I've heard quite a few comments ridiculing Corbyn for the missileless submarines.
So have I. I think it has "cut-through" because it's funny and seems to sum up the gesture-ridden stupidity that riddles Corbyn's thinking. It will still be being brought up in 2020.
On a serious point there have been a number of Labour MPs arguing that the arguments about the Labour position on Trident renewal "don't matter", because the decision will have been taken and effectively implemented long before the next election. Surely this attitude has been blown apart by Corbyn's musings, because it shows that his position on Trident is completely unmotivated by the monetary savings that are the usual argument put forward for opposing renewal. Since the money doesn't matter, the way is free for him to argue for a reversal of Govt policy even once most of the cost is sunk.
I think that if Corbyn got into power unilateral nuclear disarmament would be his first priority. He certainly wouldn't be swayed by arguments about sunk cost.
Osborne is a meddler. He's happy to cut corporation tax, but burdens firms with an 'apprenticeship levy' (punishing firms with large workforces) and the banks with an extra tax on profits.
If London loses HSBC it will be his doing.
You could have copied that comment from Gabble, Ash or BenM a decade ago.
Its always possible to get more growth and jobs, its only a matter of spending more money.
Living within your means is when the difficulty starts.
Now as you like to make comparisons with the EU how does the UK's budget and balance of payments deficits compare with other countries ?
Easy to get more growth and jobs by spending more money in the public sector. Not so easy when contracting the public sector significantly.
The Mirror front page hitting back at the Tories on defence I see.
Except they're not attacking the Tories on defence, but trying to save steel workers jobs.
First question - do any UK manufacturers make the steel specced for the ships?
No idea - my first thought was 'ultimate betrayal' was a bit overselling it, but the lead up including decimation of the industry and thousands on the dole makes it seem a bit more substantive an attack than merely that foreign steel was used, more that Tories are not ones to talk on defence.
Can't see it catching on though, given Corbyn's stances though.
A few ships won't make much difference anyway. Probably a few weeks output of steel manufacture.
I wonder if The Mirror buy British themselves, or are they just hypocrites? I doubt their printing presses are built here, nor most of the equipment and furniture in their offices, logistics etc
Osborne's handling of macro-economic issues has been freakily good. So good that you have to assume that he has had more than his fair share of luck.
Where he has undoubtedly been weaker is in reform. The banking sector should have been broken up and made more competitive. Our tax code is frankly ludicrous and is screaming out for simplification. He is far too fond of tweaks and gestures which sound good but actually achieve very little. His need for gestures means things change too often for long term investment decisions.
But he can claim a lot of credit for the employment miracle we have undergone; he has significantly reduced the deficit without creating anything like the pain that was anticipated; the emphasis on apprenticeships is a good thing; he has worked hard to reduce tax avoidance/evasion and been quite innovative on how to deal with multinationals; he has tried hard to keep London's place on the international stage in particular in relation to India, China and the middle east and he has, with his colleagues, worked wonders in getting the head count in government down to a more sustainable level.
I would give him 7 or 8 out of 10. Brown, in comparison, barely troubled the scorers.
Gordon Brown barely troubled the scorers? Really? He maintained growth despite turndowns in America and rising oil prices (remember them?) and kept us out of the Euro, paid off Tory debt so that we had lower government debt than America, Germany and France, and all that is before saving the world after the global financial meltdown.
I hope there are psychological tests for whichever officer has his finger on the button, I am sure there are some fail safe mechanisms, but the commander of a nuclear submarine can arguably claim to be one of the most powerful people on the planet
I recall a claim on a site years ago that British procedures for nukes was once so lax they were kept behind a bike lock, and sub commanders could fire without authorization, but it was ok because it was wrong to suggest an officer would act in defiance of clear orders.
I think it was a comedy site, which I hope is so, as it was pretty funny.
Huh
Britain is the only nuclear weapons state which does not have a fail-safe mechanism to prevent its submarines launching a nuclear attack without the right code being sent, according to tonight's Newsnight on BBC Two...
[MOD] say that "Britain is unique" and British Trident commanders can still launch a nuclear attack without any command from Whitehall if the worst comes to the worst.
Newsnight also reveals that, until they were retired in 1998, the RAF's nuclear bombs were armed by turning a bicycle lock key. There was no other security on the bomb itself...
National Archive papers show that, in 1966, Chief Scientific Adviser Solly Zuckerman formally advised Defence Secretary Denis Healey that Britain needed to install PALs on its nuclear weapons to keep them safe.
However, the Royal Navy argued that its officers could be trusted and: "It would be invidious to suggest... that senior Service officers may, in difficult circumstances, act in defiance of their clear orders.
Osborne is a meddler. He's happy to cut corporation tax, but burdens firms with an 'apprenticeship levy' (punishing firms with large workforces) and the banks with an extra tax on profits.
If London loses HSBC it will be his doing.
You could have copied that comment from Gabble, Ash or BenM a decade ago.
Its always possible to get more growth and jobs, its only a matter of spending more money.
Living within your means is when the difficulty starts.
Now as you like to make comparisons with the EU how does the UK's budget and balance of payments deficits compare with other countries ?
Easy to get more growth and jobs by spending more money in the public sector. Not so easy when contracting the public sector significantly.
I hope there are psychological tests for whichever officer has his finger on the button, I am sure there are some fail safe mechanisms, but the commander of a nuclear submarine can arguably claim to be one of the most powerful people on the planet
I recall a claim on a site years ago that British procedures for nukes was once so lax they were kept behind a bike lock, and sub commanders could fire without authorisation...
That's the point of the deterrent. If all were to be destroyed back home, the weapons can still be used.
I think the changes quoted earlier are compared to 2012 (I suppose because the dead Cllr was elected in 2012) given in 2014-15 there was a UKIP candidate
I hope there are psychological tests for whichever officer has his finger on the button, I am sure there are some fail safe mechanisms, but the commander of a nuclear submarine can arguably claim to be one of the most powerful people on the planet
I recall a claim on a site years ago that British procedures for nukes was once so lax they were kept behind a bike lock, and sub commanders could fire without authorization, but it was ok because it was wrong to suggest an officer would act in defiance of clear orders.
I think it was a comedy site, which I hope is so, as it was pretty funny.
Huh
Britain is the only nuclear weapons state which does not have a fail-safe mechanism to prevent its submarines launching a nuclear attack without the right code being sent, according to tonight's Newsnight on BBC Two...
[MOD] say that "Britain is unique" and British Trident commanders can still launch a nuclear attack without any command from Whitehall if the worst comes to the worst.
Newsnight also reveals that, until they were retired in 1998, the RAF's nuclear bombs were armed by turning a bicycle lock key. There was no other security on the bomb itself...
National Archive papers show that, in 1966, Chief Scientific Adviser Solly Zuckerman formally advised Defence Secretary Denis Healey that Britain needed to install PALs on its nuclear weapons to keep them safe.
However, the Royal Navy argued that its officers could be trusted and: "It would be invidious to suggest... that senior Service officers may, in difficult circumstances, act in defiance of their clear orders.
This is what scared the Bejesus out of me about Trident
Critics point in particular to the Royal Navy’s decision to install a variant of Windows XP as the operating system on its missile-carrying Vanguard-class submarines. It was cheaper than the alternatives, but Windows for Submarines, as it is called, is also more vulnerable to malware as it comes off-the-shelf. This also means there are more bugs in circulation that could affect it, and every time a submarine comes to port and gets a software patch, it is newly vulnerable
I hope there are psychological tests for whichever officer has his finger on the button, I am sure there are some fail safe mechanisms, but the commander of a nuclear submarine can arguably claim to be one of the most powerful people on the planet
I recall a claim on a site years ago that British procedures for nukes was once so lax they were kept behind a bike lock, and sub commanders could fire without authorization, but it was ok because it was wrong to suggest an officer would act in defiance of clear orders.
I think it was a comedy site, which I hope is so, as it was pretty funny.
Huh
Britain is the only nuclear weapons state which does not have a fail-safe mechanism to prevent its submarines launching a nuclear attack without the right code being sent, according to tonight's Newsnight on BBC Two...
[MOD] say that "Britain is unique" and British Trident commanders can still launch a nuclear attack without any command from Whitehall if the worst comes to the worst.
Newsnight also reveals that, until they were retired in 1998, the RAF's nuclear bombs were armed by turning a bicycle lock key. There was no other security on the bomb itself...
National Archive papers show that, in 1966, Chief Scientific Adviser Solly Zuckerman formally advised Defence Secretary Denis Healey that Britain needed to install PALs on its nuclear weapons to keep them safe.
However, the Royal Navy argued that its officers could be trusted and: "It would be invidious to suggest... that senior Service officers may, in difficult circumstances, act in defiance of their clear orders.
I hope there are psychological tests for whichever officer has his finger on the button, I am sure there are some fail safe mechanisms, but the commander of a nuclear submarine can arguably claim to be one of the most powerful people on the planet
I recall a claim on a site years ago that British procedures for nukes was once so lax they were kept behind a bike lock, and sub commanders could fire without authorization, but it was ok because it was wrong to suggest an officer would act in defiance of clear orders.
I think it was a comedy site, which I hope is so, as it was pretty funny.
Of course it was a comedy site. Why repeat the absurdities. I imagine that being commander of a ballistic nuclear submarine (of which there are a great many of various nationalities ... and there have been many many more over the years) is paralysingly boring- except in periods of what is euphemistically described as 'international tension' Whatever vague threats to our way of life a bunch of mad religious bigots in the middle east pose, they pale into insignificance when compared to a 20 megaton thermo nuclear warhead dropping on our heads. None of this changes what is a fundamental truth for our future well being and prosperity - and safety- namely the that we need a world wedded to the principle of the primacy of democracy. Democracy is worth defending and those who want it will have to fight for it.
Robert Kimbell The UK can leave the EU by repealing the 1972 European Communities Act, thus rendering all EU law unenforceable in the UK and Gibraltar.
The UK entered into the EEC with a parliament vote, it can leave with a parliament vote.
If the Kippers had got 102 seats then we could have been spared this tedious referendum.
Though the referendum is just advisory, it would take a Parliamentary act to leave. The Tories would have to be very unified to pass an exit bill.
Why 102 Seats?
If the Referendum result was for leave, then I cant see many MPs voting to stay, possible quite a few abstentions, and the SNP may vote to stay anyway but beyond that, not many.
It's a bit of an in joke - @MikeK predicted UKIP winning 102 seats at the last election.
Although I believe he misheard someone saying 1 or 2...
I see some are criticising the Apprentice Levy, fair enough I shouldn't imagine for a moment that it is perfect. However, it is a step in the right direction and one that is grossly overdue.
Far, far too many firms are hooked on cheap imported Labour and from their perspective rightly so. Why train someone when you can get a body in from outside for much less total cost? Tier 2 visas, those skills that we can't supposedly recruit or train for in the UK start at a salary of £20,100 and include such high power jobs as welders.
Now whilst those decisions may be fine for the individual companies they are awful for the long term good of the UK and its people. Aside from anything else they rely on placing more and more pressure on our public services and welfare budget (that twenty grand welder is going to be claiming in-work benefits), lowering GDP per head, and reducing productivity. If then UK is actually to become wealthier, and so able to afford all those nice things we all want, then we need to upskill our workforce and particularly our young people.
If firms will not pay to train people, then tax them until they do and they might get the idea. A company that isn't spending at least, say, 10% of gross profit on developing it workforce isn't doing enough. So take that 10% (less what percentage they did verifiably spend) and give it to companies who are spending to the limit and who are bidding for extra funds to do more.
Additionally, impose an extra tax for each employee brought in from abroad based on that persons salary level. I saw that happen in Oman and it was amazing the number of ex-pats that could suddenly be replaced by local staff who could do the job just as well.
Finally, if a company does bring in someone under tier 2 then they should be explain how that person will transfer his/her skills to a local so that someone else from abroad will not be needed in the future. That was another strategy used by the very sensible Omanis.
Yes, we have low unemployment now but we also have dreadful productivity and far, far too many people sitting around picking the noses living on benefits.
@britainelects: Hamilton N. & E. (South Lanarkshire) first prefs: SNP: 42.9% (+2.4) LAB: 33.6% (-9.4) CON: 18.5% (+8.4) GRN: 3.3% (+0.1) LDEM: 1.8% (+1.8)
I hope there are psychological tests for whichever officer has his finger on the button, I am sure there are some fail safe mechanisms, but the commander of a nuclear submarine can arguably claim to be one of the most powerful people on the planet
Crimson Tide!
Exactly, a great thriller and a great examination of a breakdown in the chain of command
I hope there are psychological tests for whichever officer has his finger on the button, I am sure there are some fail safe mechanisms, but the commander of a nuclear submarine can arguably claim to be one of the most powerful people on the planet
I recall a claim on a site years ago that British procedures for nukes was once so lax they were kept behind a bike lock, and sub commanders could fire without authorization, but it was ok because it was wrong to suggest an officer would act in defiance of clear orders.
I think it was a comedy site, which I hope is so, as it was pretty funny.
Of course it was a comedy site. Why repeat the absurdities.
...because I thought it was funny?
And I'll take your apology for your sneering dismissal (wholly necessary as it was given I was clearly attempting levity, even if you felt it fell flat) since I subsequently linked to a BBC story saying the same thing. And whatever many may think of the BBC news, it is not intentionally comedic at the very least.
I hope there are psychological tests for whichever officer has his finger on the button, I am sure there are some fail safe mechanisms, but the commander of a nuclear submarine can arguably claim to be one of the most powerful people on the planet
No single person can launch; it requires the co-operation of the boats crew. Those commanders are trained and fully aware of the capability and responsibility. They have families back home after all.
Indeed but presumably it is still the commander who pushes the button
I see some are criticising the Apprentice Levy, fair enough I shouldn't imagine for a moment that it is perfect. However, it is a step in the right direction and one that is grossly overdue.
Far, far too many firms are hooked on cheap imported Labour and from their perspective rightly so. Why train someone when you can get a body in from outside for much less total cost? Tier 2 visas, those skills that we can't supposedly recruit or train for in the UK start at a salary of £20,100 and include such high power jobs as welders.
Now whilst those decisions may be fine for the individual companies they are awful for the long term good of the UK and its people. Aside from anything else they rely on placing more and more pressure on our public services and welfare budget (that twenty grand welder is going to be claiming in-work benefits), lowering GDP per head, and reducing productivity. If then UK is actually to become wealthier, and so able to afford all those nice things we all want, then we need to upskill our workforce and particularly our young people.
If firms will not pay to train people, then tax them until they do and they might get the idea. A company that isn't spending at least, say, 10% of gross profit on developing it workforce isn't doing enough. So take that 10% (less what percentage they did verifiably spend) and give it to companies who are spending to the limit and who are bidding for extra funds to do more.
Additionally, impose an extra tax for each employee brought in from abroad based on that persons salary level. I saw that happen in Oman and it was amazing the number of ex-pats that could suddenly be replaced by local staff who could do the job just as well.
Finally, if a company does bring in someone under tier 2 then they should be explain how that person will transfer his/her skills to a local so that someone else from abroad will not be needed in the future. That was another strategy used by the very sensible Omanis.
Yes, we have low unemployment now but we also have dreadful productivity and far, far too many people sitting around picking the noses living on benefits.
I imagine equally good arguments could be made around the issue of outsourcing abroad. It is a problem that there is a major conflict between what is individually good for single organisations and what is good for the country. Jobs outsourced cost the country significant amounts in income tax, and, where they impact on local jobs significant amounts in additional welfare benefits. It's even worse when public sector organisations outsource abroad for obvious reasons because it involves one organisation saving public money, whilst increasing the cost elsewhere.
I hope there are psychological tests for whichever officer has his finger on the button, I am sure there are some fail safe mechanisms, but the commander of a nuclear submarine can arguably claim to be one of the most powerful people on the planet
I think you need more than one person to act simultaneously. At least, that's how Hollywood does it so it must be that way.
I hope there are psychological tests for whichever officer has his finger on the button, I am sure there are some fail safe mechanisms, but the commander of a nuclear submarine can arguably claim to be one of the most powerful people on the planet
No single person can launch; it requires the co-operation of the boats crew. Those commanders are trained and fully aware of the capability and responsibility. They have families back home after all.
Indeed but presumably it is still the commander who pushes the button
Would you rather the most junior member did the deed?
I hope there are psychological tests for whichever officer has his finger on the button, I am sure there are some fail safe mechanisms, but the commander of a nuclear submarine can arguably claim to be one of the most powerful people on the planet
I recall a claim on a site years ago that British procedures for nukes was once so lax they were kept behind a bike lock, and sub commanders could fire without authorization, but it was ok because it was wrong to suggest an officer would act in defiance of clear orders.
I think it was a comedy site, which I hope is so, as it was pretty funny.
Indeed, otherwise we better hope nuclear sub commanders do not get out of bed on the wrong side!
"Crick is alleging that the Tories smashed the spending limits in an effort to defeat Nigel Farage. It was treated by CCHQ like a by-election. Even if UKIP prove it, would the Electoral Commission do anything about it?"
I see some are criticising the Apprentice Levy, fair enough I shouldn't imagine for a moment that it is perfect. However, it is a step in the right direction and one that is grossly overdue.
Far, far too many firms are hooked on cheap imported Labour and from their perspective rightly so. Why train someone when you can get a body in from outside for much less total cost? Tier 2 visas, those skills that we can't supposedly recruit or train for in the UK start at a salary of £20,100 and include such high power jobs as welders.
Now whilst those decisions may be fine for the individual companies they are awful for the long term good of the UK and its people. Aside from anything else they rely on placing more and more pressure on our public services and welfare budget (that twenty grand welder is going to be claiming in-work benefits), lowering GDP per head, and reducing productivity. If then UK is actually to become wealthier, and so able to afford all those nice things we all want, then we need to upskill our workforce and particularly our young people.
Additionally, impose an extra tax for each employee brought in from abroad based on that persons salary level. I saw that happen in Oman and it was amazing the number of ex-pats that could suddenly be replaced by local staff who could do the job just as well.
Finally, if a company does bring in someone under tier 2 then they should be explain how that person will transfer his/her skills to a local so that someone else from abroad will not be needed in the future. That was another strategy used by the very sensible Omanis.
Yes, we have low unemployment now but we also have dreadful productivity and far, far too many people sitting around picking the noses living on benefits.
I imagine equally good arguments could be made around the issue of outsourcing abroad. It is a problem that there is a major conflict between what is individually good for single organisations and what is good for the country. Jobs outsourced cost the country significant amounts in income tax, and, where they impact on local jobs significant amounts in additional welfare benefits. It's even worse when public sector organisations outsource abroad for obvious reasons because it involves one organisation saving public money, whilst increasing the cost elsewhere.
A little mentioned (I presume) side effect of devolving income tax to Scotland is that it makes it more expensive for the UK Govt to employ workers in Scotland.
"Crick is alleging that the Tories smashed the spending limits in an effort to defeat Nigel Farage. It was treated by CCHQ like a by-election. Even if UKIP prove it, would the Electoral Commission do anything about it?"
I hope there are psychological tests for whichever officer has his finger on the button, I am sure there are some fail safe mechanisms, but the commander of a nuclear submarine can arguably claim to be one of the most powerful people on the planet
No single person can launch; it requires the co-operation of the boats crew. Those commanders are trained and fully aware of the capability and responsibility. They have families back home after all.
Indeed but presumably it is still the commander who pushes the button
According to Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letters_of_last_resort) one of the options that the Prime Minister can include in the "letter of last resort" is that the submarine commander should use his own judgement. That's quite a job description right there.
I hope there are psychological tests for whichever officer has his finger on the button, I am sure there are some fail safe mechanisms, but the commander of a nuclear submarine can arguably claim to be one of the most powerful people on the planet
I think you need more than one person to act simultaneously. At least, that's how Hollywood does it so it must be that way.
Who is the other person needed then?
The rest of the crew, with the second in command. I suspect if a commander were to go loco and attempt to order an authorised release, he'd be visiting the sick bay for 'a rest'.
Peter Hennessy is probably one of the most authoritative writers on this subject. It's worth reading what he's published, and broadcast.
It was Labour 43%, Tories 10% last time - a gap of 33%, now reduced to 15%. In Hamilton for Gods sake. Tories ahead of Labour in the national vote this year? Looks possible...
It was Labour 43%, Tories 10% last time - a gap of 33%, now reduced to 15%. In Hamilton for Gods sake. Tories ahead of Labour in the national vote this year? Looks possible...
There are no Tories in Scotland, which can't flood...
It was Labour 43%, Tories 10% last time - a gap of 33%, now reduced to 15%. In Hamilton for Gods sake. Tories ahead of Labour in the national vote this year? Looks possible...
There are no Tories in Scotland, which can't flood...
'There is practically not one vote in Scotland which is not managed from the moment it falls into the ballot box...'
COUNCIL chiefs are threatening to pull the plug on T in the Park in the wake of widespread chaos at last year’s event.
Senior officials at Perth & Kinross Council have warned they will not allow T in the Park to be staged again at the Strathallan Estate unless there is a total overhaul of the event.
I imagine that being commander of a ballistic nuclear submarine (of which there are a great many of various nationalities ... and there have been many many more over the years) is paralysingly boring- except in periods of what is euphemistically described as 'international tension'
...
Then Mr. Path you might want to extend your imagination.
Running a business which employs a hundred or so people is never boring. Then imagine running a business in which has those 100 people crammed into a steel tube for about six week sat a time with no fresh air and no daylight. Then take that business and put a nuclear reactor in the middle of it. Then add on the fact that you must not, ever, be found by any other submarine or ship or aeroplane that are out there looking for you and if you are found, just once, that is your career over (not to mention very significant costs to the UK), oh and in not being found you have to play a 3D mind game based on limited information. And all that is in periods without any "international tension".
You seriously think that a job like that is "paralysingly boring". God knows what you do for a living if you do.
I imagine that being commander of a ballistic nuclear submarine (of which there are a great many of various nationalities ... and there have been many many more over the years) is paralysingly boring- except in periods of what is euphemistically described as 'international tension'
...
Then Mr. Path you might want to extend your imagination.
Running a business which employs a hundred or so people is never boring. Then imagine running a business in which has those 100 people crammed into a steel tube for about six week sat a time with no fresh air and no daylight. Then take that business and put a nuclear reactor in the middle of it. Then add on the fact that you must not, ever, be found by any other submarine or ship or aeroplane that are out there looking for you and if you are found, just once, that is your career over (not to mention very significant costs to the UK), oh and in not being found you have to play a 3D mind game based on limited information. And all that is in periods without any "international tension".
You seriously think that a job like that is "paralysingly boring". God knows what you do for a living if you do.
Thanet Council for years has been a model in how not to run a council, since May it's been a laughing stock. Instead of crowing about which party has won or lost people should consider the standard of individual that controls budgets of £millions, it's just awful.
This is what scared the Bejesus out of me about Trident
Critics point in particular to the Royal Navy’s decision to install a variant of Windows XP as the operating system on its missile-carrying Vanguard-class submarines. It was cheaper than the alternatives, but Windows for Submarines, as it is called, is also more vulnerable to malware as it comes off-the-shelf. This also means there are more bugs in circulation that could affect it, and every time a submarine comes to port and gets a software patch, it is newly vulnerable
Windows XP? Pause. Well, at least it's not Vista or 8...:-)
Although there are similarites born of the fact that the UK and US launch the same type of missile, the procedure for UK SLBM nuclear weapon release is a bit different from the US version. The Brits not have Reservoir Dogs pointing guns at Leo from West Wing nor Denzel shouting at Gene. Brits have triggers, Prime Minister's Directives, safes within safes, listening for Radio 4 and letters of last resort, not keys, Emergency Action Messages, Permissive Action Links and so on.
Interestingly, the US President is the Commander-in-Chief and can order the use of nukes, but the UK PM is not the C-in-C and can only authorise their use: the order must be given by military personnel, and PM cannot force them to do so
Anyhoo, here is an accessible documentary on the UK procedure. Conversely, you could read "The Secret State: Preparing For The Worst 1945 - 2010" by Peter Hennessy" or "Planning Armageddon: Britain, the United States and the Command of Western Nuclear Forces 1945-1964" by Stephen Twigge and Len Scott
It was Labour 43%, Tories 10% last time - a gap of 33%, now reduced to 15%. In Hamilton for Gods sake. Tories ahead of Labour in the national vote this year? Looks possible...
It was Labour 43%, Tories 10% last time - a gap of 33%, now reduced to 15%. In Hamilton for Gods sake. Tories ahead of Labour in the national vote this year? Looks possible...
I hope there are psychological tests for whichever officer has his finger on the button, I am sure there are some fail safe mechanisms, but the commander of a nuclear submarine can arguably claim to be one of the most powerful people on the planet
No single person can launch; it requires the co-operation of the boats crew. Those commanders are trained and fully aware of the capability and responsibility. They have families back home after all.
Indeed but presumably it is still the commander who pushes the button
According to Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letters_of_last_resort) one of the options that the Prime Minister can include in the "letter of last resort" is that the submarine commander should use his own judgement. That's quite a job description right there.
Yes, well in the event of nuclear armageddon and a nuclear attack on the UK we would probably have enough to worry about anyway
Osborne is a meddler. He's happy to cut corporation tax, but burdens firms with an 'apprenticeship levy' (punishing firms with large workforces) and the banks with an extra tax on profits.
If London loses HSBC it will be his doing.
You could have copied that comment from Gabble, Ash or BenM a decade ago.
Its always possible to get more growth and jobs, its only a matter of spending more money.
Living within your means is when the difficulty starts.
Now as you like to make comparisons with the EU how does the UK's budget and balance of payments deficits compare with other countries ?
Easy to get more growth and jobs by spending more money in the public sector. Not so easy when contracting the public sector significantly.
The money is being pumped directly into consumer spending via triple lock pensions, pensioner bonds, increased tax allowances and the like.
This has the benefit to the Conservatives of boosting demographics electorally favourable to them rather than the predominantly Labour voting public sector.
I hope there are psychological tests for whichever officer has his finger on the button, I am sure there are some fail safe mechanisms, but the commander of a nuclear submarine can arguably claim to be one of the most powerful people on the planet
I think you need more than one person to act simultaneously. At least, that's how Hollywood does it so it must be that way.
Who is the other person needed then?
The rest of the crew, with the second in command. I suspect if a commander were to go loco and attempt to order an authorised release, he'd be visiting the sick bay for 'a rest'.
Peter Hennessy is probably one of the most authoritative writers on this subject. It's worth reading what he's published, and broadcast.
One would hope so, unless the commander and second in command are both insane
It was Labour 43%, Tories 10% last time - a gap of 33%, now reduced to 15%. In Hamilton for Gods sake. Tories ahead of Labour in the national vote this year? Looks possible...
Has the Nat definitely been elected yet?
Yes
Ah yes found the result on the Council website. Some of the transfers are weird.
Interestingly, the US President is the Commander-in-Chief and can order the use of nukes, but the UK PM is not the C-in-C and can only authorise their use: the order must be given by military personnel, and PM cannot force them to do so
I'm a bit confused there. The Queen is our C-in-C so one would expect that the Prime Minister would exercise that power on her behalf, but no?
I guess I am hopelessly ignorant of this aspect of our constitution.
I hope there are psychological tests for whichever officer has his finger on the button, I am sure there are some fail safe mechanisms, but the commander of a nuclear submarine can arguably claim to be one of the most powerful people on the planet
I think you need more than one person to act simultaneously. At least, that's how Hollywood does it so it must be that way.
Who is the other person needed then?
The rest of the crew, with the second in command. I suspect if a commander were to go loco and attempt to order an authorised release, he'd be visiting the sick bay for 'a rest'.
Peter Hennessy is probably one of the most authoritative writers on this subject. It's worth reading what he's published, and broadcast.
One would hope so, unless the commander and second in command are both insane
In the Crabs (RAF) such a thing might be possible as most of the flying types are bonkers to start with. To a lesser extent it could happen in the army, which, God knows, has alway had more than its fair share of eccentrics. In the RN, never - drafting policy allows only the commanding officer or his first lieutenant to be round the twist but not both and neither in HM Submarines.
Yes, I would say so. It had its day but was never a look to stand the test of time. I suspect Carswell will persist though, and UKIP will continue under him as a kind of ghost brand.
[Princess Liz Kendall is escorted by Lord Livingstone into an audience with Grand Moff Corbyn] Princess Liz: Governor Corbyn, I should have expected to find you holding Livingstone's leash. I recognized your foul stench when I was brought onboard. Grand Moff Corbyn: Charming to the last. You don't know how hard I found it, signing the order to terminate your political career. Princess Liz: [sarcastically] I'm surprised you had the courage to take the responsibility yourself. Grand Moff Corbyn: Princess Liz, before your deselection, I would like to invite you to a ceremony that will make this progressive party operational. No Labour Stronghold will dare oppose the Corbynistas now. Princess Liz: The more you tighten your grip, Corbyn, the more safe seats will slip through your fingers. Grand Moff Corbyn: Not after we demonstrate the power of this policy. In a way, you have determined the choice of the constituency that is to be targeted first. Since you are reluctant to provide us with the location of the Rebel base, I have chosen to test our activists' destructive power on your home planet of Leicester. Princess Liz: [shocked] No! Leicester is peaceful, we have no weapons. You can't possibly— Grand Moff Corbyn: You would prefer another target, a military target? Then name the system! [stepping closer to Liz and pinning her against Darth Livingstone] I grow tired of asking this, so it will be the last time. Where is the Rebel base? Princess Liz: [looks at view-screen showing Leicester for a moment, then, resigned] Derby. They're all on Derby. Grand Moff Corbyn: There you see, Lord Livingstone? She can be reasonable. Proceed with the operation. You may fire when ready. Princess Liz: [indignant] What?! Grand Moff Corbyn: You're far too trusting. Derby is too remote to make an effective demonstration, but don't worry. We will deal with your rebel friends soon enough! [Liz watches helplessly as Leftist activists descend on Leicester]
Libertarian Rebel Sorry, @bbcthisweek, but this mix of PC & levity won't work. 23% of Muslim women have little or no English. #bbctw https://t.co/StYyMXAdvr
I imagine that being commander of a ballistic nuclear submarine (of which there are a great many of various nationalities ... and there have been many many more over the years) is paralysingly boring- except in periods of what is euphemistically described as 'international tension'
...
Then Mr. Path you might want to extend your imagination.
Running a business which employs a hundred or so people is never boring. Then imagine running a business in which has those 100 people crammed into a steel tube for about six week sat a time with no fresh air and no daylight. Then take that business and put a nuclear reactor in the middle of it. Then add on the fact that you must not, ever, be found by any other submarine or ship or aeroplane that are out there looking for you and if you are found, just once, that is your career over (not to mention very significant costs to the UK), oh and in not being found you have to play a 3D mind game based on limited information. And all that is in periods without any "international tension".
You seriously think that a job like that is "paralysingly boring". God knows what you do for a living if you do.
Get a life when it comes to making analogies, and look at what the response was to . How about flying a Typhoon over Syria. Or running the SAS op that targets them. A nuclear balistic missile armed submarine captain will I hope never have to earn his salary
Slightly premature to write off the dreaded kippers. There is that referendum thingy.
I thought it quite a remarkable leap from considering a few hundred people turning out for a council by-election to a writing off a party that gained how many million votes at the last GE (and who rather well at the last Euro elections). The wish is sometimes father to the thought, or in this case the blog post. The good Dr. Sox might also care to reflect on the last time he made a pronouncement of UKIP's chances in my presence (it was a very nice bottle and I enjoyed it immensely).
I hope there are psychological tests for whichever officer has his finger on the button, I am sure there are some fail safe mechanisms, but the commander of a nuclear submarine can arguably claim to be one of the most powerful people on the planet
I think you need more than one person to act simultaneously. At least, that's how Hollywood does it so it must be that way.
Who is the other person needed then?
The rest of the crew, with the second in command. I suspect if a commander were to go loco and attempt to order an authorised release, he'd be visiting the sick bay for 'a rest'.
Peter Hennessy is probably one of the most authoritative writers on this subject. It's worth reading what he's published, and broadcast.
One would hope so, unless the commander and second in command are both insane
In the Crabs (RAF) such a thing might be possible as most of the flying types are bonkers to start with. To a lesser extent it could happen in the army, which, God knows, has alway had more than its fair share of eccentrics. In the RN, never - drafting policy allows only the commanding officer or his first lieutenant to be round the twist but not both and neither in HM Submarines.
When you spend most of the year hundreds or thousands of feet under the sea in a glorified tin can with a missile which could obliterate a major city who knows what could happen? They are highly trained of course and have breaks between tours but it is still a huge responsibility
I imagine that being commander of a ballistic nuclear submarine (of which there are a great many of various nationalities ... and there have been many many more over the years) is paralysingly boring- except in periods of what is euphemistically described as 'international tension'
...
Then Mr. Path you might want to extend your imagination.
Running a business which employs a hundred or so people is never boring. Then imagine running a business in which has those 100 people crammed into a steel tube for about six week sat a time with no fresh air and no daylight. Then take that business and put a nuclear reactor in the middle of it. Then add on the fact that you must not, ever, be found by any other submarine or ship or aeroplane that are out there looking for you and if you are found, just once, that is your career over (not to mention very significant costs to the UK), oh and in not being found you have to play a 3D mind game based on limited information. And all that is in periods without any "international tension".
You seriously think that a job like that is "paralysingly boring". God knows what you do for a living if you do.
Get a life when it comes to making analogies, and look at what the response was to . How about flying a Typhoon over Syria. Or running the SAS op that targets them. A nuclear balistic missile armed submarine captain will I hope never have to earn his salary
The captain of a Vanguard boat earns his salary every day as I demonstrated when I described his job. If you think that job is "paralysingly boring" then tell us what you do for a living.
Comments
The bbc having a we hate putin party in the land of the ira
How utterly fascinating #bbcqt
LAB 964
UKIP 182
CON 147
Green 62
Thatto Heath ward, St Helens:
Conservative 147
Labour 964
Lib Dem n/a
UKIP 182
Green 62
Labour Hold
Swing: 3.7% from Lab to Con
I wonder if The Mirror buy British themselves, or are they just hypocrites? I doubt their printing presses are built here, nor most of the equipment and furniture in their offices, logistics etc
Britain is the only nuclear weapons state which does not have a fail-safe mechanism to prevent its submarines launching a nuclear attack without the right code being sent, according to tonight's Newsnight on BBC Two...
[MOD] say that "Britain is unique" and British Trident commanders can still launch a nuclear attack without any command from Whitehall if the worst comes to the worst.
Newsnight also reveals that, until they were retired in 1998, the RAF's nuclear bombs were armed by turning a bicycle lock key. There was no other security on the bomb itself...
National Archive papers show that, in 1966, Chief Scientific Adviser Solly Zuckerman formally advised Defence Secretary Denis Healey that Britain needed to install PALs on its nuclear weapons to keep them safe.
However, the Royal Navy argued that its officers could be trusted and: "It would be invidious to suggest... that senior Service officers may, in difficult circumstances, act in defiance of their clear orders.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2007/11_november/15/newsnight.shtml
Lab + 5.4
UKIP -1.8
Con -2.1
Green -1.5
Critics point in particular to the Royal Navy’s decision to install a variant of Windows XP as the operating system on its missile-carrying Vanguard-class submarines. It was cheaper than the alternatives, but Windows for Submarines, as it is called, is also more vulnerable to malware as it comes off-the-shelf. This also means there are more bugs in circulation that could affect it, and every time a submarine comes to port and gets a software patch, it is newly vulnerable
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jan/16/trident-old-technology-brave-new-world-cyber-warfare
https://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/690308109403820032
Cruz is losing it.
Seriously, as I understand it they are intended to be able to be used in the event that the submarine commander can't make any contact with the UK.
That @PeoplesMomentum tweet suggests MPs should only live in London OR be rich enough to pay for their own travel to North East seats
Presumably @PeoplesMomentum would like there to be some Labour MPs who represent non London seats who aren't loaded.
In which case, can @PeoplesMomentum suggest another way of funding MPs leaving that hated Westminster Bubble, and doing constituency work?
I imagine that being commander of a ballistic nuclear submarine (of which there are a great many of various nationalities ... and there have been many many more over the years) is paralysingly boring- except in periods of what is euphemistically described as 'international tension'
Whatever vague threats to our way of life a bunch of mad religious bigots in the middle east pose, they pale into insignificance when compared to a 20 megaton thermo nuclear warhead dropping on our heads.
None of this changes what is a fundamental truth for our future well being and prosperity - and safety- namely the that we need a world wedded to the principle of the primacy of democracy. Democracy is worth defending and those who want it will have to fight for it.
Although I believe he misheard someone saying 1 or 2...
Far, far too many firms are hooked on cheap imported Labour and from their perspective rightly so. Why train someone when you can get a body in from outside for much less total cost? Tier 2 visas, those skills that we can't supposedly recruit or train for in the UK start at a salary of £20,100 and include such high power jobs as welders.
Now whilst those decisions may be fine for the individual companies they are awful for the long term good of the UK and its people. Aside from anything else they rely on placing more and more pressure on our public services and welfare budget (that twenty grand welder is going to be claiming in-work benefits), lowering GDP per head, and reducing productivity. If then UK is actually to become wealthier, and so able to afford all those nice things we all want, then we need to upskill our workforce and particularly our young people.
If firms will not pay to train people, then tax them until they do and they might get the idea. A company that isn't spending at least, say, 10% of gross profit on developing it workforce isn't doing enough. So take that 10% (less what percentage they did verifiably spend) and give it to companies who are spending to the limit and who are bidding for extra funds to do more.
Additionally, impose an extra tax for each employee brought in from abroad based on that persons salary level. I saw that happen in Oman and it was amazing the number of ex-pats that could suddenly be replaced by local staff who could do the job just as well.
Finally, if a company does bring in someone under tier 2 then they should be explain how that person will transfer his/her skills to a local so that someone else from abroad will not be needed in the future. That was another strategy used by the very sensible Omanis.
Yes, we have low unemployment now but we also have dreadful productivity and far, far too many people sitting around picking the noses living on benefits.
SNP HOLD Hamilton North & East (South Lanarkshire).
SNP: 42.9% (+2.4)
LAB: 33.6% (-9.4)
CON: 18.5% (+8.4)
GRN: 3.3% (+0.1)
LDEM: 1.8% (+1.8)
#Newsnight
Hamilton N. & E. (South Lanarkshire) first prefs:
SNP: 42.9% (+2.4)
LAB: 33.6% (-9.4)
CON: 18.5% (+8.4)
GRN: 3.3% (+0.1)
LDEM: 1.8% (+1.8)
Hamilton N. & E. (South Lanarkshire) vote result:
SNP: 1089
LAB: 855
CON: 469
GRN: 83
LDEM: 45
And I'll take your apology for your sneering dismissal (wholly necessary as it was given I was clearly attempting levity, even if you felt it fell flat) since I subsequently linked to a BBC story saying the same thing. And whatever many may think of the BBC news, it is not intentionally comedic at the very least.
Hamilton N. & E. (South Lanarkshire) vote result:
SNP: 1089
LAB: 855
CON: 469
GRN: 83
LDEM: 45
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/690312527121629184
I wonder if Britain Elects are being premature here.
I don't see how the SNP can possibly win the seat with those first preference numbers,
Even if it's arguable, I very much doubt you can prove it.
Peter Hennessy is probably one of the most authoritative writers on this subject. It's worth reading what he's published, and broadcast.
Crowborough East (Wealden) result:
CON: 64.0% (-1.3)
LDEM: 24.5% (-10.2)
LAB: 11.5% (+11.5)
Bushey North ward, Hertfordshire:
Conservative 881
Labour 286
Lib Dem 333
UKIP 176
Con Hold
Swing: 10.7% from UKIP to Con
Labour GAIN Newington (Thanet) from UKIP.
No bung next year then...
Running a business which employs a hundred or so people is never boring. Then imagine running a business in which has those 100 people crammed into a steel tube for about six week sat a time with no fresh air and no daylight. Then take that business and put a nuclear reactor in the middle of it. Then add on the fact that you must not, ever, be found by any other submarine or ship or aeroplane that are out there looking for you and if you are found, just once, that is your career over (not to mention very significant costs to the UK), oh and in not being found you have to play a 3D mind game based on limited information. And all that is in periods without any "international tension".
You seriously think that a job like that is "paralysingly boring". God knows what you do for a living if you do.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/690316251495862273
Newington result, Swing (May 2015) UKIP-Lab 8%, Lab vote up just 1.3% but enough to gain as UKIP lose nearly 15%. Con vote up 1%
May it's been a laughing stock. Instead of crowing about which party has won or lost people should consider the standard of individual that controls budgets of £millions, it's just awful.
Pause.
Well, at least it's not Vista or 8...:-)
Although there are similarites born of the fact that the UK and US launch the same type of missile, the procedure for UK SLBM nuclear weapon release is a bit different from the US version. The Brits not have Reservoir Dogs pointing guns at Leo from West Wing nor Denzel shouting at Gene. Brits have triggers, Prime Minister's Directives, safes within safes, listening for Radio 4 and letters of last resort, not keys, Emergency Action Messages, Permissive Action Links and so on.
Interestingly, the US President is the Commander-in-Chief and can order the use of nukes, but the UK PM is not the C-in-C and can only authorise their use: the order must be given by military personnel, and PM cannot force them to do so
Anyhoo, here is an accessible documentary on the UK procedure. Conversely, you could read "The Secret State: Preparing For The Worst 1945 - 2010" by Peter Hennessy" or "Planning Armageddon: Britain, the United States and the Command of Western Nuclear Forces 1945-1964" by Stephen Twigge and Len Scott
Earlier: Defeated former Labour MP Douglas Alexander carrying Bono's bags in Davos #WEF
This has the benefit to the Conservatives of boosting demographics electorally favourable to them rather than the predominantly Labour voting public sector.
Bushey North (Hertfordshire) result:
CON: 52.6% (+8.9)
LDEM: 19.9% (+5.8)
LAB: 17.1% (-2.1)
UKIP: 10.5% (-12.5)
I guess I am hopelessly ignorant of this aspect of our constitution.
Princess Liz: Governor Corbyn, I should have expected to find you holding Livingstone's leash. I recognized your foul stench when I was brought onboard.
Grand Moff Corbyn: Charming to the last. You don't know how hard I found it, signing the order to terminate your political career.
Princess Liz: [sarcastically] I'm surprised you had the courage to take the responsibility yourself.
Grand Moff Corbyn: Princess Liz, before your deselection, I would like to invite you to a ceremony that will make this progressive party operational. No Labour Stronghold will dare oppose the Corbynistas now.
Princess Liz: The more you tighten your grip, Corbyn, the more safe seats will slip through your fingers.
Grand Moff Corbyn: Not after we demonstrate the power of this policy. In a way, you have determined the choice of the constituency that is to be targeted first. Since you are reluctant to provide us with the location of the Rebel base, I have chosen to test our activists' destructive power on your home planet of Leicester.
Princess Liz: [shocked] No! Leicester is peaceful, we have no weapons. You can't possibly—
Grand Moff Corbyn: You would prefer another target, a military target? Then name the system! [stepping closer to Liz and pinning her against Darth Livingstone] I grow tired of asking this, so it will be the last time. Where is the Rebel base?
Princess Liz: [looks at view-screen showing Leicester for a moment, then, resigned] Derby. They're all on Derby.
Grand Moff Corbyn: There you see, Lord Livingstone? She can be reasonable. Proceed with the operation. You may fire when ready.
Princess Liz: [indignant] What?!
Grand Moff Corbyn: You're far too trusting. Derby is too remote to make an effective demonstration, but don't worry. We will deal with your rebel friends soon enough!
[Liz watches helplessly as Leftist activists descend on Leicester]
Labour HOLD Faraday (Southwark).
Faraday (Southwark):
LAB: 60.9% (-0.6)
LD: 14.5% (+8.2)
GRN: 7.8% (-3.8)
CON: 6.6% (-2.8)
UKIP: 5.3% (+5.3)
IND: 2.7% (+2.7)
APP: 2.2 (-4.5)
Libertarian Rebel
Sorry, @bbcthisweek, but this mix of PC & levity won't work. 23% of Muslim women have little or no English. #bbctw https://t.co/StYyMXAdvr
A nuclear balistic missile armed submarine captain will I hope never have to earn his salary