking for £200m in loan guarantees to start a new defence project, they say without it the shipyard is unsustainable. The treasury says that the loan guarantee will just help the owners pay itself a big dividend from the shipyard and they're probably right.
If the government refuses there's a very real chance the shipyard goes under and all the jobs/skills are lost and if they do the subsidy scheme there's a very good chance the shareholders will immediately suck that cash out of the business anyway and leave the taxpayer on the hook for £200m.
So best to let it go bankrupt and then lend the administrators the money to keep projects going..
But as with many things when these issues are involved no easy answers.
Worth saying that Short Brothers next door has similar issues, Airbus has "bought" it from Boeing but the vast majority of it's production is for none Airbus products and they don't want those parts and seemingly nor does Bombardier.
Rachel Reeves has decisions to make. What with Mad Ed Miliband trying to kill off 200,000 jobs in the North Sea and the major manufacturers in Belfast looking shakey, this is where we see if she has an industrial policy.
Where is your North Sea jobs figure from - that feels incredibly high..
Direct employent/contracting in UK Oil and gas exploration is between 35,000 and 40,000 jobs. There are an additional 100,000 jobs in companies directy supporting the oil and gas industry through manufacturing and direct supply of goods, materials and services. In addition there are around 80,000 jobs which are in services not directly related to the oil industry in the NE but which would suffer some loss due to a downturn in the region.
These numbers are pretty well known because of the experience of previous downturns.
Realistically I would assume that the 40K direct jobs are at risk and a reasonable proportion of the 100K directly supporting jobs. I don't know how you could or should quantify the 80K jobs which might be affected by a regional downturn.
So whilst there are more than 200,000 jobs in the UK being supported by the O&G sector, not all of those would be at risk. Maybe half of them? But that would depend a lot on the wider economy.
Rosebank is estimated to create 1.6K jobs (during construction ahead of 'first oil' in 2026) but this will fall off once construction done. We're subsidising this to the tune of half a billion, but profits will largely be rapatriated to Norway/Israel companies (the joint venture partners).
Not sure where your 100K O&G jobs comes from, but you get many more jobs from renewables (including wave).
Even if you want to 'protect' these 100K jobs, doubling down on this amount of fossil fuel investment - subsidised, foreign-owned, sunset industry - is suicidal both economically and environmentally, no?
Its actually 140K oil and gas jobs. And of course you don't know where it comes from. You don't know the first thing about the oil and gas industry beyond what you get off the internet. Even looking at only 3 companies - BP, Total and Shell, between them they directly employ 20,000 people in the UK and another 25,000+ contractors. So no it is not suicidal either economically or environmentally.
Perhaps most infamously, 'Supertram', put forward in the 1990s, was the next major scheme designed to better connect the city in the form of light rail. Originally backed by the New Labour government and due to start in 2004, spiralling costs too saw this project cancelled.
However, work to construct the system that was due to start in earnest in 2004 was suspended because of costs that were originally £500 million had risen far above this level to figures around £1 billion. This had resulted in a cut back to the system that would have seen Line 1 only go from the city centre to the park and ride site at Stourton and this would have saved £250 million from the construction of the scheme and efforts were made to lower development costs along the other planned routes. However despite this in late 2005, Transport Minister Alistair Darling said that he would not give the go-ahead for the scheme, despite £40 million having already been spent into the development of the scheme.
So in twenty years predicted costs have gone from 500m to £1bn to £2.5bn for a much smaller system.
A lesson there. If you don't build infrastructure projects when borrowing rates for government are 0.5%, then you're utterly stupid.
That's not a party political point, as both Tory and Labour governments are to blame.
Huge missed opportunities - tidal power being one.
Borrowing rates don't stay at 0.5% forever as we've now discovered.
I do have some sympathies with politicians over not investing in infrastructure as who wants to deal with the inevitable and endless costs increases and timescale overruns.
Its easier to spend money on a pay rise or tax cut or an extra subsidy which has an immediate effect - its what the voters prefer after all.
There was a point when we could borrow 20 or 30 year money at absurdly low rates. We used the privilege mainly for current spending and not investment. Crackers.
What is required is confidence in government infrastructure investment.
For that we need infrastructure which is built within budget and on time.
And that requires honesty in the tendering and placing of orders.
Its much better in the long run for infrastructure investment if realistic costs and times are accepted from the start instead of the usual 'bid low, promise quick' followed by increase, increase, increase.
"Britain will remain dependent on gas for years, warns National Grid New forecasts predict higher than expected demand in 2030 in blow to Starmer’s green energy ambitions
By Matt Oliver INDUSTRY EDITOR
Britain will be forced to rely on natural gas for years to come, in a blow to Sir Keir Starmer’s green energy ambitions, National Grid has said.
Demand for gas is now expected to be between 642 and 724 terawatt hours in 2030, according to the National Grid Electricity System Operator (ESO).
That is at least a fifth higher than the previous minimum and at the top end of what was predicted just a year ago.
The minimum predicted demand for gas in 2035 has also shifted upwards, from 331 terawatt hours to at least 433 terawatt hours....."
Three of the CCS projects due to take Final Investment Decision in the next few months are new builds fuelled by natural gas - one CCGT and two blue hydrogen. They will lock in natural gas demand for decades. More, similar plants may follow.
Tidal power - works on 4 generating cycles a day - on incoming and outgoing tide twice a day. You only need an offset in tides between two locations of 3-4 hours to balance power generation. Cardiff and Colwyn Bay have been proposed for this reason.
It was mentioned in the Labour manifesto, but not prominently. Pity MarqueeMark isn't here no to proselytise
Swansea bay could have been up and running by now.
Yes it was very expensive but most of that was the civil engineering works which would have lasted a century or more (far more if maintained well).
My worry about tidal is wildlife: estuaries tend to be pretty valuable habitats. How do you not destroy that? How, for example, do you allow fish access/egress through a big dam you've put across the mouth of the estuary? Presumably it can be done?
I understand but, I don't think we have a choice.
If we are not to regress to the 19th Century or earlier, then with current scientific knowledge and technology we have to be destructive of some environments.
No one ever wants it to be their local one though.
Although things like migrating fish getting past a dam assume someone has come up with some solution. A chain of weirs bypassing the dam perhaps?
Some of the designs are complete tidal ponds - as in a circular earth and rock dam. You build this on a suitable piece of tidal estuary.
Because they don't block the estuary, and will be quickly colonised by birds etc, the impact on wildlife would probably be much lower.
Problem is that even if Miliband decided to go for it, it would be about 12 years before the first one came online for both Process State reasons and finding sufficient trained people to build them in any quantity, by which time two general elections would have taken place and the overruning costs and delays (see process state) would result in all but the half built protoype being canned.
Building the dams is very basic engineering. In my days in the oil industry we had a queue of companies that could do such stuff.
The turbines are quite agricultural - massive, slow turning. The bearings would be fun, but the rest is large but low precision stuff. The concrete sill they would be set in wouldn’t big a giant project by oil industry standards - it would be a bit of work, but again there would be a bunch of companies that could bid on that.
Someone accidentally built a tidal pond in Canada. The idea was to protect an oil rig in shallow water against ice in winter. Someone made a mistake and instead of leaving an inlet/outlet, they made a complete circle. In the end, IIRC, they left it on grounds that it would trap any leaked oil as well. Stayed full to the high tide level happily for years.
"Britain will remain dependent on gas for years, warns National Grid New forecasts predict higher than expected demand in 2030 in blow to Starmer’s green energy ambitions
By Matt Oliver INDUSTRY EDITOR
Britain will be forced to rely on natural gas for years to come, in a blow to Sir Keir Starmer’s green energy ambitions, National Grid has said.
Demand for gas is now expected to be between 642 and 724 terawatt hours in 2030, according to the National Grid Electricity System Operator (ESO).
That is at least a fifth higher than the previous minimum and at the top end of what was predicted just a year ago.
The minimum predicted demand for gas in 2035 has also shifted upwards, from 331 terawatt hours to at least 433 terawatt hours....."
I think from a quick squint at the National Grid report most of this gas demand comes from domestic and industrial boilers. Clearly most of those boilers won't be replaced in the next five years.
Thanks
1) If they therefore think very little Gas will be used to generate electricity by then they are in la la land.
2) There will be plenty of older gas boilers getting replaced in the next five years with new gas ones, despite the "boiler tax", the fining of boiler manufacturers for not selling enough heat pumps which said manufacturers have just said tbey will add to boiler costs (delayed by a year to April 2025 and in Milibands in tray)
Tidal power - works on 4 generating cycles a day - on incoming and outgoing tide twice a day. You only need an offset in tides between two locations of 3-4 hours to balance power generation. Cardiff and Colwyn Bay have been proposed for this reason.
It was mentioned in the Labour manifesto, but not prominently. Pity MarqueeMark isn't here no to proselytise
Swansea bay could have been up and running by now.
Yes it was very expensive but most of that was the civil engineering works which would have lasted a century or more (far more if maintained well).
My worry about tidal is wildlife: estuaries tend to be pretty valuable habitats. How do you not destroy that? How, for example, do you allow fish access/egress through a big dam you've put across the mouth of the estuary? Presumably it can be done?
I understand but, I don't think we have a choice.
If we are not to regress to the 19th Century or earlier, then with current scientific knowledge and technology we have to be destructive of some environments.
No one ever wants it to be their local one though.
Although things like migrating fish getting past a dam assume someone has come up with some solution. A chain of weirs bypassing the dam perhaps?
Some of the designs are complete tidal ponds - as in a circular earth and rock dam. You build this on a suitable piece of tidal estuary.
Because they don't block the estuary, and will be quickly colonised by birds etc, the impact on wildlife would probably be much lower.
Problem is that even if Miliband decided to go for it, it would be about 12 years before the first one came online for both Process State reasons and finding sufficient trained people to build them in any quantity, by which time two general elections would have taken place and the overruning costs and delays (see process state) would result in all but the half built protoype being canned.
Building the dams is very basic engineering. In my days in the oil industry we had a queue of companies that could do such stuff.
The turbines are quite agricultural - massive, slow turning. The bearings would be fun, but the rest is large but low precision stuff. The concrete sill they would be set in wouldn’t big a giant project by oil industry standards - it would be a bit of work, but again there would be a bunch of companies that could bid on that.
Someone accidentally built a tidal pond in Canada. The idea was to protect an oil rig in shallow water against ice in winter. Someone made a mistake and instead of leaving an inlet/outlet, they made a complete circle. In the end, IIRC, they left it on grounds that it would trap any leaked oil as well. Stayed full to the high tide level happily for years.
They were built for a different purpose, but this brings to mind the two doughnuts in the Wash. I've walked out to the smaller one.
"A report today says Secret Service said the building was outside its established security perimeter and so was the responsibility of local police. If so: Makes no logical sense whatsoever to put that outside the perimeter when it's an obvious access point. How could that possibly happen? And even if local police help, a security point like that should never ever be solely under the purview of the local police. And there should be second by second coordination with and oversight by Secret Service. And even in that case, the Secret Service snipers and spotters should have been scanning. That's from what I know. But there are still many blanks to be filled in."
At the same time, the shooter seems to be the only person in the USA with no online presence whatsoever. Whodathunk it. Even his Discord is empty. He has no criminal record, no history of drugs, booze or mental issues, he was a decent student, with Democrat parents, middle class, almost bizarrely unexceptionable - but no online life at all
And then from nowhere he decides to shoot Donald Trump, either knowing that it would mean certain death for him, or having been assured he would NOT die
One of Germany’s main rail corridors is to be closed for months as part of a major overhaul of the ailing train network of Europe’s largest economy that is expected to last until the end of the decade.
Years of underinvestment and lack of political direction are being blamed for the state of the German railways, which have in recent years been beset by a massive increase in breakdowns, delays, cancellations and other major technical mishaps and led to unflattering comparisons with infrastructure in the developing world.
Deutsche Bahn, the national railway company of Germany, a state-owned enterprise under the control of the German government, has also become the butt of international jokes at the Euro 2024 football championships.
Over the four-week tournament, football fans from England to Georgia discovered often to their surprise just how unreliable the trains were. “If it wasn’t already clear, the [experience during the] Euros showed just what a problem Deutsche Bahn has with reliability and punctuality,” wrote Die Zeit on Monday.
Yet we've been continually told that nationalised railways are so much better.
It's hardly as if Avanti West Coast, for example, provides a sterling service fit for the 21st century though, is it?
Privatised monopolies like this are all about inflicting a bad product on a captive market for excessive prices, then siphoning off as much of the profit as possible to the shareholders. See also: the water businesses in England and Wales.
But in the case of rail, that's bullshit. And as the article shows, in Germany the *nationalised* DB is not doing well.
The ownership structure is often unimportant to success or failure. What matters is the management of the system, and in the case of rail in England, the DfT plays much more of a role in success or failure than the franchises or concessions.
The frequency of service and speed (125mph) on "classic" lines are unmatched pretty well anywhere else in the world.
4per hour to Birmingham. 3 per hour to Manchester (at clockface 20 min intervals) Hourly to Liverpool, Glasgow and Crewe via Stoke.
Tidal power - works on 4 generating cycles a day - on incoming and outgoing tide twice a day. You only need an offset in tides between two locations of 3-4 hours to balance power generation. Cardiff and Colwyn Bay have been proposed for this reason.
It was mentioned in the Labour manifesto, but not prominently. Pity MarqueeMark isn't here no to proselytise
Swansea bay could have been up and running by now.
Yes it was very expensive but most of that was the civil engineering works which would have lasted a century or more (far more if maintained well).
My worry about tidal is wildlife: estuaries tend to be pretty valuable habitats. How do you not destroy that? How, for example, do you allow fish access/egress through a big dam you've put across the mouth of the estuary? Presumably it can be done?
I understand but, I don't think we have a choice.
If we are not to regress to the 19th Century or earlier, then with current scientific knowledge and technology we have to be destructive of some environments.
No one ever wants it to be their local one though.
Although things like migrating fish getting past a dam assume someone has come up with some solution. A chain of weirs bypassing the dam perhaps?
Some of the designs are complete tidal ponds - as in a circular earth and rock dam. You build this on a suitable piece of tidal estuary.
Because they don't block the estuary, and will be quickly colonised by birds etc, the impact on wildlife would probably be much lower.
Problem is that even if Miliband decided to go for it, it would be about 12 years before the first one came online for both Process State reasons and finding sufficient trained people to build them in any quantity, by which time two general elections would have taken place and the overruning costs and delays (see process state) would result in all but the half built protoype being canned.
Building the dams is very basic engineering. In my days in the oil industry we had a queue of companies that could do such stuff.
The turbines are quite agricultural - massive, slow turning. The bearings would be fun, but the rest is large but low precision stuff. The concrete sill they would be set in wouldn’t big a giant project by oil industry standards - it would be a bit of work, but again there would be a bunch of companies that could bid on that.
Someone accidentally built a tidal pond in Canada. The idea was to protect an oil rig in shallow water against ice in winter. Someone made a mistake and instead of leaving an inlet/outlet, they made a complete circle. In the end, IIRC, they left it on grounds that it would trap any leaked oil as well. Stayed full to the high tide level happily for years.
Ah but did it have an Equality Impact Assessment, a Flood Impact Assessment, a Biodiversity impact assessment, nutrient neutrality impact assessment etc etc, consultatuons on all of these, public inquiry, judicial review on the public inquiry, another public inquiry, a judicial review on that, an appeal to the high court when the judicial review failed
"A report today says Secret Service said the building was outside its established security perimeter and so was the responsibility of local police. If so: Makes no logical sense whatsoever to put that outside the perimeter when it's an obvious access point. How could that possibly happen? And even if local police help, a security point like that should never ever be solely under the purview of the local police. And there should be second by second coordination with and oversight by Secret Service. And even in that case, the Secret Service snipers and spotters should have been scanning. That's from what I know. But there are still many blanks to be filled in."
At the same time, the shooter seems to be the only person in the USA with no online presence whatsoever. Whodathunk it. Even his Discord is empty. He has no criminal record, no history of drugs, booze or mental issues, he was a decent student, with Democrat parents, middle class, almost bizarrely unexceptionable - but no online life at all
And then from nowhere he decides to shoot Donald Trump, either knowing that it would mean certain death for him, or having been assured he would NOT die
It is perfectly weird
A bit like the person who emerged from obscurity and shot the MP, seemingly acting alone, a few days before the referendum.
"A report today says Secret Service said the building was outside its established security perimeter and so was the responsibility of local police. If so: Makes no logical sense whatsoever to put that outside the perimeter when it's an obvious access point. How could that possibly happen? And even if local police help, a security point like that should never ever be solely under the purview of the local police. And there should be second by second coordination with and oversight by Secret Service. And even in that case, the Secret Service snipers and spotters should have been scanning. That's from what I know. But there are still many blanks to be filled in."
At the same time, the shooter seems to be the only person in the USA with no online presence whatsoever. Whodathunk it. Even his Discord is empty. He has no criminal record, no history of drugs, booze or mental issues, he was a decent student, with Democrat parents, middle class, almost bizarrely unexceptionable - but no online life at all
And then from nowhere he decides to shoot Donald Trump, either knowing that it would mean certain death for him, or having been assured he would NOT die
It is perfectly weird
You need a month off the internet. Sit on a Polynesian island and do nothing but sleep and swim 'cos otherwise you'll be mad by 60.
'The things you think about determine the quality of your mind. Your soul takes on the colour of your thoughts.'
"A report today says Secret Service said the building was outside its established security perimeter and so was the responsibility of local police. If so: Makes no logical sense whatsoever to put that outside the perimeter when it's an obvious access point. How could that possibly happen? And even if local police help, a security point like that should never ever be solely under the purview of the local police. And there should be second by second coordination with and oversight by Secret Service. And even in that case, the Secret Service snipers and spotters should have been scanning. That's from what I know. But there are still many blanks to be filled in."
At the same time, the shooter seems to be the only person in the USA with no online presence whatsoever. Whodathunk it. Even his Discord is empty. He has no criminal record, no history of drugs, booze or mental issues, he was a decent student, with Democrat parents, middle class, almost bizarrely unexceptionable - but no online life at all
And then from nowhere he decides to shoot Donald Trump, either knowing that it would mean certain death for him, or having been assured he would NOT die
It is perfectly weird
A bit like the person who emerged from obscurity and shot the MP, seemingly acting alone, a few days before the referendum.
But didn't they break into his bedsit and find it was a neo-nazi shrine?
"A report today says Secret Service said the building was outside its established security perimeter and so was the responsibility of local police. If so: Makes no logical sense whatsoever to put that outside the perimeter when it's an obvious access point. How could that possibly happen? And even if local police help, a security point like that should never ever be solely under the purview of the local police. And there should be second by second coordination with and oversight by Secret Service. And even in that case, the Secret Service snipers and spotters should have been scanning. That's from what I know. But there are still many blanks to be filled in."
At the same time, the shooter seems to be the only person in the USA with no online presence whatsoever. Whodathunk it. Even his Discord is empty. He has no criminal record, no history of drugs, booze or mental issues, he was a decent student, with Democrat parents, middle class, almost bizarrely unexceptionable - but no online life at all
And then from nowhere he decides to shoot Donald Trump, either knowing that it would mean certain death for him, or having been assured he would NOT die
It is perfectly weird
A bit like the person who emerged from obscurity and shot the MP, seemingly acting alone, a few days before the referendum.
So do you believe Jo Cox was murdered in a false flag operation orchestrated by the remain campaign?
Or are you just making insinuations you don’t actually believe, in order to look edgy?
One of Germany’s main rail corridors is to be closed for months as part of a major overhaul of the ailing train network of Europe’s largest economy that is expected to last until the end of the decade.
Years of underinvestment and lack of political direction are being blamed for the state of the German railways, which have in recent years been beset by a massive increase in breakdowns, delays, cancellations and other major technical mishaps and led to unflattering comparisons with infrastructure in the developing world.
Deutsche Bahn, the national railway company of Germany, a state-owned enterprise under the control of the German government, has also become the butt of international jokes at the Euro 2024 football championships.
Over the four-week tournament, football fans from England to Georgia discovered often to their surprise just how unreliable the trains were. “If it wasn’t already clear, the [experience during the] Euros showed just what a problem Deutsche Bahn has with reliability and punctuality,” wrote Die Zeit on Monday.
Yet we've been continually told that nationalised railways are so much better.
It's hardly as if Avanti West Coast, for example, provides a sterling service fit for the 21st century though, is it?
Privatised monopolies like this are all about inflicting a bad product on a captive market for excessive prices, then siphoning off as much of the profit as possible to the shareholders. See also: the water businesses in England and Wales.
But in the case of rail, that's bullshit. And as the article shows, in Germany the *nationalised* DB is not doing well.
The ownership structure is often unimportant to success or failure. What matters is the management of the system, and in the case of rail in England, the DfT plays much more of a role in success or failure than the franchises or concessions.
The frequency of service and speed (125mph) on "classic" lines are unmatched pretty well anywhere else in the world.
4per hour to Birmingham. 3 per hour to Manchester (at clockface 20 min intervals) Hourly to Liverpool, Glasgow and Crewe via Stoke.
Covid did put a bit of a spanner in the works, didn't it.
Although, its legacy, less commuting and more off peak journies is beneficial to rail economics (or would be if the fare structure was aligned to this new reality).
One thing that is little mentioned is that in places like France where high speed links have been built, the residual service on the "classic" lines is often abysmal, with infrequent slow shuttle services requiring multiple changes, leaving quite significant intermediate towns/cities not on the high speed route high and dry.
"A report today says Secret Service said the building was outside its established security perimeter and so was the responsibility of local police. If so: Makes no logical sense whatsoever to put that outside the perimeter when it's an obvious access point. How could that possibly happen? And even if local police help, a security point like that should never ever be solely under the purview of the local police. And there should be second by second coordination with and oversight by Secret Service. And even in that case, the Secret Service snipers and spotters should have been scanning. That's from what I know. But there are still many blanks to be filled in."
At the same time, the shooter seems to be the only person in the USA with no online presence whatsoever. Whodathunk it. Even his Discord is empty. He has no criminal record, no history of drugs, booze or mental issues, he was a decent student, with Democrat parents, middle class, almost bizarrely unexceptionable - but no online life at all
And then from nowhere he decides to shoot Donald Trump, either knowing that it would mean certain death for him, or having been assured he would NOT die
It is perfectly weird
You need a month off the internet. Sit on a Polynesian island and do nothing but sleep and swim 'cos otherwise you'll be mad by 60.
'The things you think about determine the quality of your mind. Your soul takes on the colour of your thoughts.'
Bit late for me, also, I don’t care
And I love mysteries, and this is a genuine mystery
Right now I’m sticking with my Ukrainian connytheer. The Ukes hired a clean skin, probably using some beautiful girl to persuade, and they lied to him and said he’d survive and no one would shoot back
Aishah Hasnie @aishahhasnie 🚨🚨🚨 A source tells @steinhauserNH1 that North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum has received a call notifying the senator that he’s NOT Trump’s choice for running mate.
"A report today says Secret Service said the building was outside its established security perimeter and so was the responsibility of local police. If so: Makes no logical sense whatsoever to put that outside the perimeter when it's an obvious access point. How could that possibly happen? And even if local police help, a security point like that should never ever be solely under the purview of the local police. And there should be second by second coordination with and oversight by Secret Service. And even in that case, the Secret Service snipers and spotters should have been scanning. That's from what I know. But there are still many blanks to be filled in."
At the same time, the shooter seems to be the only person in the USA with no online presence whatsoever. Whodathunk it. Even his Discord is empty. He has no criminal record, no history of drugs, booze or mental issues, he was a decent student, with Democrat parents, middle class, almost bizarrely unexceptionable - but no online life at all
And then from nowhere he decides to shoot Donald Trump, either knowing that it would mean certain death for him, or having been assured he would NOT die
It is perfectly weird
A bit like the person who emerged from obscurity and shot the MP, seemingly acting alone, a few days before the referendum.
So do you believe Jo Cox was murdered in a false flag operation orchestrated by the remain campaign?
Or are you just making insinuations you don’t actually believe, in order to look edgy?
"A report today says Secret Service said the building was outside its established security perimeter and so was the responsibility of local police. If so: Makes no logical sense whatsoever to put that outside the perimeter when it's an obvious access point. How could that possibly happen? And even if local police help, a security point like that should never ever be solely under the purview of the local police. And there should be second by second coordination with and oversight by Secret Service. And even in that case, the Secret Service snipers and spotters should have been scanning. That's from what I know. But there are still many blanks to be filled in."
At the same time, the shooter seems to be the only person in the USA with no online presence whatsoever. Whodathunk it. Even his Discord is empty. He has no criminal record, no history of drugs, booze or mental issues, he was a decent student, with Democrat parents, middle class, almost bizarrely unexceptionable - but no online life at all
And then from nowhere he decides to shoot Donald Trump, either knowing that it would mean certain death for him, or having been assured he would NOT die
It is perfectly weird
You need a month off the internet. Sit on a Polynesian island and do nothing but sleep and swim 'cos otherwise you'll be mad by 60.
'The things you think about determine the quality of your mind. Your soul takes on the colour of your thoughts.'
What is it with the free psychological advice for Leon coming from all quarters? He seems quite chipper to me, and I note most of it comes from PB's sopping wet brigade who he annoys relentlessly. Just skip past his stuff if you don't like it, and for heaven's sake don't reply.
One of Germany’s main rail corridors is to be closed for months as part of a major overhaul of the ailing train network of Europe’s largest economy that is expected to last until the end of the decade.
Years of underinvestment and lack of political direction are being blamed for the state of the German railways, which have in recent years been beset by a massive increase in breakdowns, delays, cancellations and other major technical mishaps and led to unflattering comparisons with infrastructure in the developing world.
Deutsche Bahn, the national railway company of Germany, a state-owned enterprise under the control of the German government, has also become the butt of international jokes at the Euro 2024 football championships.
Over the four-week tournament, football fans from England to Georgia discovered often to their surprise just how unreliable the trains were. “If it wasn’t already clear, the [experience during the] Euros showed just what a problem Deutsche Bahn has with reliability and punctuality,” wrote Die Zeit on Monday.
Yet we've been continually told that nationalised railways are so much better.
It's hardly as if Avanti West Coast, for example, provides a sterling service fit for the 21st century though, is it?
Privatised monopolies like this are all about inflicting a bad product on a captive market for excessive prices, then siphoning off as much of the profit as possible to the shareholders. See also: the water businesses in England and Wales.
But in the case of rail, that's bullshit. And as the article shows, in Germany the *nationalised* DB is not doing well.
The ownership structure is often unimportant to success or failure. What matters is the management of the system, and in the case of rail in England, the DfT plays much more of a role in success or failure than the franchises or concessions.
The frequency of service and speed (125mph) on "classic" lines are unmatched pretty well anywhere else in the world.
4per hour to Birmingham. 3 per hour to Manchester (at clockface 20 min intervals) Hourly to Liverpool, Glasgow and Crewe via Stoke.
Covid did put a bit of a spanner in the works, didn't it.
Although, its legacy, less commuting and more off peak journies is beneficial to rail economics (or would be if the fare structure was aligned to this new reality).
One thing that is little mentioned is that in places like France where high speed links have been built, the residual service on the "classic" lines is often abysmal, with infrequent slow shuttle services requiring multiple changes, leaving quite significant intermediate towns/cities not on the high speed route high and dry.
I sincerely recommend some of the branch line trains in France to our resident trainspotters. The feeling of travelling in about 1982 is overwhelming.
"A report today says Secret Service said the building was outside its established security perimeter and so was the responsibility of local police. If so: Makes no logical sense whatsoever to put that outside the perimeter when it's an obvious access point. How could that possibly happen? And even if local police help, a security point like that should never ever be solely under the purview of the local police. And there should be second by second coordination with and oversight by Secret Service. And even in that case, the Secret Service snipers and spotters should have been scanning. That's from what I know. But there are still many blanks to be filled in."
At the same time, the shooter seems to be the only person in the USA with no online presence whatsoever. Whodathunk it. Even his Discord is empty. He has no criminal record, no history of drugs, booze or mental issues, he was a decent student, with Democrat parents, middle class, almost bizarrely unexceptionable - but no online life at all
And then from nowhere he decides to shoot Donald Trump, either knowing that it would mean certain death for him, or having been assured he would NOT die
It is perfectly weird
You need a month off the internet. Sit on a Polynesian island and do nothing but sleep and swim 'cos otherwise you'll be mad by 60.
'The things you think about determine the quality of your mind. Your soul takes on the colour of your thoughts.'
Bit late for me, also, I don’t care
And I love mysteries, and this is a genuine mystery
Right now I’m sticking with my Ukrainian connytheer. The Ukes hired a clean skin, probably using some beautiful girl to persuade, and they lied to him and said he’d survive and no one would shoot back
Something similar involving the serbs (after their TV station got bombed by Nato) seems the most likely explanation as to Jill Dandos fate. (although a rather more experienced hitman both in accuracy and making an escape seems to have been used).
That said, if it was them they would have been better off using someone who wasnt chucked out of the high school rifle club for being dangerously inaccurate.
"A report today says Secret Service said the building was outside its established security perimeter and so was the responsibility of local police. If so: Makes no logical sense whatsoever to put that outside the perimeter when it's an obvious access point. How could that possibly happen? And even if local police help, a security point like that should never ever be solely under the purview of the local police. And there should be second by second coordination with and oversight by Secret Service. And even in that case, the Secret Service snipers and spotters should have been scanning. That's from what I know. But there are still many blanks to be filled in."
At the same time, the shooter seems to be the only person in the USA with no online presence whatsoever. Whodathunk it. Even his Discord is empty. He has no criminal record, no history of drugs, booze or mental issues, he was a decent student, with Democrat parents, middle class, almost bizarrely unexceptionable - but no online life at all
And then from nowhere he decides to shoot Donald Trump, either knowing that it would mean certain death for him, or having been assured he would NOT die
It is perfectly weird
A bit like the person who emerged from obscurity and shot the MP, seemingly acting alone, a few days before the referendum.
So do you believe Jo Cox was murdered in a false flag operation orchestrated by the remain campaign?
Or are you just making insinuations you don’t actually believe, in order to look edgy?
Dr Kellys ghost says hello.
Are you saying that Dr Kelly's ghost was involve in Jo Coxes murder? Serious allegation.
If you look at the gormless NU10K'rs who run the country - if they could kill people that well, they'd have the trains running on time. So people would like them more.
"A report today says Secret Service said the building was outside its established security perimeter and so was the responsibility of local police. If so: Makes no logical sense whatsoever to put that outside the perimeter when it's an obvious access point. How could that possibly happen? And even if local police help, a security point like that should never ever be solely under the purview of the local police. And there should be second by second coordination with and oversight by Secret Service. And even in that case, the Secret Service snipers and spotters should have been scanning. That's from what I know. But there are still many blanks to be filled in."
At the same time, the shooter seems to be the only person in the USA with no online presence whatsoever. Whodathunk it. Even his Discord is empty. He has no criminal record, no history of drugs, booze or mental issues, he was a decent student, with Democrat parents, middle class, almost bizarrely unexceptionable - but no online life at all
And then from nowhere he decides to shoot Donald Trump, either knowing that it would mean certain death for him, or having been assured he would NOT die
It is perfectly weird
You need a month off the internet. Sit on a Polynesian island and do nothing but sleep and swim 'cos otherwise you'll be mad by 60.
'The things you think about determine the quality of your mind. Your soul takes on the colour of your thoughts.'
What is it with the free psychological advice for Leon coming from all quarters? He seems quite chipper to me, and I note most of it comes from PB's sopping wet brigade who he annoys relentlessly. Just skip past his stuff if you don't like it, and for heaven's sake don't reply.
"A report today says Secret Service said the building was outside its established security perimeter and so was the responsibility of local police. If so: Makes no logical sense whatsoever to put that outside the perimeter when it's an obvious access point. How could that possibly happen? And even if local police help, a security point like that should never ever be solely under the purview of the local police. And there should be second by second coordination with and oversight by Secret Service. And even in that case, the Secret Service snipers and spotters should have been scanning. That's from what I know. But there are still many blanks to be filled in."
At the same time, the shooter seems to be the only person in the USA with no online presence whatsoever. Whodathunk it. Even his Discord is empty. He has no criminal record, no history of drugs, booze or mental issues, he was a decent student, with Democrat parents, middle class, almost bizarrely unexceptionable - but no online life at all
And then from nowhere he decides to shoot Donald Trump, either knowing that it would mean certain death for him, or having been assured he would NOT die
It is perfectly weird
You need a month off the internet. Sit on a Polynesian island and do nothing but sleep and swim 'cos otherwise you'll be mad by 60.
'The things you think about determine the quality of your mind. Your soul takes on the colour of your thoughts.'
What is it with the free psychological advice for Leon coming from all quarters? He seems quite chipper to me, and I note most of it comes from PB's sopping wet brigade who he annoys relentlessly. Just skip past his stuff if you don't like it, and for heaven's sake don't reply.
lol. Also they don’t seem to realise I ENJOY annoying them. If they are trying to get me to stop posting “for my health” it means I am winding them up, which is always fun
One of Germany’s main rail corridors is to be closed for months as part of a major overhaul of the ailing train network of Europe’s largest economy that is expected to last until the end of the decade.
Years of underinvestment and lack of political direction are being blamed for the state of the German railways, which have in recent years been beset by a massive increase in breakdowns, delays, cancellations and other major technical mishaps and led to unflattering comparisons with infrastructure in the developing world.
Deutsche Bahn, the national railway company of Germany, a state-owned enterprise under the control of the German government, has also become the butt of international jokes at the Euro 2024 football championships.
Over the four-week tournament, football fans from England to Georgia discovered often to their surprise just how unreliable the trains were. “If it wasn’t already clear, the [experience during the] Euros showed just what a problem Deutsche Bahn has with reliability and punctuality,” wrote Die Zeit on Monday.
Yet we've been continually told that nationalised railways are so much better.
It's hardly as if Avanti West Coast, for example, provides a sterling service fit for the 21st century though, is it?
Privatised monopolies like this are all about inflicting a bad product on a captive market for excessive prices, then siphoning off as much of the profit as possible to the shareholders. See also: the water businesses in England and Wales.
But in the case of rail, that's bullshit. And as the article shows, in Germany the *nationalised* DB is not doing well.
The ownership structure is often unimportant to success or failure. What matters is the management of the system, and in the case of rail in England, the DfT plays much more of a role in success or failure than the franchises or concessions.
The frequency of service and speed (125mph) on "classic" lines are unmatched pretty well anywhere else in the world.
4per hour to Birmingham. 3 per hour to Manchester (at clockface 20 min intervals) Hourly to Liverpool, Glasgow and Crewe via Stoke.
Covid did put a bit of a spanner in the works, didn't it.
Although, its legacy, less commuting and more off peak journies is beneficial to rail economics (or would be if the fare structure was aligned to this new reality).
One thing that is little mentioned is that in places like France where high speed links have been built, the residual service on the "classic" lines is often abysmal, with infrequent slow shuttle services requiring multiple changes, leaving quite significant intermediate towns/cities not on the high speed route high and dry.
I sincerely recommend some of the branch line trains in France to our resident trainspotters. The feeling of travelling in about 1982 is overwhelming.
Assuming the train isn't a bus outside the station and will be indefinitely.
Tidal power - works on 4 generating cycles a day - on incoming and outgoing tide twice a day. You only need an offset in tides between two locations of 3-4 hours to balance power generation. Cardiff and Colwyn Bay have been proposed for this reason.
It was mentioned in the Labour manifesto, but not prominently. Pity MarqueeMark isn't here no to proselytise
Swansea bay could have been up and running by now.
Yes it was very expensive but most of that was the civil engineering works which would have lasted a century or more (far more if maintained well).
My worry about tidal is wildlife: estuaries tend to be pretty valuable habitats. How do you not destroy that? How, for example, do you allow fish access/egress through a big dam you've put across the mouth of the estuary? Presumably it can be done?
I understand but, I don't think we have a choice.
If we are not to regress to the 19th Century or earlier, then with current scientific knowledge and technology we have to be destructive of some environments.
No one ever wants it to be their local one though.
Although things like migrating fish getting past a dam assume someone has come up with some solution. A chain of weirs bypassing the dam perhaps?
Some of the designs are complete tidal ponds - as in a circular earth and rock dam. You build this on a suitable piece of tidal estuary.
Because they don't block the estuary, and will be quickly colonised by birds etc, the impact on wildlife would probably be much lower.
Problem is that even if Miliband decided to go for it, it would be about 12 years before the first one came online for both Process State reasons and finding sufficient trained people to build them in any quantity, by which time two general elections would have taken place and the overruning costs and delays (see process state) would result in all but the half built protoype being canned.
I would hope they could build Swansea Bay, and that would be a very visual sign going into the next election.
"A report today says Secret Service said the building was outside its established security perimeter and so was the responsibility of local police. If so: Makes no logical sense whatsoever to put that outside the perimeter when it's an obvious access point. How could that possibly happen? And even if local police help, a security point like that should never ever be solely under the purview of the local police. And there should be second by second coordination with and oversight by Secret Service. And even in that case, the Secret Service snipers and spotters should have been scanning. That's from what I know. But there are still many blanks to be filled in."
At the same time, the shooter seems to be the only person in the USA with no online presence whatsoever. Whodathunk it. Even his Discord is empty. He has no criminal record, no history of drugs, booze or mental issues, he was a decent student, with Democrat parents, middle class, almost bizarrely unexceptionable - but no online life at all
And then from nowhere he decides to shoot Donald Trump, either knowing that it would mean certain death for him, or having been assured he would NOT die
It is perfectly weird
Just incompetence and they have not found his chosen internet medium. He was wearing a T shirt of a YouTube channel dedicated to massyshoots, I expect he commented there 24.7.
One of Germany’s main rail corridors is to be closed for months as part of a major overhaul of the ailing train network of Europe’s largest economy that is expected to last until the end of the decade.
Years of underinvestment and lack of political direction are being blamed for the state of the German railways, which have in recent years been beset by a massive increase in breakdowns, delays, cancellations and other major technical mishaps and led to unflattering comparisons with infrastructure in the developing world.
Deutsche Bahn, the national railway company of Germany, a state-owned enterprise under the control of the German government, has also become the butt of international jokes at the Euro 2024 football championships.
Over the four-week tournament, football fans from England to Georgia discovered often to their surprise just how unreliable the trains were. “If it wasn’t already clear, the [experience during the] Euros showed just what a problem Deutsche Bahn has with reliability and punctuality,” wrote Die Zeit on Monday.
Yet we've been continually told that nationalised railways are so much better.
It's hardly as if Avanti West Coast, for example, provides a sterling service fit for the 21st century though, is it?
Privatised monopolies like this are all about inflicting a bad product on a captive market for excessive prices, then siphoning off as much of the profit as possible to the shareholders. See also: the water businesses in England and Wales.
But in the case of rail, that's bullshit. And as the article shows, in Germany the *nationalised* DB is not doing well.
The ownership structure is often unimportant to success or failure. What matters is the management of the system, and in the case of rail in England, the DfT plays much more of a role in success or failure than the franchises or concessions.
The frequency of service and speed (125mph) on "classic" lines are unmatched pretty well anywhere else in the world.
4per hour to Birmingham. 3 per hour to Manchester (at clockface 20 min intervals) Hourly to Liverpool, Glasgow and Crewe via Stoke.
Covid did put a bit of a spanner in the works, didn't it.
Although, its legacy, less commuting and more off peak journies is beneficial to rail economics (or would be if the fare structure was aligned to this new reality).
One thing that is little mentioned is that in places like France where high speed links have been built, the residual service on the "classic" lines is often abysmal, with infrequent slow shuttle services requiring multiple changes, leaving quite significant intermediate towns/cities not on the high speed route high and dry.
I sincerely recommend some of the branch line trains in France to our resident trainspotters. The feeling of travelling in about 1982 is overwhelming.
Assuming the train isn't a bus outside the station and will be indefinitely.
They've generally been fairly reliable, I found. Just rolling stock old enough that IKB probably consulted....
Tidal power - works on 4 generating cycles a day - on incoming and outgoing tide twice a day. You only need an offset in tides between two locations of 3-4 hours to balance power generation. Cardiff and Colwyn Bay have been proposed for this reason.
It was mentioned in the Labour manifesto, but not prominently. Pity MarqueeMark isn't here no to proselytise
Swansea bay could have been up and running by now.
Yes it was very expensive but most of that was the civil engineering works which would have lasted a century or more (far more if maintained well).
My worry about tidal is wildlife: estuaries tend to be pretty valuable habitats. How do you not destroy that? How, for example, do you allow fish access/egress through a big dam you've put across the mouth of the estuary? Presumably it can be done?
I understand but, I don't think we have a choice.
If we are not to regress to the 19th Century or earlier, then with current scientific knowledge and technology we have to be destructive of some environments.
No one ever wants it to be their local one though.
Although things like migrating fish getting past a dam assume someone has come up with some solution. A chain of weirs bypassing the dam perhaps?
Some of the designs are complete tidal ponds - as in a circular earth and rock dam. You build this on a suitable piece of tidal estuary.
Because they don't block the estuary, and will be quickly colonised by birds etc, the impact on wildlife would probably be much lower.
Problem is that even if Miliband decided to go for it, it would be about 12 years before the first one came online for both Process State reasons and finding sufficient trained people to build them in any quantity, by which time two general elections would have taken place and the overruning costs and delays (see process state) would result in all but the half built protoype being canned.
I would hope they could build Swansea Bay, and that would be a very visual sign going into the next election.
Tidal power - works on 4 generating cycles a day - on incoming and outgoing tide twice a day. You only need an offset in tides between two locations of 3-4 hours to balance power generation. Cardiff and Colwyn Bay have been proposed for this reason.
It was mentioned in the Labour manifesto, but not prominently. Pity MarqueeMark isn't here no to proselytise
Swansea bay could have been up and running by now.
Yes it was very expensive but most of that was the civil engineering works which would have lasted a century or more (far more if maintained well).
My worry about tidal is wildlife: estuaries tend to be pretty valuable habitats. How do you not destroy that? How, for example, do you allow fish access/egress through a big dam you've put across the mouth of the estuary? Presumably it can be done?
I understand but, I don't think we have a choice.
If we are not to regress to the 19th Century or earlier, then with current scientific knowledge and technology we have to be destructive of some environments.
No one ever wants it to be their local one though.
Although things like migrating fish getting past a dam assume someone has come up with some solution. A chain of weirs bypassing the dam perhaps?
Some of the designs are complete tidal ponds - as in a circular earth and rock dam. You build this on a suitable piece of tidal estuary.
Because they don't block the estuary, and will be quickly colonised by birds etc, the impact on wildlife would probably be much lower.
Problem is that even if Miliband decided to go for it, it would be about 12 years before the first one came online for both Process State reasons and finding sufficient trained people to build them in any quantity, by which time two general elections would have taken place and the overruning costs and delays (see process state) would result in all but the half built protoype being canned.
I would hope they could build Swansea Bay, and that would be a very visual sign going into the next election.
I think that some of them realise that they *have* to do such things before the election or will face catastrophe. Whether they will succeed is another matter, given their reluctance to dismantle regulations and the blob wholesale.
"Britain will remain dependent on gas for years, warns National Grid New forecasts predict higher than expected demand in 2030 in blow to Starmer’s green energy ambitions
By Matt Oliver INDUSTRY EDITOR
Britain will be forced to rely on natural gas for years to come, in a blow to Sir Keir Starmer’s green energy ambitions, National Grid has said.
Demand for gas is now expected to be between 642 and 724 terawatt hours in 2030, according to the National Grid Electricity System Operator (ESO).
That is at least a fifth higher than the previous minimum and at the top end of what was predicted just a year ago.
The minimum predicted demand for gas in 2035 has also shifted upwards, from 331 terawatt hours to at least 433 terawatt hours....."
Three of the CCS projects due to take Final Investment Decision in the next few months are new builds fuelled by natural gas - one CCGT and two blue hydrogen. They will lock in natural gas demand for decades. More, similar plants may follow.
"A report today says Secret Service said the building was outside its established security perimeter and so was the responsibility of local police. If so: Makes no logical sense whatsoever to put that outside the perimeter when it's an obvious access point. How could that possibly happen? And even if local police help, a security point like that should never ever be solely under the purview of the local police. And there should be second by second coordination with and oversight by Secret Service. And even in that case, the Secret Service snipers and spotters should have been scanning. That's from what I know. But there are still many blanks to be filled in."
At the same time, the shooter seems to be the only person in the USA with no online presence whatsoever. Whodathunk it. Even his Discord is empty. He has no criminal record, no history of drugs, booze or mental issues, he was a decent student, with Democrat parents, middle class, almost bizarrely unexceptionable - but no online life at all
And then from nowhere he decides to shoot Donald Trump, either knowing that it would mean certain death for him, or having been assured he would NOT die
It is perfectly weird
You need a month off the internet. Sit on a Polynesian island and do nothing but sleep and swim 'cos otherwise you'll be mad by 60.
'The things you think about determine the quality of your mind. Your soul takes on the colour of your thoughts.'
What is it with the free psychological advice for Leon coming from all quarters? He seems quite chipper to me, and I note most of it comes from PB's sopping wet brigade who he annoys relentlessly. Just skip past his stuff if you don't like it, and for heaven's sake don't reply.
lol. Also they don’t seem to realise I ENJOY annoying them. If they are trying to get me to stop posting “for my health” it means I am winding them up, which is always fun
"A report today says Secret Service said the building was outside its established security perimeter and so was the responsibility of local police. If so: Makes no logical sense whatsoever to put that outside the perimeter when it's an obvious access point. How could that possibly happen? And even if local police help, a security point like that should never ever be solely under the purview of the local police. And there should be second by second coordination with and oversight by Secret Service. And even in that case, the Secret Service snipers and spotters should have been scanning. That's from what I know. But there are still many blanks to be filled in."
At the same time, the shooter seems to be the only person in the USA with no online presence whatsoever. Whodathunk it. Even his Discord is empty. He has no criminal record, no history of drugs, booze or mental issues, he was a decent student, with Democrat parents, middle class, almost bizarrely unexceptionable - but no online life at all
And then from nowhere he decides to shoot Donald Trump, either knowing that it would mean certain death for him, or having been assured he would NOT die
It is perfectly weird
You need a month off the internet. Sit on a Polynesian island and do nothing but sleep and swim 'cos otherwise you'll be mad by 60.
'The things you think about determine the quality of your mind. Your soul takes on the colour of your thoughts.'
Bit late for me, also, I don’t care
And I love mysteries, and this is a genuine mystery
Right now I’m sticking with my Ukrainian connytheer. The Ukes hired a clean skin, probably using some beautiful girl to persuade, and they lied to him and said he’d survive and no one would shoot back
Tidal power - works on 4 generating cycles a day - on incoming and outgoing tide twice a day. You only need an offset in tides between two locations of 3-4 hours to balance power generation. Cardiff and Colwyn Bay have been proposed for this reason.
It was mentioned in the Labour manifesto, but not prominently. Pity MarqueeMark isn't here no to proselytise
Swansea bay could have been up and running by now.
Yes it was very expensive but most of that was the civil engineering works which would have lasted a century or more (far more if maintained well).
My worry about tidal is wildlife: estuaries tend to be pretty valuable habitats. How do you not destroy that? How, for example, do you allow fish access/egress through a big dam you've put across the mouth of the estuary? Presumably it can be done?
I understand but, I don't think we have a choice.
If we are not to regress to the 19th Century or earlier, then with current scientific knowledge and technology we have to be destructive of some environments.
No one ever wants it to be their local one though.
Although things like migrating fish getting past a dam assume someone has come up with some solution. A chain of weirs bypassing the dam perhaps?
Some of the designs are complete tidal ponds - as in a circular earth and rock dam. You build this on a suitable piece of tidal estuary.
Because they don't block the estuary, and will be quickly colonised by birds etc, the impact on wildlife would probably be much lower.
Problem is that even if Miliband decided to go for it, it would be about 12 years before the first one came online for both Process State reasons and finding sufficient trained people to build them in any quantity, by which time two general elections would have taken place and the overruning costs and delays (see process state) would result in all but the half built protoype being canned.
I would hope they could build Swansea Bay, and that would be a very visual sign going into the next election.
Build it illegally.
I'm serious. Just get started.
I know you are, but that is anathema to SKS and the main three parties generally, as is doing it legally by axing the laws.
Alas that is how the likes of Mussolini end up getting power and achieving a lot with huge popularity, at least at first before it all goes to their head and they go mad.
"A report today says Secret Service said the building was outside its established security perimeter and so was the responsibility of local police. If so: Makes no logical sense whatsoever to put that outside the perimeter when it's an obvious access point. How could that possibly happen? And even if local police help, a security point like that should never ever be solely under the purview of the local police. And there should be second by second coordination with and oversight by Secret Service. And even in that case, the Secret Service snipers and spotters should have been scanning. That's from what I know. But there are still many blanks to be filled in."
At the same time, the shooter seems to be the only person in the USA with no online presence whatsoever. Whodathunk it. Even his Discord is empty. He has no criminal record, no history of drugs, booze or mental issues, he was a decent student, with Democrat parents, middle class, almost bizarrely unexceptionable - but no online life at all
And then from nowhere he decides to shoot Donald Trump, either knowing that it would mean certain death for him, or having been assured he would NOT die
It is perfectly weird
You need a month off the internet. Sit on a Polynesian island and do nothing but sleep and swim 'cos otherwise you'll be mad by 60.
'The things you think about determine the quality of your mind. Your soul takes on the colour of your thoughts.'
Bit late for me, also, I don’t care
And I love mysteries, and this is a genuine mystery
Right now I’m sticking with my Ukrainian connytheer. The Ukes hired a clean skin, probably using some beautiful girl to persuade, and they lied to him and said he’d survive and no one would shoot back
Something similar involving the serbs (after their TV station got bombed by Nato) seems the most likely explanation as to Jill Dandos fate. (although a rather more experienced hitman both in accuracy and making an escape seems to have been used).
That said, if it was them they would have been better off using someone who wasnt chucked out of the high school rifle club for being dangerously inaccurate.
Trouble is they needed someone fairly dim to believe he wouldn’t end up dead
Comments
started here.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/07/11/miliband-overrules-officials-immediate-north-sea-oil-ban/?_hsenc=p2ANqtz-9Lcng5_w-9L4PLQl2Plwuy8pHaQruOPVL6i4s5CzuP1NuQi4XoDiaxrpqTyNa5lzN_i1e_
The problem was the wider industrial changes and resulting high unemployment - something which happened in all industrial economies at that time.
It would look good to moderate and swing voters.
And there's little to stop Trump breaking his promises once in office.
But alas it didn't work in NornIron....
It's one thing which won't obsolete all that quickly.
(Though I note S Korea , like us, has also deployed its first anti flying vehicle laser system.)
Arizona - 🔴 Trump +7
Georgia - 🔴 Trump +4
Michigan - 🔴 Trump +2
North Carolina - 🔴 Trump +4
Nevada - 🔴 Trump +4
Pennsylvania - 🔴 Trump +3
Wisconsin - 🔴 Trump +5
YouGov A+ - about 900 RV (Each) - 7/12
But this link seems to show that Telegraph report is largely BS: https://www.energyvoice.com/oilandgas/north-sea/556575/ed-miliband-blocks-new-north-sea-drilling/
I suspect Labour wanted to spin their more coherent Net Zero plan around the same time Roger Hallam and Just Stop Oil campaigners are being sentenced.
·
Jul 14
#New General Election Poll - Battlegrounds
🔴 Trump 50% (+2)
🔵 Biden 48%
YouGov #77 - 2,004 RV - 7/13
https://x.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1812483258606604697
Last poll was 🔴 Trump +3
https://x.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1812483420561301713
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crg70kmylrxo.amp
"Britain will remain dependent on gas for years, warns National Grid
New forecasts predict higher than expected demand in 2030 in blow to Starmer’s green energy ambitions
By
Matt Oliver
INDUSTRY EDITOR
Britain will be forced to rely on natural gas for years to come, in a blow to Sir Keir Starmer’s green energy ambitions, National Grid has said.
Demand for gas is now expected to be between 642 and 724 terawatt hours in 2030, according to the National Grid Electricity System Operator (ESO).
That is at least a fifth higher than the previous minimum and at the top end of what was predicted just a year ago.
The minimum predicted demand for gas in 2035 has also shifted upwards, from 331 terawatt hours to at least 433 terawatt hours....."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/07/15/britain-will-remain-dependent-gas-years-national-grid/
There won't be money for new transport schemes like this for quite a long time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leeds_Supertram
However, work to construct the system that was due to start in earnest in 2004 was suspended because of costs that were originally £500 million had risen far above this level to figures around £1 billion. This had resulted in a cut back to the system that would have seen Line 1 only go from the city centre to the park and ride site at Stourton and this would have saved £250 million from the construction of the scheme and efforts were made to lower development costs along the other planned routes. However despite this in late 2005, Transport Minister Alistair Darling said that he would not give the go-ahead for the scheme, despite £40 million having already been spent into the development of the scheme.
So in twenty years predicted costs have gone from 500m to £1bn to £2.5bn for a much smaller system.
https://www.thetimes.com/world/us-world/article/trump-vs-biden-polls-election-2024-9g856t0lj
Privatised monopolies like this are all about inflicting a bad product on a captive market for excessive prices, then siphoning off as much of the profit as possible to the shareholders. See also: the water businesses in England and Wales.
Mind you, Orange Parades are now much more entertaining featuring scantily clad marchers flashing their boobs.
(nb not wholly suitable for work but pixellated)
https://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/video-news/watch-woman-flashes-shocked-onlookers-during-belfast-twelfth-parade/a1753311424.html
http://cynicalbastards.com/ubs/
She just directly contradicted recent decisions by Trump appointed circuit court appeal judges, and three Trump appointed judges on the Supreme Court itself.
Your point is simply ignorant.
Because they don't block the estuary, and will be quickly colonised by birds etc, the impact on wildlife would probably be much lower.
If you don't build infrastructure projects when borrowing rates for government are 0.5%, then you're utterly stupid.
That's not a party political point, as both Tory and Labour governments are to blame.
Huge missed opportunities - tidal power being one.
https://x.com/seannhickey/status/1812824488272150688
Billy Bawheid has the unfortunate trait of looking violently agressive at inopportune moments. I'm sure that's not the real Wills of course.
On leaving the Nottingham Tram system formal opening celebrations he "apparently muttered to his advisors that he hoped this was the last opening of an overpriced, over-budget system that he would have to attend."
https://www.christianwolmar.co.uk/2004/05/rail-487-light-rail-is-trapped-on-tramlines-of-a-mistaken-model/
The Office for National Statistics said that from mid-2022 to mid-2023 there were 598,400 births, a decrease of 21,900 compared with the previous year and the lowest since 2002.
There were 598,000 deaths over the period, an increase of 24,000 and in line with the UK’s ageing population, the ONS said.
The natural change, or the difference between births and deaths, was just 400 in 2023, the lowest since 1978.
An increase in migration drove the population of England and Wales to grow by 610,000, the highest for at least 75 years, taking the total to 60.9 million."
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/society/article/difference-between-births-and-deaths-at-lowest-level-in-45-years-g8ghldz2h
The ownership structure is often unimportant to success or failure. What matters is the management of the system, and in the case of rail in England, the DfT plays much more of a role in success or failure than the franchises or concessions.
Poor maintenace doesn't just cause delays as we know and one of the achievements of the last decade is how much safer our railways have become. Yes, incidents still happen but overall travelling by rail, while not always enjoyable or comfortable or value for money, is safe.
then imagine debating, with him, the concept of transubstantiation. Or getting him to spell it.
I do have some sympathies with politicians over not investing in infrastructure as who wants to deal with the inevitable and endless costs increases and timescale overruns.
Its easier to spend money on a pay rise or tax cut or an extra subsidy which has an immediate effect - its what the voters prefer after all.
Still catching up on the election - East Ham is now the 52nd safest Labour seat after July 4th.
The safest in London and seventh safest overall is Lewisham West. East Ham ranks 22nd safest of the 59 Labour seats in London.
Perhaps its just that railways are bad ?
We used the privilege mainly for current spending and not investment. Crackers.
https://x.com/g_slattery/status/1812907544022598052
TRANSLATION: I have no answer to this point
Net migration continues at an astounding pace. The turnover of people in this country is huge.
It may be fortunate additional school places were added given what may be a wave of new children coming over from the Independent sector but the real issue is Special Educational Needs accommodation. This was an issue the LDs mentioned in the GE and it'll be interesting to see how Philippson responds.
As an example, the £1.5 billion new A14 between the A1 and Cambridge was delivered on budget, and half a year early. The Borders Railway was also delivered on time and budget. There are many other examples.
It's interesting to consider why some projects are delivered on time and budget, whilst others are not. I don't think it's a simple answer.
(As ever, 'on budget' depends on how inflation was factored in as well.)
4per hour to Birmingham.
3 per hour to Manchester (at clockface 20 min intervals)
Hourly to Liverpool, Glasgow and Crewe via Stoke.
etc
Reform made a paltry 4.5% this time, behind the Tories’ 6%.
For that we need infrastructure which is built within budget and on time.
And that requires honesty in the tendering and placing of orders.
Its much better in the long run for infrastructure investment if realistic costs and times are accepted from the start instead of the usual 'bid low, promise quick' followed by increase, increase, increase.
The turbines are quite agricultural - massive, slow turning. The bearings would be fun, but the rest is large but low precision stuff. The concrete sill they would be set in wouldn’t big a giant project by oil industry standards - it would be a bit of work, but again there would be a bunch of companies that could bid on that.
Someone accidentally built a tidal pond in Canada. The idea was to protect an oil rig in shallow water against ice in winter. Someone made a mistake and instead of leaving an inlet/outlet, they made a complete circle. In the end, IIRC, they left it on grounds that it would trap any leaked oil as well. Stayed full to the high tide level happily for years.
1) If they therefore think very little Gas will be used to generate electricity by then they are in la la land.
2) There will be plenty of older gas boilers getting replaced in the next five years with new gas ones, despite the "boiler tax", the fining of boiler manufacturers for not selling enough heat pumps which said manufacturers have just said tbey will add to boiler costs (delayed by a year to April 2025 and in Milibands in tray)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Trial_Bank
"A report today says Secret Service said the building was outside its established security perimeter and so was the responsibility of local police. If so: Makes no logical sense whatsoever to put that outside the perimeter when it's an obvious access point. How could that possibly happen? And even if local police help, a security point like that should never ever be solely under the purview of the local police. And there should be second by second coordination with and oversight by Secret Service. And even in that case, the Secret Service snipers and spotters should have been scanning. That's from what I know. But there are still many blanks to be filled in."
https://x.com/SharylAttkisson/status/1812867884038648090
At the same time, the shooter seems to be the only person in the USA with no online presence whatsoever. Whodathunk it. Even his Discord is empty. He has no criminal record, no history of drugs, booze or mental issues, he was a decent student, with Democrat parents, middle class, almost bizarrely unexceptionable - but no online life at all
And then from nowhere he decides to shoot Donald Trump, either knowing that it would mean certain death for him, or having been assured he would NOT die
It is perfectly weird
'The things you think about determine the quality of your mind. Your soul takes on the colour of your thoughts.'
Or are you just making insinuations you don’t actually believe, in order to look edgy?
Although, its legacy, less commuting and more off peak journies is beneficial to rail economics (or would be if the fare structure was aligned to this new reality).
One thing that is little mentioned is that in places like France where high speed links have been built, the residual service on the "classic" lines is often abysmal, with infrequent slow shuttle services requiring multiple changes, leaving quite significant intermediate towns/cities not on the high speed route high and dry.
And I love mysteries, and this is a genuine mystery
Right now I’m sticking with my Ukrainian connytheer. The Ukes hired a clean skin, probably using some beautiful girl to persuade, and they lied to him and said he’d survive and no one would shoot back
Aishah Hasnie
@aishahhasnie
🚨🚨🚨
A source tells
@steinhauserNH1
that North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum has received a call notifying the senator that he’s NOT Trump’s choice for running mate.
https://x.com/aishahhasnie/status/1812913487812702584
Yeah I didn't think so
That said, if it was them they would have been better off using someone who wasnt chucked out of the high school rifle club for being dangerously inaccurate.
If you look at the gormless NU10K'rs who run the country - if they could kill people that well, they'd have the trains running on time. So people would like them more.
It`s a shame for Biden as the US economy is doing well and had he been fit, he might have won it easily.
I'm serious. Just get started.
Alas that is how the likes of Mussolini end up getting power and achieving a lot with huge popularity, at least at first before it all goes to their head and they go mad.
Never bet on Scandinavian football matches. Every time I have, I've lost.