Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Was the CONHome members’ survey the driver of the re-shuffle? – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited September 16 in General
imageWas the CONHome members’ survey the driver of the re-shuffle? – politicalbetting.com

One of the features of ConHome, which was founded a few months after PB in 2004, has been its monthly survey of party members and the publication of its league table with net satisfaction levels for Cabinet members.

Read the full story here

«13456789

Comments

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 25,879
    edited September 16
    First.

    The reshuffle actually feels like a little of a damp squib to me.

    I want to see ideas from the government. Last night's news was a decent start; let's have some more.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 13,487
    "Exclusive: Get ready for a general election, says Oliver Dowden
    New Conservative chairman tells party staff that the fight for votes starts now, with a poll as little as 20 months away"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/09/15/exclusive-get-ready-general-election-says-oliver-dowden/
  • Andy_JS said:

    "Exclusive: Get ready for a general election, says Oliver Dowden
    New Conservative chairman tells party staff that the fight for votes starts now, with a poll as little as 20 months away"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/09/15/exclusive-get-ready-general-election-says-oliver-dowden/

    From that link, to save people working out when 20 months is:-

    The working assumption inside Number 10 is that Boris Johnson will go to the country in May or June 2024. However, The Telegraph understands he is also eyeing up a year earlier – May or June 2023.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 10,347
    edited September 16
    No, the ConHome survey was not the trigger – that was last week's poll lead for Labour, breaking 150-odd consecutive Tory leads and landing a few bets for PBers. The ConHome survey almost certainly determined individual sackings and promotions.
  • We might need to wait for the Sundays to cover the reshuffle in detail. In particular, it looks like Dominic Raab, though demoted, was able to negotiate a better deal for himself, and this will have disrupted Boris's original plan. Priti Patel went in for no readily apparent reason, and Nadhim Zahawi spent a suspiciously long time with the Prime Minister for what should have been a straightforward promotion.
  • Michael Gove did not get the promotion he was angling for, and tipped for, possibly by himself! – one (any) of the great offices of state. Did his personal life get in the way? As Housing Secretary, Gove has the hot potato of planning reform, with its capacity to hand Conservative seats to the LibDems, and although Gove has gained a departmental role, in moving out of the Cabinet Office, he has become remote from the seat of power.
  • Rishi is probably a winner, on balance – staying at the Treasury despite suggestions he might be moved to the Foreign Office to reduce his grip on domestic politics where he is very popular at around 75% on the ConHome numbers in the header, and thus a potential threat to the Prime Minister. Simon Clarke replaces Steve Barclay (who replaces Michael Gove) as Chief Secretary to the Treasury. I'm not sure of the kremlinology here.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,969
    Andy_JS said:

    "Exclusive: Get ready for a general election, says Oliver Dowden
    New Conservative chairman tells party staff that the fight for votes starts now, with a poll as little as 20 months away"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/09/15/exclusive-get-ready-general-election-says-oliver-dowden/

    That sounds like it's really soon...

    But actually, it's an election just a year before the the FTPA would mandate one anyway. It's May 2023, rather than May 2024.

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,969

    First.

    The reshuffle actually feels like a little of a damp squib to me.

    I want to see ideas from the government. Last night's news was a decent start; let's have some more.

    Gove.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,612
    Interesting that the French fulmination over the subs deal makes no mention of the UK. Is that 1) a snub because they don’t want to credit us with anything on the global stage or 2) a recognition that in Europe the UK is the only other serious military power in town and that’s a bridge not worth burning?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,612
    On topic, possibly a factor - but I suspect more in the sense that ConHome members views may now be more typical of the Party at large and views of general competence. The timing had nowt to do with last week’s polls - a reshuffle was due, better to get it out of the way before the conference season.
  • rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "Exclusive: Get ready for a general election, says Oliver Dowden
    New Conservative chairman tells party staff that the fight for votes starts now, with a poll as little as 20 months away"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/09/15/exclusive-get-ready-general-election-says-oliver-dowden/

    That sounds like it's really soon...

    But actually, it's an election just a year before the the FTPA would mandate one anyway. It's May 2023, rather than May 2024.

    There is one important difference. A 2023 election would be on the old constituency boundaries, whereas 2024 would be on the new ones. The Boundary Commission final reports are due in July 2023.

    Although early expectations were that the new boundaries would give the Conservatives a dozen or so extra seats but with recent Conservative success in the red wall seats, and LibDem and Labour success in more prosperous seats, it has been reported that some Conservative activists are sceptical of these gains.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 25,879
    edited September 16
    rcs1000 said:

    First.

    The reshuffle actually feels like a little of a damp squib to me.

    I want to see ideas from the government. Last night's news was a decent start; let's have some more.

    Gove.
    Are you saying give Gove a chance?

    But yes, hopefully he'll come up with some good ones. Mandatory nightclub nights for all men in their mid-fifties? ;)
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,969

    Interesting that the French fulmination over the subs deal makes no mention of the UK. Is that 1) a snub because they don’t want to credit us with anything on the global stage or 2) a recognition that in Europe the UK is the only other serious military power in town and that’s a bridge not worth burning?

    I know we build our own submarines, but have we made any sales to other countries? France's defence industry exists because countries want Western technology, but don't want to be dependent on the US.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,612
    TAIPEI, Sept 16 (Reuters) - Taiwan proposed on Thursday extra defence spending of T$240 billion ($8.69 billion) over the next five years, including on new missiles, as it warned of an urgent need to upgrade weapons in the face of a "severe threat" from giant neighbour China.

    https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/taiwan-proposes-extra-87-bln-defence-spending-over-5-years-2021-09-16/
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 41,516

    rcs1000 said:

    First.

    The reshuffle actually feels like a little of a damp squib to me.

    I want to see ideas from the government. Last night's news was a decent start; let's have some more.

    Gove.
    Are you saying give Gove a chance?

    But yes, hopefully he'll come up with some good ones. Mandatory nightclub nights for all men in their mid-fifties? ;)
    Gove will tear us apart.

    Although I wonder if his ambitions are quite what they were - with the departure of Lady Macbeth from his life?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 41,516

    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "Exclusive: Get ready for a general election, says Oliver Dowden
    New Conservative chairman tells party staff that the fight for votes starts now, with a poll as little as 20 months away"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/09/15/exclusive-get-ready-general-election-says-oliver-dowden/

    That sounds like it's really soon...

    But actually, it's an election just a year before the the FTPA would mandate one anyway. It's May 2023, rather than May 2024.

    There is one important difference. A 2023 election would be on the old constituency boundaries, whereas 2024 would be on the new ones. The Boundary Commission final reports are due in July 2023.

    Although early expectations were that the new boundaries would give the Conservatives a dozen or so extra seats but with recent Conservative success in the red wall seats, and LibDem and Labour success in more prosperous seats, it has been reported that some Conservative activists are sceptical of these gains.
    Our constituency campaign team have pencilled in a GE for 2023 since at least April. FYI.
  • Interesting that the French fulmination over the subs deal makes no mention of the UK. Is that 1) a snub because they don’t want to credit us with anything on the global stage or 2) a recognition that in Europe the UK is the only other serious military power in town and that’s a bridge not worth burning?

    It could be a snub but mainly this is an Australian-American deal with Britain as bit-part players. Australia was due to buy French submarines. Now it will buy American. That is what France is complaining about, not the sliver of the deal that benefits this country.

    Really there is no contract signed but an undertaking to start a two year feasibility study, negotatiating work and technology transfers. The boats will be built in Australian shipyards, for instance, and there will be questions of who supplies and maintains various components. The sorts of considerations that are standard on large arms deals.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 7,731
    rcs1000 said:

    Interesting that the French fulmination over the subs deal makes no mention of the UK. Is that 1) a snub because they don’t want to credit us with anything on the global stage or 2) a recognition that in Europe the UK is the only other serious military power in town and that’s a bridge not worth burning?

    I know we build our own submarines, but have we made any sales to other countries? .
    Not since we absolutely fucked Canada with the Upholder boats.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,969

    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "Exclusive: Get ready for a general election, says Oliver Dowden
    New Conservative chairman tells party staff that the fight for votes starts now, with a poll as little as 20 months away"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/09/15/exclusive-get-ready-general-election-says-oliver-dowden/

    That sounds like it's really soon...

    But actually, it's an election just a year before the the FTPA would mandate one anyway. It's May 2023, rather than May 2024.

    There is one important difference. A 2023 election would be on the old constituency boundaries, whereas 2024 would be on the new ones. The Boundary Commission final reports are due in July 2023.

    Although early expectations were that the new boundaries would give the Conservatives a dozen or so extra seats but with recent Conservative success in the red wall seats, and LibDem and Labour success in more prosperous seats, it has been reported that some Conservative activists are sceptical of these gains.
    Interesting.

    My gut is that the boundary changes help the Conservatives because they muddy the tactical voting equation. The longer a party is in power, the more their opponents will tactically vote to remove them. Look at 1992 - the Conservatives got 42% of the vote, and were eight points clear of Labour, and yet only squeaked out a majority.

    Well... We shall see.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 7,731

    Interesting that the French fulmination over the subs deal makes no mention of the UK. Is that 1) a snub because they don’t want to credit us with anything on the global stage or 2) a recognition that in Europe the UK is the only other serious military power in town and that’s a bridge not worth burning?

    It could be a snub but mainly this is an Australian-American deal with Britain as bit-part players. Australia was due to buy French submarines. Now it will buy American. That is what France is complaining about, not the sliver of the deal that benefits this country.

    Really there is no contract signed but an undertaking to start a two year feasibility study, negotatiating work and technology transfers. The boats will be built in Australian shipyards, for instance, and there will be questions of who supplies and maintains various components. The sorts of considerations that are standard on large arms deals.
    It's politically impossible to 'build' them anywhere but ASC at Osborne in South Australia. However that yard has zero autochthonous experience with nuclear propulsion so the centre sections will probably be built at GDEB (who also had to be brought in to sort out the Astute program) in Groton, CT and then shipped to Australia for integration.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,612
    rcs1000 said:

    Interesting that the French fulmination over the subs deal makes no mention of the UK. Is that 1) a snub because they don’t want to credit us with anything on the global stage or 2) a recognition that in Europe the UK is the only other serious military power in town and that’s a bridge not worth burning?

    I know we build our own submarines, but have we made any sales to other countries? France's defence industry exists because countries want Western technology, but don't want to be dependent on the US.
    The only export order France had for its Barracuda class was Australia. The UK hasn’t exported any subs since we went all nuclear - Australia’s current diesel electrics are based on Swedish tech, which replaced British designed subs.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 25,879
    rcs1000 said:

    Interesting that the French fulmination over the subs deal makes no mention of the UK. Is that 1) a snub because they don’t want to credit us with anything on the global stage or 2) a recognition that in Europe the UK is the only other serious military power in town and that’s a bridge not worth burning?

    I know we build our own submarines, but have we made any sales to other countries? France's defence industry exists because countries want Western technology, but don't want to be dependent on the US.
    When we got rid of the Upholder (*) class (as DuraAce mentions above), we went all-nuclear on our boats. Most countries cannot be bothered with nukes, and want diesel-electric instead. We couldn't offer them that. The French could not either; but offered to redesign their latest nuke attack sub to be diesel powered.

    The Spanish S-80 class is probably not in the running due to the (ahem) interesting problems they've had with it. Like making it the first submarine that could sink but not surface again. So they lengthened it to add buoyancy, which added a whole host of other issues ...

    It's interesting that Oz never really considered the UK for their Collins replacements because of their nuke power - despite their requirements being perfect for nuclear power, given the area they have to patrol.

    (*) For train fans, these use the Paxman Valenta engines that originally powered the HST.
  • Liz Truss is around 12/1 in the betting. Depending which bookmaker you look at, this is the same sort of price as Michael Gove and Jeremy Hunt. You might take the view that Truss is a more likely successor than either man.

    Jeremy Hunt – no return to the front bench.
  • Dura_Ace said:

    At least we now know where Johnson is going to put the Trident boats after Scottish independence. They are obviously going to RAN Fleet Base West at Garden Island.

    From Airstrip One to Airstrip Two.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,612
    We’ll see the new Culture Secretary @NadineDorries in action in DCMS questions in the Commons at 9.30 this morning. Life comes at you fast in a reshuffle.

    https://twitter.com/adamfleming/status/1438374778369454081?s=20
  • Volvo Cars* to be floated on the Stockholm stock exchange. At approx $20bn this will be one of the biggest flotations in Europe.

    (*Not to be confused with the since 1999 completely separate Volvo Group - trucks, buses, heavy construction, marine and aerospace.)
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 25,879
    Dura_Ace said:

    Interesting that the French fulmination over the subs deal makes no mention of the UK. Is that 1) a snub because they don’t want to credit us with anything on the global stage or 2) a recognition that in Europe the UK is the only other serious military power in town and that’s a bridge not worth burning?

    It could be a snub but mainly this is an Australian-American deal with Britain as bit-part players. Australia was due to buy French submarines. Now it will buy American. That is what France is complaining about, not the sliver of the deal that benefits this country.

    Really there is no contract signed but an undertaking to start a two year feasibility study, negotatiating work and technology transfers. The boats will be built in Australian shipyards, for instance, and there will be questions of who supplies and maintains various components. The sorts of considerations that are standard on large arms deals.
    It's politically impossible to 'build' them anywhere but ASC at Osborne in South Australia. However that yard has zero autochthonous experience with nuclear propulsion so the centre sections will probably be built at GDEB (who also had to be brought in to sort out the Astute program) in Groton, CT and then shipped to Australia for integration.
    I could see it splitting three ways:
    * Hull built in Oz.
    * Sensors and weapons systems from US.
    * Powerplant from UK (RR PWR-2 or 3)

    Probably not, though.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,612
    Strange framing here. It was Australia that proposed this in March. Not the UK or US.….

    French gov't: "The American choice to push aside a European ally and partner like France from a structural partnership with Australia ... shows a lack of coherence that France can only acknowledge and regret" https://theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/16/cold-war-mentality-china-criticises-aukus-us-uk-australia-submarine-pact… (Ignores fact that this was an Aus initiative.)


    https://twitter.com/shashj/status/1438376859176259588?s=20
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 42,396

    Liz Truss is around 12/1 in the betting. Depending which bookmaker you look at, this is the same sort of price as Michael Gove and Jeremy Hunt. You might take the view that Truss is a more likely successor than either man.

    Jeremy Hunt – no return to the front bench.

    She has many similarities to Johnson as well. Dishevelled looking blond with a rather mad turn of phrase, boundless self confidence and beloved by the grassroots.

    Also known for her ummm…lively private life.
  • Andy_JS said:

    "Exclusive: Get ready for a general election, says Oliver Dowden
    New Conservative chairman tells party staff that the fight for votes starts now, with a poll as little as 20 months away"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/09/15/exclusive-get-ready-general-election-says-oliver-dowden/

    Don't tell Brenda!
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 7,731

    Dura_Ace said:

    Interesting that the French fulmination over the subs deal makes no mention of the UK. Is that 1) a snub because they don’t want to credit us with anything on the global stage or 2) a recognition that in Europe the UK is the only other serious military power in town and that’s a bridge not worth burning?

    It could be a snub but mainly this is an Australian-American deal with Britain as bit-part players. Australia was due to buy French submarines. Now it will buy American. That is what France is complaining about, not the sliver of the deal that benefits this country.

    Really there is no contract signed but an undertaking to start a two year feasibility study, negotatiating work and technology transfers. The boats will be built in Australian shipyards, for instance, and there will be questions of who supplies and maintains various components. The sorts of considerations that are standard on large arms deals.
    It's politically impossible to 'build' them anywhere but ASC at Osborne in South Australia. However that yard has zero autochthonous experience with nuclear propulsion so the centre sections will probably be built at GDEB (who also had to be brought in to sort out the Astute program) in Groton, CT and then shipped to Australia for integration.
    I could see it splitting three ways:
    * Hull built in Oz.
    * Sensors and weapons systems from US.
    * Powerplant from UK (RR PWR-2 or 3)

    Probably not, though.
    PWR3 is a lightly rebranded American S9G anyway. The US Navy operates 100 reactors and just has a completely different level of expertise and experience to the RN. The Australians would be mad to get their nuclear propulsion knowledge second hand via the UK.

    All of the Australian reactor officers will have to go through the USN NPS system at Goose Creek anyway. This is going to take decades...
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 35,767

    Rishi is probably a winner, on balance – staying at the Treasury despite suggestions he might be moved to the Foreign Office to reduce his grip on domestic politics where he is very popular at around 75% on the ConHome numbers in the header, and thus a potential threat to the Prime Minister. Simon Clarke replaces Steve Barclay (who replaces Michael Gove) as Chief Secretary to the Treasury. I'm not sure of the kremlinology here.

    From a career development perspective, his having got out of his comfort zone and performed in another of the big offices wouldn’t have done him any harm (unless he isn’t up to it, of course)
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 16,628
    ydoethur said:

    Liz Truss is around 12/1 in the betting. Depending which bookmaker you look at, this is the same sort of price as Michael Gove and Jeremy Hunt. You might take the view that Truss is a more likely successor than either man.

    Jeremy Hunt – no return to the front bench.

    She has many similarities to Johnson as well. Dishevelled looking blond with a rather mad turn of phrase, boundless self confidence and beloved by the grassroots.

    Also known for her ummm…lively private life.
    Box of frogs says steady on.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,612
    Damn, another huge NYT scoop. I thought it was 9 counts of wire fraud and 2 counts of conspiracy to commit wire fraud that led to the Elizabeth Holmes trial.

    https://twitter.com/Birdyword/status/1438378564525694983?s=20
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 39,788

    Michael Gove did not get the promotion he was angling for, and tipped for, possibly by himself! – one (any) of the great offices of state. Did his personal life get in the way? As Housing Secretary, Gove has the hot potato of planning reform, with its capacity to hand Conservative seats to the LibDems, and although Gove has gained a departmental role, in moving out of the Cabinet Office, he has become remote from the seat of power.

    As I have said before Gove is a depressingly rare resource in modern politics, a Minister who can think, analyse and come up with solutions themselves. Where Boris deploys that rare resource shows us his priorities. He is determined to make something of this levelling up agenda beyond mere soundbites and has deployed the Gove to achieve that. He may not succeed of course. Not all of his original thinking produces useful ideas as @ydoethur will no doubt remind us, but this is the area where change and action is to be expected.

    I would have preferred him to be at the Home Office but have no doubt the housing crisis is where the action is going to be. Interesting.
  • French elections next year btw. Whether the submarine news might be a factor...
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 25,879
    Dura_Ace said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Interesting that the French fulmination over the subs deal makes no mention of the UK. Is that 1) a snub because they don’t want to credit us with anything on the global stage or 2) a recognition that in Europe the UK is the only other serious military power in town and that’s a bridge not worth burning?

    It could be a snub but mainly this is an Australian-American deal with Britain as bit-part players. Australia was due to buy French submarines. Now it will buy American. That is what France is complaining about, not the sliver of the deal that benefits this country.

    Really there is no contract signed but an undertaking to start a two year feasibility study, negotatiating work and technology transfers. The boats will be built in Australian shipyards, for instance, and there will be questions of who supplies and maintains various components. The sorts of considerations that are standard on large arms deals.
    It's politically impossible to 'build' them anywhere but ASC at Osborne in South Australia. However that yard has zero autochthonous experience with nuclear propulsion so the centre sections will probably be built at GDEB (who also had to be brought in to sort out the Astute program) in Groton, CT and then shipped to Australia for integration.
    I could see it splitting three ways:
    * Hull built in Oz.
    * Sensors and weapons systems from US.
    * Powerplant from UK (RR PWR-2 or 3)

    Probably not, though.
    PWR3 is a lightly rebranded American S9G anyway. The US Navy operates 100 reactors and just has a completely different level of expertise and experience to the RN. The Australians would be mad to get their nuclear propulsion knowledge second hand via the UK.

    All of the Australian reactor officers will have to go through the USN NPS system at Goose Creek anyway. This is going to take decades...
    "PWR3 is a lightly rebranded American S9G anyway."

    Do you actually have direct evidence for that? I know RR got access to S9G designs, but I've not seen much saying they're the same.

    As for the Aussies being mad: they were mad enough to sign the Shortfin Barracuda deal in the first place ...
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,612
    WAPO Editorial

    The new alliance is meant to bolster allies in Asia, starting with Australia, that are facing intense pressure from a China that seeks regional dominance. As Australia has pushed back, Beijing has reacted with sharp economic reprisals and meddling in Australian politics. Australia pressed the White House, soon after Biden’s inauguration, “Don’t leave us alone in the field.” The Biden team, after consulting with Johnson, who touts a “global Britain,” moved ahead quickly.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/09/15/new-us-alliance-responds-chinese-aggression-us-military-complacency/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=wp_main
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 42,396
    DavidL said:

    Michael Gove did not get the promotion he was angling for, and tipped for, possibly by himself! – one (any) of the great offices of state. Did his personal life get in the way? As Housing Secretary, Gove has the hot potato of planning reform, with its capacity to hand Conservative seats to the LibDems, and although Gove has gained a departmental role, in moving out of the Cabinet Office, he has become remote from the seat of power.

    As I have said before Gove is a depressingly rare resource in modern politics, a Minister who can think, analyse and come up with solutions themselves. Where Boris deploys that rare resource shows us his priorities. He is determined to make something of this levelling up agenda beyond mere soundbites and has deployed the Gove to achieve that. He may not succeed of course. Not all of his original thinking produces useful ideas as @ydoethur will no doubt remind us, but this is the area where change and action is to be expected.

    I would have preferred him to be at the Home Office but have no doubt the housing crisis is where the action is going to be. Interesting.
    That’s putting it mildly.

    And Nick Gibb is out, out, OUT!!!!

    Just Spielman left, and when Rashford sees her comments this morning she’s toast too. Hopefully.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 42,396

    French elections next year btw. Whether the submarine news might be a factor...

    Nah, it will sink without trace.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 35,767
    ydoethur said:

    French elections next year btw. Whether the submarine news might be a factor...

    Nah, it will sink without trace.
    Or emerge from the deep
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 39,788
    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    Michael Gove did not get the promotion he was angling for, and tipped for, possibly by himself! – one (any) of the great offices of state. Did his personal life get in the way? As Housing Secretary, Gove has the hot potato of planning reform, with its capacity to hand Conservative seats to the LibDems, and although Gove has gained a departmental role, in moving out of the Cabinet Office, he has become remote from the seat of power.

    As I have said before Gove is a depressingly rare resource in modern politics, a Minister who can think, analyse and come up with solutions themselves. Where Boris deploys that rare resource shows us his priorities. He is determined to make something of this levelling up agenda beyond mere soundbites and has deployed the Gove to achieve that. He may not succeed of course. Not all of his original thinking produces useful ideas as @ydoethur will no doubt remind us, but this is the area where change and action is to be expected.

    I would have preferred him to be at the Home Office but have no doubt the housing crisis is where the action is going to be. Interesting.
    That’s putting it mildly.

    And Nick Gibb is out, out, OUT!!!!

    Just Spielman left, and when Rashford sees her comments this morning she’s toast too. Hopefully.
    I feel a song coming on, 2 out of three ain't bad. Don't be greedy.


    Meanwhile Swinney is now left horribly exposed as indisputably the most useless and incompetent education minister in the UK with no more cover from down south.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,612
    Scots could miss out on international healthcare after SNP refuses to agree to post-Brexit Bill

    Row could mean English travellers are entitled to treatment in foreign countries where there is a reciprocal agreement, but Scots are not


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/09/15/scots-could-miss-international-healthcare-snp-refuse-agree-post/
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 39,788

    WAPO Editorial

    The new alliance is meant to bolster allies in Asia, starting with Australia, that are facing intense pressure from a China that seeks regional dominance. As Australia has pushed back, Beijing has reacted with sharp economic reprisals and meddling in Australian politics. Australia pressed the White House, soon after Biden’s inauguration, “Don’t leave us alone in the field.” The Biden team, after consulting with Johnson, who touts a “global Britain,” moved ahead quickly.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/09/15/new-us-alliance-responds-chinese-aggression-us-military-complacency/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=wp_main

    It's interesting that we are involved in this at all. In many ways Japan or South Korea would have been a more obvious fit for what both Australia and the US were seeking to achieve here. It's almost as if the UK matters after all. Ah well.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,969

    Dura_Ace said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Interesting that the French fulmination over the subs deal makes no mention of the UK. Is that 1) a snub because they don’t want to credit us with anything on the global stage or 2) a recognition that in Europe the UK is the only other serious military power in town and that’s a bridge not worth burning?

    It could be a snub but mainly this is an Australian-American deal with Britain as bit-part players. Australia was due to buy French submarines. Now it will buy American. That is what France is complaining about, not the sliver of the deal that benefits this country.

    Really there is no contract signed but an undertaking to start a two year feasibility study, negotatiating work and technology transfers. The boats will be built in Australian shipyards, for instance, and there will be questions of who supplies and maintains various components. The sorts of considerations that are standard on large arms deals.
    It's politically impossible to 'build' them anywhere but ASC at Osborne in South Australia. However that yard has zero autochthonous experience with nuclear propulsion so the centre sections will probably be built at GDEB (who also had to be brought in to sort out the Astute program) in Groton, CT and then shipped to Australia for integration.
    I could see it splitting three ways:
    * Hull built in Oz.
    * Sensors and weapons systems from US.
    * Powerplant from UK (RR PWR-2 or 3)

    Probably not, though.
    PWR3 is a lightly rebranded American S9G anyway. The US Navy operates 100 reactors and just has a completely different level of expertise and experience to the RN. The Australians would be mad to get their nuclear propulsion knowledge second hand via the UK.

    All of the Australian reactor officers will have to go through the USN NPS system at Goose Creek anyway. This is going to take decades...
    "PWR3 is a lightly rebranded American S9G anyway."

    Do you actually have direct evidence for that? I know RR got access to S9G designs, but I've not seen much saying they're the same.

    As for the Aussies being mad: they were mad enough to sign the Shortfin Barracuda deal in the first place ...
    As a former RR shareholder (professionally, not personally), I did note that Knolls/GE have an awful lot of patents related to modular nuclear reactors, while RR has relatively few. That always suggested to me that they were licensing a fair amount of technology.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 16,628
    DavidL said:

    WAPO Editorial

    The new alliance is meant to bolster allies in Asia, starting with Australia, that are facing intense pressure from a China that seeks regional dominance. As Australia has pushed back, Beijing has reacted with sharp economic reprisals and meddling in Australian politics. Australia pressed the White House, soon after Biden’s inauguration, “Don’t leave us alone in the field.” The Biden team, after consulting with Johnson, who touts a “global Britain,” moved ahead quickly.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/09/15/new-us-alliance-responds-chinese-aggression-us-military-complacency/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=wp_main

    It's interesting that we are involved in this at all. In many ways Japan or South Korea would have been a more obvious fit for what both Australia and the US were seeking to achieve here. It's almost as if the UK matters after all. Ah well.
    Trade deal, quid quo pro. Suspect we might be getting involved in all sorts of schemes from now on.
  • DavidL said:

    Michael Gove did not get the promotion he was angling for, and tipped for, possibly by himself! – one (any) of the great offices of state. Did his personal life get in the way? As Housing Secretary, Gove has the hot potato of planning reform, with its capacity to hand Conservative seats to the LibDems, and although Gove has gained a departmental role, in moving out of the Cabinet Office, he has become remote from the seat of power.

    As I have said before Gove is a depressingly rare resource in modern politics, a Minister who can think, analyse and come up with solutions themselves. Where Boris deploys that rare resource shows us his priorities. He is determined to make something of this levelling up agenda beyond mere soundbites and has deployed the Gove to achieve that. He may not succeed of course. Not all of his original thinking produces useful ideas as @ydoethur will no doubt remind us, but this is the area where change and action is to be expected.

    I would have preferred him to be at the Home Office but have no doubt the housing crisis is where the action is going to be. Interesting.
    Yeah it's such a priority that he's been PM for two years and is yet to put any policies in place to help realise this empty soundbite, while pushing ahead with policies that undermine it.
    An alternative explanation is that he sees Gove as a backstabbing rival and is setting him up as the fall guy for the government's abject failure to "level up".
  • Jonathan said:

    DavidL said:

    WAPO Editorial

    The new alliance is meant to bolster allies in Asia, starting with Australia, that are facing intense pressure from a China that seeks regional dominance. As Australia has pushed back, Beijing has reacted with sharp economic reprisals and meddling in Australian politics. Australia pressed the White House, soon after Biden’s inauguration, “Don’t leave us alone in the field.” The Biden team, after consulting with Johnson, who touts a “global Britain,” moved ahead quickly.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/09/15/new-us-alliance-responds-chinese-aggression-us-military-complacency/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=wp_main

    It's interesting that we are involved in this at all. In many ways Japan or South Korea would have been a more obvious fit for what both Australia and the US were seeking to achieve here. It's almost as if the UK matters after all. Ah well.
    Trade deal, quid quo pro. Suspect we might be getting involved in all sorts of schemes from now on.
    Great, things always work out so well for us when we get dragged into stuff by the Americans. I expect many on here were celebrating our global power status in 2003 (I was marching against it).
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 39,788

    DavidL said:

    Michael Gove did not get the promotion he was angling for, and tipped for, possibly by himself! – one (any) of the great offices of state. Did his personal life get in the way? As Housing Secretary, Gove has the hot potato of planning reform, with its capacity to hand Conservative seats to the LibDems, and although Gove has gained a departmental role, in moving out of the Cabinet Office, he has become remote from the seat of power.

    As I have said before Gove is a depressingly rare resource in modern politics, a Minister who can think, analyse and come up with solutions themselves. Where Boris deploys that rare resource shows us his priorities. He is determined to make something of this levelling up agenda beyond mere soundbites and has deployed the Gove to achieve that. He may not succeed of course. Not all of his original thinking produces useful ideas as @ydoethur will no doubt remind us, but this is the area where change and action is to be expected.

    I would have preferred him to be at the Home Office but have no doubt the housing crisis is where the action is going to be. Interesting.
    Yeah it's such a priority that he's been PM for two years and is yet to put any policies in place to help realise this empty soundbite, while pushing ahead with policies that undermine it.
    An alternative explanation is that he sees Gove as a backstabbing rival and is setting him up as the fall guy for the government's abject failure to "level up".
    I think it is fair to say that the last 2 years have been rather busy what with the B word and this pandemic thingy. But there has been more commitment to investment in northern infrastructure and manufacturing. Long way to go of course.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 2,630
    Need to see how they build on this initiative but it does have the potential to transform my view of Uk politics. It’s hard to imagine Arch Remoaner Starmer’s barely post-Corbynite party moving so firmly in this direction. And it’s far more important than the national insurance vs income tax debate.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 35,767
    OT Balinese officials have come up with a rather unorthodox punishment for maskless travelers.

    While those who are deliberately non-compliant are subject to a 100,000 rupiah ($9) fine, visitors who admit to having slipped up, for example, bringing their mask out with them but forgetting to put it on, have been given the option of doing push ups, or even sweeping the street instead.

    Badung regency Public Order Agency chief I Gusti Agung Kerta Suryanegara told the ABC that 80% of those who received a fine were travelers.

    In recent weeks, various videos of tourists completing push-ups have been posted online. "The fine is absolutely nothing, but the videos might be a deterrent," says O'Regan.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,612
    Defence Secretary @BWallaceMP on @SkyNews:

    -Says UK/US/Aus defence pact is ‘directed to lots of different threats’. Avoids saying it’s aimed at China.
    -France remains one of ‘closest military allies’. ‘We didn’t go fishing for these opportunities’. Australians made decision.


    https://twitter.com/joepike/status/1438384808728711172?s=20
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 26,946
    Dura_Ace said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Interesting that the French fulmination over the subs deal makes no mention of the UK. Is that 1) a snub because they don’t want to credit us with anything on the global stage or 2) a recognition that in Europe the UK is the only other serious military power in town and that’s a bridge not worth burning?

    It could be a snub but mainly this is an Australian-American deal with Britain as bit-part players. Australia was due to buy French submarines. Now it will buy American. That is what France is complaining about, not the sliver of the deal that benefits this country.

    Really there is no contract signed but an undertaking to start a two year feasibility study, negotatiating work and technology transfers. The boats will be built in Australian shipyards, for instance, and there will be questions of who supplies and maintains various components. The sorts of considerations that are standard on large arms deals.
    It's politically impossible to 'build' them anywhere but ASC at Osborne in South Australia. However that yard has zero autochthonous experience with nuclear propulsion so the centre sections will probably be built at GDEB (who also had to be brought in to sort out the Astute program) in Groton, CT and then shipped to Australia for integration.
    I could see it splitting three ways:
    * Hull built in Oz.
    * Sensors and weapons systems from US.
    * Powerplant from UK (RR PWR-2 or 3)

    Probably not, though.
    PWR3 is a lightly rebranded American S9G anyway. The US Navy operates 100 reactors and just has a completely different level of expertise and experience to the RN. The Australians would be mad to get their nuclear propulsion knowledge second hand via the UK.

    All of the Australian reactor officers will have to go through the USN NPS system at Goose Creek anyway. This is going to take decades...
    Quite an expensive project for the RAN. If the Naval contract was cancelled mainly because of escalating costs at AUD 90 billion, and porkbarrelling at ASC, this is unlikely to be quicker or cheaper.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 39,788

    We’ll see the new Culture Secretary @NadineDorries in action in DCMS questions in the Commons at 9.30 this morning. Life comes at you fast in a reshuffle.

    https://twitter.com/adamfleming/status/1438374778369454081?s=20

    The reshuffle did get rid of the worst duffers in the Cabinet and is therefore to be welcomed but Mad Nad is a bizarre appointment, presumably for the entertainment value.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,612
    Jonathan said:

    DavidL said:

    WAPO Editorial

    The new alliance is meant to bolster allies in Asia, starting with Australia, that are facing intense pressure from a China that seeks regional dominance. As Australia has pushed back, Beijing has reacted with sharp economic reprisals and meddling in Australian politics. Australia pressed the White House, soon after Biden’s inauguration, “Don’t leave us alone in the field.” The Biden team, after consulting with Johnson, who touts a “global Britain,” moved ahead quickly.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/09/15/new-us-alliance-responds-chinese-aggression-us-military-complacency/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=wp_main

    It's interesting that we are involved in this at all. In many ways Japan or South Korea would have been a more obvious fit for what both Australia and the US were seeking to achieve here. It's almost as if the UK matters after all. Ah well.
    Trade deal, quid quo pro. Suspect we might be getting involved in all sorts of schemes from now on.
    Vaccine swap……
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 42,396

    Defence Secretary @BWallaceMP on @SkyNews:

    -Says UK/US/Aus defence pact is ‘directed to lots of different threats’. Avoids saying it’s aimed at China.
    -France remains one of ‘closest military allies’. ‘We didn’t go fishing for these opportunities’. Australians made decision.


    https://twitter.com/joepike/status/1438384808728711172?s=20

    Just as well given we’ve left the CFP.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 26,946
    edited September 16
    DavidL said:

    We’ll see the new Culture Secretary @NadineDorries in action in DCMS questions in the Commons at 9.30 this morning. Life comes at you fast in a reshuffle.

    https://twitter.com/adamfleming/status/1438374778369454081?s=20

    The reshuffle did get rid of the worst duffers in the Cabinet and is therefore to be welcomed but Mad Nad is a bizarre appointment, presumably for the entertainment value.
    She is just there for the Culture War stuff, which will be a key part of GE strategy.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 43,970
    Here's an idea: the EU just reframes itself as as trading block/regulatory union and gives up on "strategic autonomy" with the nations that care and do defence, France, Sweden and maybe Spain, integrating themselves into a pan-Western defence network worldwide.

    There. Solved it.
  • DavidL said:

    We’ll see the new Culture Secretary @NadineDorries in action in DCMS questions in the Commons at 9.30 this morning. Life comes at you fast in a reshuffle.

    https://twitter.com/adamfleming/status/1438374778369454081?s=20

    The reshuffle did get rid of the worst duffers in the Cabinet and is therefore to be welcomed but Mad Nad is a bizarre appointment, presumably for the entertainment value.
    She is only there to throw red meat at the lunatics. She will shriek about the wokeists under the bed and try to impose a union flag onto the set of every news broadcast.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,969

    Here's an idea: the EU just reframes itself as as trading block/regulatory union and gives up on "strategic autonomy" with the nations that care and do defence, France, Sweden and maybe Spain, integrating themselves into a pan-Western defence network worldwide.

    There. Solved it.

    The problem is that some countries have money (Germany), while others have capability (France), and everyone wants to be treated like they're really important.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 2,997
    ydoethur said:

    Liz Truss is around 12/1 in the betting. Depending which bookmaker you look at, this is the same sort of price as Michael Gove and Jeremy Hunt. You might take the view that Truss is a more likely successor than either man.

    Jeremy Hunt – no return to the front bench.

    She has many similarities to Johnson as well. Dishevelled looking blond with a rather mad turn of phrase, boundless self confidence and beloved by the grassroots.

    Also known for her ummm…lively private life.
    It'd be interesting if the Conservatives chose a THIRD female leader while Labour has only chosen men.

    Not so much point-scoring as outright trolling.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 33,387

    Interesting that the French fulmination over the subs deal makes no mention of the UK. Is that 1) a snub because they don’t want to credit us with anything on the global stage or 2) a recognition that in Europe the UK is the only other serious military power in town and that’s a bridge not worth burning?

    c) The knowledge that this is entirely of US making.
    It will be interesting to see if it will be of any direct (other than in terms of global security) benefit to us.Too early to tell.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 45,410
    edited September 16
    moonshine said:

    Need to see how they build on this initiative but it does have the potential to transform my view of Uk politics. It’s hard to imagine Arch Remoaner Starmer’s barely post-Corbynite party moving so firmly in this direction. And it’s far more important than the national insurance vs income tax debate.

    I would gentle suggest that last night's new defence agreement with US and Aus could only have happened under Boris and his global outlook and the consequences of this agreements are profound, far reaching, and will impact on trade and the EU

    The media are highlighting the purchase of nuclear submarine technology (not weapons) by Australia in a top secret deal that excludes all other parties, certainly at this stage

    However, it is more than that as the agreement will see the exclusive sharing of intelligence, AI and much more as the Trans Pacific join together to deal with the threat of China. It is ludicrous that Ardern of New Zealand has already banned Australian nuclear subs from their waters, but then she has moved very much into China's pocket

    It is also clear that UK will soon join the Trans Pacific partnership and it is more than likely so will the US

    It has been said that the reason this deal has come into place is not just that France's diesel subs were not suitable for Australia's defence requirements, but also that Germany is heading towards neutrality and that the EU and Germany could not be trusted not to share nuclear secrets with Russia or China

    This indicates wide distrust with the EU and in the medium term they face being isolated from the World's largest trading block, giving them little choice but to negotiate their own membership and at a stroke resolve the trading impasse with the UK as they would all then trade under the same terms

    Some will say fantasy, but those who support the EU need to wake up and see the direction of travel
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 34,397

    rcs1000 said:

    Interesting that the French fulmination over the subs deal makes no mention of the UK. Is that 1) a snub because they don’t want to credit us with anything on the global stage or 2) a recognition that in Europe the UK is the only other serious military power in town and that’s a bridge not worth burning?

    I know we build our own submarines, but have we made any sales to other countries? France's defence industry exists because countries want Western technology, but don't want to be dependent on the US.
    When we got rid of the Upholder (*) class (as DuraAce mentions above), we went all-nuclear on our boats. Most countries cannot be bothered with nukes, and want diesel-electric instead. We couldn't offer them that. The French could not either; but offered to redesign their latest nuke attack sub to be diesel powered.

    The Spanish S-80 class is probably not in the running due to the (ahem) interesting problems they've had with it. Like making it the first submarine that could sink but not surface again. So they lengthened it to add buoyancy, which added a whole host of other issues ...

    It's interesting that Oz never really considered the UK for their Collins replacements because of their nuke power - despite their requirements being perfect for nuclear power, given the area they have to patrol.

    (*) For train fans, these use the Paxman Valenta engines that originally powered the HST.
    Valentine tanks surely win the prize for the first submersibles that can’t surface?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 43,970
    rcs1000 said:

    Here's an idea: the EU just reframes itself as as trading block/regulatory union and gives up on "strategic autonomy" with the nations that care and do defence, France, Sweden and maybe Spain, integrating themselves into a pan-Western defence network worldwide.

    There. Solved it.

    The problem is that some countries have money (Germany), while others have capability (France), and everyone wants to be treated like they're really important.
    You say that, and yet France pays and pulls its weight on defence and yet Germany doesn't.

    We need to get far more comfortable with intersecting and overlapping alliances. If Germany wants to focus on local defence of the central European plain, fine. France can pursue more global interests and aspirations, and that's also fine.

    Different nations, different roles, but complimentary and coherent - not contradictory.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 26,946
    Fishing said:

    ydoethur said:

    Liz Truss is around 12/1 in the betting. Depending which bookmaker you look at, this is the same sort of price as Michael Gove and Jeremy Hunt. You might take the view that Truss is a more likely successor than either man.

    Jeremy Hunt – no return to the front bench.

    She has many similarities to Johnson as well. Dishevelled looking blond with a rather mad turn of phrase, boundless self confidence and beloved by the grassroots.

    Also known for her ummm…lively private life.
    It'd be interesting if the Conservatives chose a THIRD female leader while Labour has only chosen men.

    Not so much point-scoring as outright trolling.
    How did the last one do against Labour?
  • FishingFishing Posts: 2,997
    rcs1000 said:

    Here's an idea: the EU just reframes itself as as trading block/regulatory union and gives up on "strategic autonomy" with the nations that care and do defence, France, Sweden and maybe Spain, integrating themselves into a pan-Western defence network worldwide.

    There. Solved it.

    The problem is that some countries have money (Germany), while others have capability (France), and everyone wants to be treated like they're really important.
    No, the main problem with that is that the EU is the EU.

    If it starts giving up powers, there is a danger that people will realise how pointless it is. You can't justify five Presidents, a large bureaucracy, a big budget, a flag and embassies everywhere for just a trading agreement. That's what they're terrified of.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 35,767
    DavidL said:

    We’ll see the new Culture Secretary @NadineDorries in action in DCMS questions in the Commons at 9.30 this morning. Life comes at you fast in a reshuffle.

    https://twitter.com/adamfleming/status/1438374778369454081?s=20

    The reshuffle did get rid of the worst duffers in the Cabinet and is therefore to be welcomed but Mad Nad is a bizarre appointment, presumably for the entertainment value.
    Boris can’t risk becoming the weakest link himself, is my guess.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 2,997
    edited September 16
    Foxy said:

    Fishing said:

    ydoethur said:

    Liz Truss is around 12/1 in the betting. Depending which bookmaker you look at, this is the same sort of price as Michael Gove and Jeremy Hunt. You might take the view that Truss is a more likely successor than either man.

    Jeremy Hunt – no return to the front bench.

    She has many similarities to Johnson as well. Dishevelled looking blond with a rather mad turn of phrase, boundless self confidence and beloved by the grassroots.

    Also known for her ummm…lively private life.
    It'd be interesting if the Conservatives chose a THIRD female leader while Labour has only chosen men.

    Not so much point-scoring as outright trolling.
    How did the last one do against Labour?
    Beat them, iirc.

    And the one before that thrice trounced them.
  • DavidL said:

    We’ll see the new Culture Secretary @NadineDorries in action in DCMS questions in the Commons at 9.30 this morning. Life comes at you fast in a reshuffle.

    https://twitter.com/adamfleming/status/1438374778369454081?s=20

    The reshuffle did get rid of the worst duffers in the Cabinet and is therefore to be welcomed but Mad Nad is a bizarre appointment, presumably for the entertainment value.
    She is only there to throw red meat at the lunatics. She will shriek about the wokeists under the bed and try to impose a union flag onto the set of every news broadcast.
    Privatising the Beeb & C4 while promoting GB News to state broadcaster status would be a master stroke.

    https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1438166900761141248?s=21
  • Scots could miss out on international healthcare after SNP refuses to agree to post-Brexit Bill

    Row could mean English travellers are entitled to treatment in foreign countries where there is a reciprocal agreement, but Scots are not


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/09/15/scots-could-miss-international-healthcare-snp-refuse-agree-post/

    That’ll be one of those “Union Dividends”. Just like the privilege of Scottish police and fires services uniquely paying VAT. Lucky, lucky us.
  • DavidL said:

    We’ll see the new Culture Secretary @NadineDorries in action in DCMS questions in the Commons at 9.30 this morning. Life comes at you fast in a reshuffle.

    https://twitter.com/adamfleming/status/1438374778369454081?s=20

    The reshuffle did get rid of the worst duffers in the Cabinet and is therefore to be welcomed but Mad Nad is a bizarre appointment, presumably for the entertainment value.
    Distracts from the Clown-in-Chief.
  • CatManCatMan Posts: 1,366

    Damn, another huge NYT scoop. I thought it was 9 counts of wire fraud and 2 counts of conspiracy to commit wire fraud that led to the Elizabeth Holmes trial.

    https://twitter.com/Birdyword/status/1438378564525694983?s=20

    The article isn't saying that Holmes shouldn't be put on trial:


    "Yet Ms. Holmes is also exceptional for the basic fact that she is a woman. Time and again, we see that the boys’ club that is the tech industry supports and protects its own — even when the costs are huge. And when the door cracks open ever so slightly to let a woman in, the same rules don’t apply. Indeed, as Ms. Holmes’s trial for fraud continues in San Jose, it’s clear that two things can be true. She should be held accountable for her actions as chief executive of Theranos. And it can be sexist to hold her accountable for alleged serious wrongdoing and not hold an array of men accountable for reports of wrongdoing or bad judgment."
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 24,545
    Morning all! Brighter this morning, but the weather seems to be cooling. As, to be fair, one would expect.

    Can't understand this obsession with 'Global Britain', and getting involved with potential conflicts thousands of miles away. We can't really afford it and it's hardly environmentally friendly to be charging over to the other side of the globe.

    Unless it's trying to bring back achievements of days of yore. Like me running for a bus; I'd like to think I could do it, but realism has to prevail.

  • It has been said that the reason this deal has come into place is not just that France's diesel subs were not suitable for Australia's defence requirements, but also that Germany is heading towards neutrality and that the EU and Germany could not be trusted not to share nuclear secrets with Russia or China

    Who has been saying this, just so I can judge the value of such a suggestion?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 16,628
    edited September 16

    Morning all! Brighter this morning, but the weather seems to be cooling. As, to be fair, one would expect.

    Can't understand this obsession with 'Global Britain', and getting involved with potential conflicts thousands of miles away. We can't really afford it and it's hardly environmentally friendly to be charging over to the other side of the globe.

    Unless it's trying to bring back achievements of days of yore. Like me running for a bus; I'd like to think I could do it, but realism has to prevail.

    Boris brings to foreign policy the same down to Earth realism that he brought to the garden bridge and the island airport. Will end the same way probably.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 20,281
    CatMan said:

    Damn, another huge NYT scoop. I thought it was 9 counts of wire fraud and 2 counts of conspiracy to commit wire fraud that led to the Elizabeth Holmes trial.

    https://twitter.com/Birdyword/status/1438378564525694983?s=20

    The article isn't saying that Holmes shouldn't be put on trial:


    "Yet Ms. Holmes is also exceptional for the basic fact that she is a woman. Time and again, we see that the boys’ club that is the tech industry supports and protects its own — even when the costs are huge. And when the door cracks open ever so slightly to let a woman in, the same rules don’t apply. Indeed, as Ms. Holmes’s trial for fraud continues in San Jose, it’s clear that two things can be true. She should be held accountable for her actions as chief executive of Theranos. And it can be sexist to hold her accountable for alleged serious wrongdoing and not hold an array of men accountable for reports of wrongdoing or bad judgment."
    Do they name names and crimes that have gone without prosecution?
  • Scots could miss out on international healthcare after SNP refuses to agree to post-Brexit Bill

    Row could mean English travellers are entitled to treatment in foreign countries where there is a reciprocal agreement, but Scots are not


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/09/15/scots-could-miss-international-healthcare-snp-refuse-agree-post/

    That’ll be one of those “Union Dividends”. Just like the privilege of Scottish police and fires services uniquely paying VAT. Lucky, lucky us.
    You mean entirely based upon the actions of the SNP government? Yes you're right.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 41,516

    Here's an idea: the EU just reframes itself as as trading block/regulatory union and gives up on "strategic autonomy" with the nations that care and do defence, France, Sweden and maybe Spain, integrating themselves into a pan-Western defence network worldwide.

    There. Solved it.

    They could rebrand themselves at the same time. Maybe as the "European Economic Community"?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 26,946

    Morning all! Brighter this morning, but the weather seems to be cooling. As, to be fair, one would expect.

    Can't understand this obsession with 'Global Britain', and getting involved with potential conflicts thousands of miles away. We can't really afford it and it's hardly environmentally friendly to be charging over to the other side of the globe.

    Unless it's trying to bring back achievements of days of yore. Like me running for a bus; I'd like to think I could do it, but realism has to prevail.

    C'mon! Get on board for the third Opium War.
  • Scots could miss out on international healthcare after SNP refuses to agree to post-Brexit Bill

    Row could mean English travellers are entitled to treatment in foreign countries where there is a reciprocal agreement, but Scots are not


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/09/15/scots-could-miss-international-healthcare-snp-refuse-agree-post/

    That’ll be one of those “Union Dividends”. Just like the privilege of Scottish police and fires services uniquely paying VAT. Lucky, lucky us.
    You mean entirely based upon the actions of the SNP government? Yes you're right.
    Huh? It is the UK Government who choose to levy VAT on Scottish police but not on English police. Bit hard to justify n’est-ce pas?
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 7,731
    Foxy said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Interesting that the French fulmination over the subs deal makes no mention of the UK. Is that 1) a snub because they don’t want to credit us with anything on the global stage or 2) a recognition that in Europe the UK is the only other serious military power in town and that’s a bridge not worth burning?

    It could be a snub but mainly this is an Australian-American deal with Britain as bit-part players. Australia was due to buy French submarines. Now it will buy American. That is what France is complaining about, not the sliver of the deal that benefits this country.

    Really there is no contract signed but an undertaking to start a two year feasibility study, negotatiating work and technology transfers. The boats will be built in Australian shipyards, for instance, and there will be questions of who supplies and maintains various components. The sorts of considerations that are standard on large arms deals.
    It's politically impossible to 'build' them anywhere but ASC at Osborne in South Australia. However that yard has zero autochthonous experience with nuclear propulsion so the centre sections will probably be built at GDEB (who also had to be brought in to sort out the Astute program) in Groton, CT and then shipped to Australia for integration.
    I could see it splitting three ways:
    * Hull built in Oz.
    * Sensors and weapons systems from US.
    * Powerplant from UK (RR PWR-2 or 3)

    Probably not, though.
    PWR3 is a lightly rebranded American S9G anyway. The US Navy operates 100 reactors and just has a completely different level of expertise and experience to the RN. The Australians would be mad to get their nuclear propulsion knowledge second hand via the UK.

    All of the Australian reactor officers will have to go through the USN NPS system at Goose Creek anyway. This is going to take decades...
    Quite an expensive project for the RAN. If the Naval contract was cancelled mainly because of escalating costs at AUD 90 billion, and porkbarrelling at ASC, this is unlikely to be quicker or cheaper.
    One area where the Australian Defence Force absolutely excel is poaching talent so they will asset strip the RN of suitably experienced reactor officers. We stopped doing flying exchanges with them at one point because of this. If they liked the look of an exchanged officer they would offer a lateral transfer, fast track citizenship within 6 months and superior terms of service. The RAF in particular lost quite a few aircrew this way.
  • Foxy said:

    Morning all! Brighter this morning, but the weather seems to be cooling. As, to be fair, one would expect.

    Can't understand this obsession with 'Global Britain', and getting involved with potential conflicts thousands of miles away. We can't really afford it and it's hardly environmentally friendly to be charging over to the other side of the globe.

    Unless it's trying to bring back achievements of days of yore. Like me running for a bus; I'd like to think I could do it, but realism has to prevail.

    C'mon! Get on board for the third Opium War.
    It’ll all, predictably, end in tears.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 2,997

    Here's an idea: the EU just reframes itself as as trading block/regulatory union and gives up on "strategic autonomy" with the nations that care and do defence, France, Sweden and maybe Spain, integrating themselves into a pan-Western defence network worldwide.

    There. Solved it.

    They could rebrand themselves at the same time. Maybe as the "European Economic Community"?
    Then the Conservatives might discover their europhilia and Labour its euro-scepticism.

    And everybody would go back to wearing flares and listening to prog rock and punk.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 41,516
    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    We’ll see the new Culture Secretary @NadineDorries in action in DCMS questions in the Commons at 9.30 this morning. Life comes at you fast in a reshuffle.

    https://twitter.com/adamfleming/status/1438374778369454081?s=20

    The reshuffle did get rid of the worst duffers in the Cabinet and is therefore to be welcomed but Mad Nad is a bizarre appointment, presumably for the entertainment value.
    She is just there for the Culture War stuff, which will be a key part of GE strategy.
    It's also a great appointment to troll the BBC.

    "You think you are important? Well, meet your new contact point with Government..."

    THAT is how you do humour, HIGNFY, Mock the Week, The News Quiz....
  • Morning all! Brighter this morning, but the weather seems to be cooling. As, to be fair, one would expect.

    Can't understand this obsession with 'Global Britain', and getting involved with potential conflicts thousands of miles away. We can't really afford it and it's hardly environmentally friendly to be charging over to the other side of the globe.

    Unless it's trying to bring back achievements of days of yore. Like me running for a bus; I'd like to think I could do it, but realism has to prevail.

    We live in an interconnected world and as such the direction of travel is much wider than just Europe and indeed the Trans Pacific partnership will dwarf the EU in trading terms

    It is also true that China is a threat to the west, and this is widely recognised and this new defence agreement is the precursor to a wider alignment of cooperation with like minded western countries both in defence and trade whiich may in years to come result in a world wide trading association of countries
  • Dura_Ace said:

    Foxy said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Interesting that the French fulmination over the subs deal makes no mention of the UK. Is that 1) a snub because they don’t want to credit us with anything on the global stage or 2) a recognition that in Europe the UK is the only other serious military power in town and that’s a bridge not worth burning?

    It could be a snub but mainly this is an Australian-American deal with Britain as bit-part players. Australia was due to buy French submarines. Now it will buy American. That is what France is complaining about, not the sliver of the deal that benefits this country.

    Really there is no contract signed but an undertaking to start a two year feasibility study, negotatiating work and technology transfers. The boats will be built in Australian shipyards, for instance, and there will be questions of who supplies and maintains various components. The sorts of considerations that are standard on large arms deals.
    It's politically impossible to 'build' them anywhere but ASC at Osborne in South Australia. However that yard has zero autochthonous experience with nuclear propulsion so the centre sections will probably be built at GDEB (who also had to be brought in to sort out the Astute program) in Groton, CT and then shipped to Australia for integration.
    I could see it splitting three ways:
    * Hull built in Oz.
    * Sensors and weapons systems from US.
    * Powerplant from UK (RR PWR-2 or 3)

    Probably not, though.
    PWR3 is a lightly rebranded American S9G anyway. The US Navy operates 100 reactors and just has a completely different level of expertise and experience to the RN. The Australians would be mad to get their nuclear propulsion knowledge second hand via the UK.

    All of the Australian reactor officers will have to go through the USN NPS system at Goose Creek anyway. This is going to take decades...
    Quite an expensive project for the RAN. If the Naval contract was cancelled mainly because of escalating costs at AUD 90 billion, and porkbarrelling at ASC, this is unlikely to be quicker or cheaper.
    One area where the Australian Defence Force absolutely excel is poaching talent so they will asset strip the RN of suitably experienced reactor officers. We stopped doing flying exchanges with them at one point because of this. If they liked the look of an exchanged officer they would offer a lateral transfer, fast track citizenship within 6 months and superior terms of service. The RAF in particular lost quite a few aircrew this way.
    What great pals.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 33,387
    CatMan said:

    Damn, another huge NYT scoop. I thought it was 9 counts of wire fraud and 2 counts of conspiracy to commit wire fraud that led to the Elizabeth Holmes trial.

    https://twitter.com/Birdyword/status/1438378564525694983?s=20

    The article isn't saying that Holmes shouldn't be put on trial:


    "Yet Ms. Holmes is also exceptional for the basic fact that she is a woman. Time and again, we see that the boys’ club that is the tech industry supports and protects its own — even when the costs are huge. And when the door cracks open ever so slightly to let a woman in, the same rules don’t apply. Indeed, as Ms. Holmes’s trial for fraud continues in San Jose, it’s clear that two things can be true. She should be held accountable for her actions as chief executive of Theranos. And it can be sexist to hold her accountable for alleged serious wrongdoing and not hold an array of men accountable for reports of wrongdoing or bad judgment."
    Do they name any of these men who should be "held accountable" ?
    (I can't access the article at the moment.)
    The point is that there is very clear evidence Holmes was guilty of blatant scientific fraud on which her business was based, and there was zero chance from the outset that its product would work.
    Is there a direct comparison elsewhere ? The ones I can think of are considerably less clear cut.
  • Fishing said:

    Here's an idea: the EU just reframes itself as as trading block/regulatory union and gives up on "strategic autonomy" with the nations that care and do defence, France, Sweden and maybe Spain, integrating themselves into a pan-Western defence network worldwide.

    There. Solved it.

    They could rebrand themselves at the same time. Maybe as the "European Economic Community"?
    Then the Conservatives might discover their europhilia and Labour its euro-scepticism.

    And everybody would go back to wearing flares and listening to prog rock and punk.
    What an attractive Union you portray.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 24,545
    Foxy said:

    Morning all! Brighter this morning, but the weather seems to be cooling. As, to be fair, one would expect.

    Can't understand this obsession with 'Global Britain', and getting involved with potential conflicts thousands of miles away. We can't really afford it and it's hardly environmentally friendly to be charging over to the other side of the globe.

    Unless it's trying to bring back achievements of days of yore. Like me running for a bus; I'd like to think I could do it, but realism has to prevail.

    C'mon! Get on board for the third Opium War.
    Thought we'd just fought that in Afghanistan. And, as we usually do in that country, lost.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 33,387


    It has been said that the reason this deal has come into place is not just that France's diesel subs were not suitable for Australia's defence requirements, but also that Germany is heading towards neutrality and that the EU and Germany could not be trusted not to share nuclear secrets with Russia or China

    Who has been saying this, just so I can judge the value of such a suggestion?
    I'm not sure what motive there might be in giving Germany US submarine tech in any event. It's a particularly odd idea.in the context.

  • It has been said that the reason this deal has come into place is not just that France's diesel subs were not suitable for Australia's defence requirements, but also that Germany is heading towards neutrality and that the EU and Germany could not be trusted not to share nuclear secrets with Russia or China

    Who has been saying this, just so I can judge the value of such a suggestion?
    Commented on here last night but of course you must come to your own conclusion
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 16,628
    edited September 16

    Morning all! Brighter this morning, but the weather seems to be cooling. As, to be fair, one would expect.

    Can't understand this obsession with 'Global Britain', and getting involved with potential conflicts thousands of miles away. We can't really afford it and it's hardly environmentally friendly to be charging over to the other side of the globe.

    Unless it's trying to bring back achievements of days of yore. Like me running for a bus; I'd like to think I could do it, but realism has to prevail.

    We live in an interconnected world and as such the direction of travel is much wider than just Europe and indeed the Trans Pacific partnership will dwarf the EU in trading terms

    It is also true that China is a threat to the west, and this is widely recognised and this new defence agreement is the precursor to a wider alignment of cooperation with like minded western countries both in defence and trade whiich may in years to come result in a world wide trading association of countries
    Or local political pressures now force us to stretch and contrive economic and defence policy. We’re still in Europe, anchored in the cold North Atlantic and close in time zone to the EU, even if for now the UK government can’t be seen to accept that fact.


  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,612
    Usually when something v big happens internationally several members of the retired ambassador corps pop up within hours to say it proves again how isolated and rubbish Britain is of late. For now... silence.

    https://twitter.com/iainmartin1/status/1438391557128863747?s=20
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 33,387

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    We’ll see the new Culture Secretary @NadineDorries in action in DCMS questions in the Commons at 9.30 this morning. Life comes at you fast in a reshuffle.

    https://twitter.com/adamfleming/status/1438374778369454081?s=20

    The reshuffle did get rid of the worst duffers in the Cabinet and is therefore to be welcomed but Mad Nad is a bizarre appointment, presumably for the entertainment value.
    She is just there for the Culture War stuff, which will be a key part of GE strategy.
    It's also a great appointment to troll the BBC.

    "You think you are important? Well, meet your new contact point with Government..."

    THAT is how you do humour, HIGNFY, Mock the Week, The News Quiz....
    THAT is how you would govern ?
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 7,731


    It has been said that the reason this deal has come into place is not just that France's diesel subs were not suitable for Australia's defence requirements, but also that Germany is heading towards neutrality and that the EU and Germany could not be trusted not to share nuclear secrets with Russia or China

    Who has been saying this, just so I can judge the value of such a suggestion?
    Commented on here last night but of course you must come to your own conclusion
    Long term detainees on pb.com become acculturated to confidently asserted ultracrepidarianism on all manner of subjects but some of last night's pronouncements by our newly emergent experts in submarines were really quite something.
  • Groundgord Day on R4.

    Broony: I know what Scots really want, and it’s not BJ & his muscular Unionism and it’s not the Scottish nationalists.

    It’s Labour isn’t it!
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,612
    Nigelb said:

    Interesting that the French fulmination over the subs deal makes no mention of the UK. Is that 1) a snub because they don’t want to credit us with anything on the global stage or 2) a recognition that in Europe the UK is the only other serious military power in town and that’s a bridge not worth burning?

    c) The knowledge that this is entirely of US making.
    It will be interesting to see if it will be of any direct (other than in terms of global security) benefit to us.Too early to tell.
    I think its Australia that started it - fed up of being stiffed on the French deal, asked the US for access to nuclear technology and Biden checked that Johnson (the only other country the US shares tech with) was ok with it. Presumably Johnson was an enthusiastic supporter.
This discussion has been closed.