US embassy in Iraq preparing for ordered evacuation due to 'heightened security risks', sources say
Tonight or tomorrow night eyes on is my guess. Suddenly there's warnings everywhere - UKMTO now. So I think the word has gone out.
Makes me more convinced its a bluff, sadly.
If it were really happening, I don't think word would be out until after it started.
Unless its in the next few hours - allies given proper heads up. We will soon see
If so, oil prices likely to soar - which Russia desperately needs. Currently running a 1.5% deficit - which is draining the National Wealth Fund. It was $150bn going into the Ukraine invasion - now sub $40bn.
I think Bibi is too much of a chickenhawk to actually take on Iran. Posture but no follow through.
I hope I'm wrong.
Bibi is like Big Brother. He needs the war to continue, because it creates the weird national psyche that keeps him in office and out of prison.
Which is why I don't think he'll hit Iran.
Knock out Iran and peace in the Middle East becomes a lot more viable, and Israel's enemies lose their primary state sponsor.
Keep Iran there, there's an ever-present enemy to hate.
That does actually make some sense, but the problem is that you can't knock out Iran easily, as he will well know. The regime has built in all sorts of preparations for attacks like this, over many, many years.
So instead, it's more likely that you get a wider war.
I think Bibi is too much of a chickenhawk to actually take on Iran. Posture but no follow through.
I hope I'm wrong.
Bibi is like Big Brother. He needs the war to continue, because it creates the weird national psyche that keeps him in office and out of prison.
Which is why I don't think he'll hit Iran.
Knock out Iran and peace in the Middle East becomes a lot more viable, and Israel's enemies lose their primary state sponsor.
Keep Iran there, there's an ever-present enemy to hate.
That does actually make some sense, but the problem is that you can't knock out Iran easily, as he will well know. The regime has built in all sorts of preparations for attacks like this, over many, many years.
So instead, it's more likely that you get a wider war.
I think Bibi is too much of a chickenhawk to actually take on Iran. Posture but no follow through.
I hope I'm wrong.
Bibi is like Big Brother. He needs the war to continue, because it creates the weird national psyche that keeps him in office and out of prison.
Which is why I don't think he'll hit Iran.
Knock out Iran and peace in the Middle East becomes a lot more viable, and Israel's enemies lose their primary state sponsor.
Keep Iran there, there's an ever-present enemy to hate.
If Israel and Iran go to war, you think Israel wins?
If you do, describe day one after that war, and the terms of the ceasefire.
Yes I think Israel wins. No idea what comes after, but the world would be a far better place without the Mullahs. Victory might not lead to regime change though, maybe just knocking their military back a peg or two.
I think Bibi is too much of a chickenhawk to actually take on Iran. Posture but no follow through.
I hope I'm wrong.
Bibi is like Big Brother. He needs the war to continue, because it creates the weird national psyche that keeps him in office and out of prison.
Which is why I don't think he'll hit Iran.
Knock out Iran and peace in the Middle East becomes a lot more viable, and Israel's enemies lose their primary state sponsor.
Keep Iran there, there's an ever-present enemy to hate.
If Israel and Iran go to war, you think Israel wins?
If you do, describe day one after that war, and the terms of the ceasefire.
Yes I think Israel wins. No idea what comes after, but the world would be a far better place without the Mullahs. Victory might not lead to regime change though, maybe just knocking their military back a peg or two.
The NHS incease doesn't include any capital spending just day to day so we will see how much gets eaten by paying off the strikers.
Is it true the NHS no longer treats children who are attending private schools? Saw that on BlackBeltBarrister who said it was in a newspaper. Sounds very whacky.
Not exactly. If the privately educated child turns up at A&E with a a broken leg, of course they will still be treated. The story is about an extra service for children with difficulties with I think speech/comprehension that are not eligible if they are not in the state system.
If Israel and Iran go to full-scale war, expect Iran to destabilise as much of the Middle East as possible; particularly Iraq, Syria, Joedan and Lebanon.
An important question would be Saudi Arabia's reaction. They generally don't get on well with Iran.
If Israel and Iran go to full-scale war, expect Iran to destabilise as much of the Middle East as possible; particularly Iraq, Syria, Joedan and Lebanon.
An important question would be Saudi Arabia's reaction. They generally don't get on well with Iran.
How would we tell the difference?
I imagine Saudi Arabia's reaction would be to tut, call for peace, and sit back with a bucket of popcorn.
"Annabel Denham I didn’t think we were heading for civil war. Now I’m not so sure We are not there yet, but uncontrolled immigration means that our nation’s cohesion is fraying fast" (£)
"Neil O'Brien Britain is heading for utter oblivion. Here is why From immigration and demographics to welfare and low productivity, we are facing terminal decline" (£)
With such negative dross as this, the Telegraph has become part of the problem rather than looking for solutions. These and other commentators/politicians are incessantly talking the country, and its people, down. Depressing clickbait journalism.
Pentagon launches review of Aukus nuclear submarine deal
Ending pact would be blow to security alliance with Australia and UK
The Pentagon has launched a review of the 2021 Aukus submarine deal with the UK and Australia, throwing the security pact into doubt at a time of heightened tension with China.
The review to determine whether the US should scrap the project is being led by Elbridge Colby, a top defence department official who previously expressed scepticism about Aukus, according to six people familiar with the matter.
Ending the submarine and advanced technology development agreement would destroy a pillar of security co-operation between the allies. The review has triggered anxiety in London and Canberra.
I am not a CANZUK advocate, because having left EU it makes no sense to enter into another ever-closer-union. But lower-level versions such as a UK-CA-AUS-NZ naval defence pact make sense, and would prevent shocks like this.
£68 million already spent on the project without it even being started.
WTF!?
There's an issue with these projects. They're not just planned by an ignoramus crayoning lines onto a map. Potential routes need surveying; geological, environmental, archeological and flora and fauna data all needs to go into the decision of which route to take. And if you want prices anywhere near accurate, you don't just say: "We'll put a concrete beam bridge over that stream"; you say: "Actually, the ground there is mud and peat down to twenty feet. We'll need piles down to the bedrock, and because the area often flash floods, we'll put in culverts either side to relieve floodwaters. Oh, and one can be used for an access track for a farmer, meaning we don't need to build that occupation bridge over there. We'll spend £5 million on the culverts, but save £8 million on not building the occupation bridge. Lifetime maintenance costs should also be lower for the culverts, and electrification clearances are not relevant."
This is outline, not detailed design, but until such decisions are made, costs are incredibly vague. This early work saves vast amounts of money later.
The surveys along cost money. Some work is being done on the EWR rail route near us, and some scrotes stole (from memory) over £200,000 of metal track that had been placed across fields to allow the surveys to occur. That's stuff needed just to support the surveys.
So the question becomes how much of these things do you do before detailed planning and construction starts: none, and have costs balloon during design and construction, or a large amount, and risk the money being lost if the project does not go ahead?
(And yes, there will be stupid costs in there, such as legal costs... )
Oh I'm sure some costs are legitimately incurred before a project commences, absolutely.
But £68,000,000 spent on a 13 mile route without it being commenced? You don't think that takes the piss a little bit?
That's £3,400 spent per metre of route without even commencing the project.
This level of gold-plating projects is why we can't get anything done.
“Infrastructure inflation”
It’s related to “Military Inflation”, “Aerospace Inflation” and the rest. The problem with cost in government projects is the assumed cost of line items. Then everyone adds from last time.
The numbers no longer connect to reality.
When you point out projects done better with lower costs in other countries, silence…
I'm pretty sure you're wrong about that wrt civil engineering projects. Many projects *are* delivered on, or below, cost and on time or early. I believe the >£1 billion A14 upgrade was one such. But the many successful projects don't get remarked upon. (The A14 upgrade partially opened six months early)
The problem I am talking about is high estimates, and cost of work being done.
In the example above, the survey cost £32.50. Per millimetre.
The NHS incease doesn't include any capital spending just day to day so we will see how much gets eaten by paying off the strikers.
Is it true the NHS no longer treats children who are attending private schools? Saw that on BlackBeltBarrister who said it was in a newspaper. Sounds very whacky.
Not exactly. If the privately educated child turns up at A&E with a a broken leg, of course they will still be treated. The story is about an extra service for children with difficulties with I think speech/comprehension that are not eligible if they are not in the state system.
Which is still wrong
..and if so, the fault of the Coalition government's 2014 legislation.
If Israel and Iran go to full-scale war, expect Iran to destabilise as much of the Middle East as possible; particularly Iraq, Syria, Joedan and Lebanon.
An important question would be Saudi Arabia's reaction. They generally don't get on well with Iran.
Israel cannot beat Hamas quickly in a small little plot of land. I do think it will win eventually.
What chance would it have against Iran. I cannot see western nations being as keen to go into bat for Israel.
US embassy in Iraq preparing for ordered evacuation due to 'heightened security risks', sources say
Tonight or tomorrow night eyes on is my guess. Suddenly there's warnings everywhere - UKMTO now. So I think the word has gone out.
Makes me more convinced its a bluff, sadly.
If it were really happening, I don't think word would be out until after it started.
American is busy signalling
Definitely a bluff then, they wouldn't be signalling if it were legit.
How many times have we been here before? Bibi is the Grand Old Duke of York, constantly marching troops to the top of the hill, then back down again.
Hopefully Bibi is out of office and in prison where he belongs sooner rather than later, and Israel can get a proper leader who will take the gloves off and actually fight Iran properly.
I think Bibi is too much of a chickenhawk to actually take on Iran. Posture but no follow through.
I hope I'm wrong.
Bibi is like Big Brother. He needs the war to continue, because it creates the weird national psyche that keeps him in office and out of prison.
Which is why I don't think he'll hit Iran.
Knock out Iran and peace in the Middle East becomes a lot more viable, and Israel's enemies lose their primary state sponsor.
Keep Iran there, there's an ever-present enemy to hate.
That does actually make some sense, but the problem is that you can't knock out Iran easily, as he will well know. The regime has built in all sorts of preparations for attacks like this, over many, many years.
So instead, it's more likely that you get a wider war.
The reason Israel are trying to persuade anyone who'll listen to attack iraq is because it's the one country in the area that israel can't subjugate. The only reason they probably don't have nuclear weapons is because the Ayatollah decared them unislamic in that their destructive force is indiscriminate. Israel have no such qualms
If Israel and Iran go to full-scale war, expect Iran to destabilise as much of the Middle East as possible; particularly Iraq, Syria, Joedan and Lebanon.
An important question would be Saudi Arabia's reaction. They generally don't get on well with Iran.
Israel cannot beat Hamas quickly in a small little plot of land. I do think it will win eventually.
What chance would it have against Iran. I cannot see western nations being as keen to go into bat for Israel.
Hamas are insurgents within Greater Israel, they're a much tougher threat to eradicate.
Get the Mullahs down to the level of Hamas and Iran won't be remotely such a threat anymore, nor would Hamas or Hezbollah for that matter.
To be fair the Gibraltar Chief Minister is involved in the talks as well
No. The Chagos Deal was far more complicated and nuanced - India, our involvement with US on security. The Gibraltar Surrender is completely different. Everything the EU wanted surrendered purely in the Labour Party interest in cuddling up to EU.
After today’s awful clueless budget, the only thing that can save Labour from a rout at next election is some growth tempting people away from voting against how awful they’ve been, Starmer and gang are going all out on growth - cuddling up to the EU, borrowing and spending, tax and spending, giving EU everything they want. The Gibraltar Surrender epitomises this.
This post makes your byelection prediction sound prescien! If it's a cry for attention you might do better arrowing in on the Lab-Leak theory
Lab do leak, like a sieve, most of this budget was in the Sunday Papers.
I called July 4th election day right, weeks before when Sunak’s shower cloud was mere drop in the Caribbean Sea. I still fear being summoned to court about it. “Your honour. How can these defendants be guilty of the charge, when PB.com has been crowing they told them to do it from ingenious political betting analysis?”
The NHS incease doesn't include any capital spending just day to day so we will see how much gets eaten by paying off the strikers.
Is it true the NHS no longer treats children who are attending private schools? Saw that on BlackBeltBarrister who said it was in a newspaper. Sounds very whacky.
Not exactly. If the privately educated child turns up at A&E with a a broken leg, of course they will still be treated. The story is about an extra service for children with difficulties with I think speech/comprehension that are not eligible if they are not in the state system.
Which is still wrong
..and if so, the fault of the Coalition government's 2014 legislation.
US embassy in Iraq preparing for ordered evacuation due to 'heightened security risks', sources say
Tonight or tomorrow night eyes on is my guess. Suddenly there's warnings everywhere - UKMTO now. So I think the word has gone out.
Makes me more convinced its a bluff, sadly.
If it were really happening, I don't think word would be out until after it started.
American is busy signalling
Definitely a bluff then, they wouldn't be signalling if it were legit.
How many times have we been here before? Bibi is the Grand Old Duke of York, constantly marching troops to the top of the hill, then back down again.
Hopefully Bibi is out of office and in prison where he belongs sooner rather than later, and Israel can get a proper leader who will take the gloves off and actually fight Iran properly.
There was plenty of signalling before Russia attacked Ukraine. It doesn't mean it's not happening.
US embassy in Iraq preparing for ordered evacuation due to 'heightened security risks', sources say
Tonight or tomorrow night eyes on is my guess. Suddenly there's warnings everywhere - UKMTO now. So I think the word has gone out.
Makes me more convinced its a bluff, sadly.
If it were really happening, I don't think word would be out until after it started.
American is busy signalling
Definitely a bluff then, they wouldn't be signalling if it were legit.
How many times have we been here before? Bibi is the Grand Old Duke of York, constantly marching troops to the top of the hill, then back down again.
Hopefully Bibi is out of office and in prison where he belongs sooner rather than later, and Israel can get a proper leader who will take the gloves off and actually fight Iran properly.
US embassy in Iraq preparing for ordered evacuation due to 'heightened security risks', sources say
Tonight or tomorrow night eyes on is my guess. Suddenly there's warnings everywhere - UKMTO now. So I think the word has gone out.
Makes me more convinced its a bluff, sadly.
If it were really happening, I don't think word would be out until after it started.
American is busy signalling
Definitely a bluff then, they wouldn't be signalling if it were legit.
How many times have we been here before? Bibi is the Grand Old Duke of York, constantly marching troops to the top of the hill, then back down again.
Hopefully Bibi is out of office and in prison where he belongs sooner rather than later, and Israel can get a proper leader who will take the gloves off and actually fight Iran properly.
There was plenty of signalling before Russia attacked Ukraine. It doesn't mean it's not happening.
"Annabel Denham I didn’t think we were heading for civil war. Now I’m not so sure We are not there yet, but uncontrolled immigration means that our nation’s cohesion is fraying fast" (£)
"Neil O'Brien Britain is heading for utter oblivion. Here is why From immigration and demographics to welfare and low productivity, we are facing terminal decline" (£)
With such negative dross as this, the Telegraph has become part of the problem rather than looking for solutions. These and other commentators/politicians are incessantly talking the country, and its people, down. Depressing clickbait journalism.
Pentagon launches review of Aukus nuclear submarine deal
Ending pact would be blow to security alliance with Australia and UK
The Pentagon has launched a review of the 2021 Aukus submarine deal with the UK and Australia, throwing the security pact into doubt at a time of heightened tension with China.
The review to determine whether the US should scrap the project is being led by Elbridge Colby, a top defence department official who previously expressed scepticism about Aukus, according to six people familiar with the matter.
Ending the submarine and advanced technology development agreement would destroy a pillar of security co-operation between the allies. The review has triggered anxiety in London and Canberra.
If Trump's minions kill AUKUS that will do catastrophic damage to relations with Aus and the UK. I wish I could believe Trump isn't that stupid, but he very much is.
On the bright side it would be a significant opportunity for the UK to sell SSNs (or at least designs and reactors) to selected allies if the US decides they're uninterested in doing that.
AUKUS was a branchild of the last administration, therefore it must be bad. It's oppositionalism at it's worse.
There's an extraordinary blindness to the fact that the US gets its gear cheaper, because the cost of development is subsidised by the British, the Japanese and a host of other nations, while the US gets first dibs, and (ulimately) control.
But if you cease to be a reliable partner, then who will buy your defence exports? Who wants to be dependent on a country that doesn't seem interested in keeping its commitments?
Which in turn means that the US will need to spend more money to be in the same position.
European defence companies have been handed the most extraordinary lifeline by the US.
Has anyone noticed how impressive Darren Jones is? Surely worth a flutter on next Labour leader. No known skeletons I hope?
One to watch maybe, but not next leader. That's Angela's job.
The one I don't get is Wes Streeting as favourite. He has a very thin majority and health secretary is both a tough job and one with very high expectations. I think he's good at generating soundbites but don't personally see much progress so far. And a tendency to just say NHS trusts need to try harder.
Ending strikes is fine, but is kind of the minimum level of performance I'd expect. Your view may differ!
Have you been on Eurostar or crossed the channel at Dover?
I have not. Well not this millennium
My travel schedule for the next 2 weeks:
London Paris Avignon Marseille London Devon Milan Toronto Charlottetown Montreal Los Angeles London
Good grief are you actually spending any time not travelling?
I've got London County Durham Cornwall County Durham Manchester County Durham London Paris Manchester (in passing) County Durham And I thought that was an insane amount.
Have you been on Eurostar or crossed the channel at Dover?
I have not. Well not this millennium
My travel schedule for the next 2 weeks:
London Paris Avignon Marseille London Devon Milan Toronto Charlottetown Montreal Los Angeles London
Good grief are you actually spending any time not travelling?
Very little. But people want to see me
I'm imagining Maria Callas in her apartment.
"Ofcourse one does want time for one's own projects. My people in Monte Carlo, Paris and London, they all want me. To be loved so much, it's such a responsibility. We must bear it."
Have you been on Eurostar or crossed the channel at Dover?
I have not. Well not this millennium
My travel schedule for the next 2 weeks:
London Paris Avignon Marseille London Devon Milan Toronto Charlottetown Montreal Los Angeles London
Good grief are you actually spending any time not travelling?
I've got London County Durham Cornwall County Durham Manchester County Durham London Paris Manchester (in passing) County Durham And I thought that was an insane amount.
New York Paris London Munich Everyone talk about pop muzic.
Has anyone noticed how impressive Darren Jones is? Surely worth a flutter on next Labour leader. No known skeletons I hope?
One to watch maybe, but not next leader. That's Angela's job.
The one I don't get is Wes Streeting as favourite. He has a very thin majority and health secretary is both a tough job and one with very high expectations. I think he's good at generating soundbites but don't personally see much progress so far. And a tendency to just say NHS trusts need to try harder.
Ending strikes is fine, but is kind of the minimum level of performance I'd expect. Your view may differ!
At the moment, it's all about visibility and who we have heard of. But put another way, who is Labour's equivalent of John Major? In early June 1987, he was Minister for Social Security. Just over three years later, PM.
(Actually, JM was Chief Secretary, like Darren Jones; it's probably a pretty good job for a PM apprenticeship, given that it requires knowing quite a lot about everything. Truss and Sunak both had spells in the role as well, though they may be counterindicators.)
I'm far from convinced that we do do it much worse. We tend to ignore our successful projects and concentrate on our problematic ones, whilst lauding their successful projects and ignoring their problematic ones.
Berlin Brandenberg airport being a classic German failure, the trains the French made that were too wide for the platforms; the Charles De Gaulle airport building collapse, etc.
The problems are far more political, rather than technical, I think.
Have you been on Eurostar or crossed the channel at Dover?
I have not. Well not this millennium
My travel schedule for the next 2 weeks:
London Paris Avignon Marseille London Devon Milan Toronto Charlottetown Montreal Los Angeles London
Good grief are you actually spending any time not travelling?
I've got London County Durham Cornwall County Durham Manchester County Durham London Paris Manchester (in passing) County Durham And I thought that was an insane amount.
New York Paris London Munich Everyone talk about pop muzic.
I saw Little & Large at Butlins in Bognor when I was about 13, and Eddie Large sang that but changed the words to “Paris, Munich, Munich, Paris, everyone talking about Rolf Harris”
A glorious evening here in the Reform heartland of Amber Valley. Drove through last week’s by-election town of Somercotes which Reform of course won. Talking to some of the locals, I’m beginning to get more of an insight about why Reform are doing so well. It’s not about immigration, it’s far more complex and nuanced.
Today’s Spending Review suggests a very tough winter ahead for local Government and we may well, see more Section 114 notices issued and with new Shadow Authorities set to come into existence in April and May 2026, it offers a sense of the financial millstone which these new councils may be inheriting.
There’s little sense of urgency over tackling Social Care reform, SEN provision and Temporary Accommodation funding all of which are bankrupting poorly run councils and crippling well run councils.
The last sentence of yoir first paragraph leaves the reader thinking "...?" Your thoughts always welcome and intereating!
Here's an example perhaps. Reform is Farage and Farage speaks human to a substantial audience.
By contrast, today's long trailed Reeves review was addressed to no possible audience. To most it was meaningless slogans + numbers, to experts it was sloganising drivel, to those who love decent speeches and well crafted English it was a barbarity, to those who wanted to be better informed it was futile, to those who wanted sane inspiration it was empty, to those wanting urgent answers on social care or the funding crisis in local government it was vacant.
A glorious evening here in the Reform heartland of Amber Valley. Drove through last week’s by-election town of Somercotes which Reform of course won. Talking to some of the locals, I’m beginning to get more of an insight about why Reform are doing so well. It’s not about immigration, it’s far more complex and nuanced.
Belper is an interesting place - it's a market town of 20k which has done relatively well, but had a very diverse industrial base up until say 1990-2000-ish when a lot gradually closed down. It gave the world Swarfega.
It is blessed because there are not many larger places too close by so it has a decent hinterland, and it has almost a White Peak feel whilst being closer to Derby than say Matlock. It's a nice place for bringing up families or early retirement - not very touristy but much of the future is tourism, around the World Heritage Site and the Derwent..
It is less gritty than Bolsover or Ripley or Heanor, and was always a happy hunting ground for Homes Under the Hammer. I suspect there are decent numbers of incomers, who may be more at cricket matches alongside long-term locals.
For politics, I'd perhaps expect nostalgia amongst some, and an attitude to Reform that would be based on "the other parties have not helped us enough here". I'd expect them to be less from the hard-edge (like say Heanor) and perhaps more pragmatic. And perhaps some resentment of "city Labour". The architecture is quite Peak District - stone not brick iirc in the older parts. It's iirc in Mid-Derbyshire not Amber Valley.
Has anyone noticed how impressive Darren Jones is? Surely worth a flutter on next Labour leader. No known skeletons I hope?
One to watch maybe, but not next leader. That's Angela's job.
The one I don't get is Wes Streeting as favourite. He has a very thin majority and health secretary is both a tough job and one with very high expectations. I think he's good at generating soundbites but don't personally see much progress so far. And a tendency to just say NHS trusts need to try harder.
Ending strikes is fine, but is kind of the minimum level of performance I'd expect. Your view may differ!
At the moment, it's all about visibility and who we have heard of. But put another way, who is Labour's equivalent of John Major? In early June 1987, he was Minister for Social Security. Just over three years later, PM.
(Actually, JM was Chief Secretary, like Darren Jones; it's probably a pretty good job for a PM apprenticeship, given that it requires knowing quite a lot about everything. Truss and Sunak both had spells in the role as well, though they may be counterindicators.)
Sunak was Chief Secretary to the Treasury when he was tipped here at 250/1 as next PM, which may have just narrowly not come in but was still a very profitable trading bet.
Has anyone noticed how impressive Darren Jones is? Surely worth a flutter on next Labour leader. No known skeletons I hope?
One to watch maybe, but not next leader. That's Angela's job.
The one I don't get is Wes Streeting as favourite. He has a very thin majority and health secretary is both a tough job and one with very high expectations. I think he's good at generating soundbites but don't personally see much progress so far. And a tendency to just say NHS trusts need to try harder.
Ending strikes is fine, but is kind of the minimum level of performance I'd expect. Your view may differ!
He hasn't ended them though as they are balloting on strike action less than a year later. They want another 29%
£68 million already spent on the project without it even being started.
WTF!?
There's an issue with these projects. They're not just planned by an ignoramus crayoning lines onto a map. Potential routes need surveying; geological, environmental, archeological and flora and fauna data all needs to go into the decision of which route to take. And if you want prices anywhere near accurate, you don't just say: "We'll put a concrete beam bridge over that stream"; you say: "Actually, the ground there is mud and peat down to twenty feet. We'll need piles down to the bedrock, and because the area often flash floods, we'll put in culverts either side to relieve floodwaters. Oh, and one can be used for an access track for a farmer, meaning we don't need to build that occupation bridge over there. We'll spend £5 million on the culverts, but save £8 million on not building the occupation bridge. Lifetime maintenance costs should also be lower for the culverts, and electrification clearances are not relevant."
This is outline, not detailed design, but until such decisions are made, costs are incredibly vague. This early work saves vast amounts of money later.
The surveys along cost money. Some work is being done on the EWR rail route near us, and some scrotes stole (from memory) over £200,000 of metal track that had been placed across fields to allow the surveys to occur. That's stuff needed just to support the surveys.
So the question becomes how much of these things do you do before detailed planning and construction starts: none, and have costs balloon during design and construction, or a large amount, and risk the money being lost if the project does not go ahead?
(And yes, there will be stupid costs in there, such as legal costs... )
Oh I'm sure some costs are legitimately incurred before a project commences, absolutely.
But £68,000,000 spent on a 13 mile route without it being commenced? You don't think that takes the piss a little bit?
That's £3,400 spent per metre of route without even commencing the project.
This level of gold-plating projects is why we can't get anything done.
“Infrastructure inflation”
It’s related to “Military Inflation”, “Aerospace Inflation” and the rest. The problem with cost in government projects is the assumed cost of line items. Then everyone adds from last time.
The numbers no longer connect to reality.
When you point out projects done better with lower costs in other countries, silence…
I'm pretty sure you're wrong about that wrt civil engineering projects. Many projects *are* delivered on, or below, cost and on time or early. I believe the >£1 billion A14 upgrade was one such. But the many successful projects don't get remarked upon. (The A14 upgrade partially opened six months early)
The problem I am talking about is high estimates, and cost of work being done.
In the example above, the survey cost £32.50. Per millimetre.
Which example was that?
Dualling the A1
Of course, what actually happened is that various consultancies “refreshed” the previous reports with copy and paste and a change in graphics. Actual road engineering was the minority of that spend.
Pentagon launches review of Aukus nuclear submarine deal
Ending pact would be blow to security alliance with Australia and UK
The Pentagon has launched a review of the 2021 Aukus submarine deal with the UK and Australia, throwing the security pact into doubt at a time of heightened tension with China.
The review to determine whether the US should scrap the project is being led by Elbridge Colby, a top defence department official who previously expressed scepticism about Aukus, according to six people familiar with the matter.
Ending the submarine and advanced technology development agreement would destroy a pillar of security co-operation between the allies. The review has triggered anxiety in London and Canberra.
If Trump's minions kill AUKUS that will do catastrophic damage to relations with Aus and the UK. I wish I could believe Trump isn't that stupid, but he very much is.
On the bright side it would be a significant opportunity for the UK to sell SSNs (or at least designs and reactors) to selected allies if the US decides they're uninterested in doing that.
AUKUS was a branchild of the last administration, therefore it must be bad. It's oppositionalism at it's worse.
There's an extraordinary blindness to the fact that the US gets its gear cheaper, because the cost of development is subsidised by the British, the Japanese and a host of other nations, while the US gets first dibs, and (ulimately) control.
But if you cease to be a reliable partner, then who will buy your defence exports? Who wants to be dependent on a country that doesn't seem interested in keeping its commitments?
Which in turn means that the US will need to spend more money to be in the same position.
European defence companies have been handed the most extraordinary lifeline by the US.
Even from their own viewpoint, the actions of the Trump administration are stupid and self-defeating.
One can say the same of Putin’s government. In return for gaining some territory of dubious value, they’ve reinvigorated Europe’s military capacity, brought Finland’s and Sweden into NATO, and severely damaged their military reputation.
If Israel and Iran go to full-scale war, expect Iran to destabilise as much of the Middle East as possible; particularly Iraq, Syria, Joedan and Lebanon.
An important question would be Saudi Arabia's reaction. They generally don't get on well with Iran.
Israel cannot beat Hamas quickly in a small little plot of land. I do think it will win eventually.
What chance would it have against Iran. I cannot see western nations being as keen to go into bat for Israel.
Hamas and Iran are very different opponents, and Israel's aims will probably be very different. In the case of Hamas, depending on viewpoint, their aim may be to crush Hamas as opponents or to gain total control over Gaza.
With Iran, the aim may well be to finally stop Iran from fully developing a nuke and to stop Iran sponsoring all sorts of anti-Israeli entities. As those entities are also distinctly anti-western, and we really don't want Iran having nukes, those aims might be in our interests as well.
A glorious evening here in the Reform heartland of Amber Valley. Drove through last week’s by-election town of Somercotes which Reform of course won. Talking to some of the locals, I’m beginning to get more of an insight about why Reform are doing so well. It’s not about immigration, it’s far more complex and nuanced.
Belper is an interesting place - it's a market town of 20k which has done relatively well, but had a very diverse industrial base up until say 1990-2000-ish when a lot gradually closed down. It gave the world Swarfega.
It is blessed because there are not many larger places too close by so it has a decent hinterland, and it has almost a White Peak feel whilst being closer to Derby than say Matlock. It's a nice place for bringing up families or early retirement - not very touristy but much of the future is tourism, around the World Heritage Site and the Derwent..
It is less gritty than Bolsover or Ripley or Heanor, and was always a happy hunting ground for Homes Under the Hammer. I suspect there are decent numbers of incomers, who may be more at cricket matches alongside long-term people.
For politics, I'd perhaps expect nostalgia amongst some, and an attitude to Reform that would be based on "the others have not helped us enough here". And perhaps some resentment of "city Labour". The architecture is quite Peak District - stone not brick iirc in the older parts.
Am I right in thinking that Matlock is not a particularly friendly sort of place? I have some dim memories of it from a school trip, about 45 years ago.
It may be perfectly nice or improved since then, ofcourse
Has anyone noticed how impressive Darren Jones is? Surely worth a flutter on next Labour leader. No known skeletons I hope?
We can't have a PM called Darren.
We had one called Liz.
It was Dorian in "Birds of a Feather" who pointed out you should never give a child a name if you couldn't see a monarch with that name. So George yes, but Wayne no.
Has anyone noticed how impressive Darren Jones is? Surely worth a flutter on next Labour leader. No known skeletons I hope?
One to watch maybe, but not next leader. That's Angela's job.
The one I don't get is Wes Streeting as favourite. He has a very thin majority and health secretary is both a tough job and one with very high expectations. I think he's good at generating soundbites but don't personally see much progress so far. And a tendency to just say NHS trusts need to try harder.
Ending strikes is fine, but is kind of the minimum level of performance I'd expect. Your view may differ!
Chicken run at a safe by-election, if there's such a thing.
£68 million already spent on the project without it even being started.
WTF!?
There's an issue with these projects. They're not just planned by an ignoramus crayoning lines onto a map. Potential routes need surveying; geological, environmental, archeological and flora and fauna data all needs to go into the decision of which route to take. And if you want prices anywhere near accurate, you don't just say: "We'll put a concrete beam bridge over that stream"; you say: "Actually, the ground there is mud and peat down to twenty feet. We'll need piles down to the bedrock, and because the area often flash floods, we'll put in culverts either side to relieve floodwaters. Oh, and one can be used for an access track for a farmer, meaning we don't need to build that occupation bridge over there. We'll spend £5 million on the culverts, but save £8 million on not building the occupation bridge. Lifetime maintenance costs should also be lower for the culverts, and electrification clearances are not relevant."
This is outline, not detailed design, but until such decisions are made, costs are incredibly vague. This early work saves vast amounts of money later.
The surveys along cost money. Some work is being done on the EWR rail route near us, and some scrotes stole (from memory) over £200,000 of metal track that had been placed across fields to allow the surveys to occur. That's stuff needed just to support the surveys.
So the question becomes how much of these things do you do before detailed planning and construction starts: none, and have costs balloon during design and construction, or a large amount, and risk the money being lost if the project does not go ahead?
(And yes, there will be stupid costs in there, such as legal costs... )
Oh I'm sure some costs are legitimately incurred before a project commences, absolutely.
But £68,000,000 spent on a 13 mile route without it being commenced? You don't think that takes the piss a little bit?
That's £3,400 spent per metre of route without even commencing the project.
This level of gold-plating projects is why we can't get anything done.
“Infrastructure inflation”
It’s related to “Military Inflation”, “Aerospace Inflation” and the rest. The problem with cost in government projects is the assumed cost of line items. Then everyone adds from last time.
The numbers no longer connect to reality.
When you point out projects done better with lower costs in other countries, silence…
I'm pretty sure you're wrong about that wrt civil engineering projects. Many projects *are* delivered on, or below, cost and on time or early. I believe the >£1 billion A14 upgrade was one such. But the many successful projects don't get remarked upon. (The A14 upgrade partially opened six months early)
The problem I am talking about is high estimates, and cost of work being done.
In the example above, the survey cost £32.50. Per millimetre.
Which example was that?
Dualling the A1
Of course, what actually happened is that various consultancies “refreshed” the previous reports with copy and paste and a change in graphics. Actual road engineering was the minority of that spend.
I can't get your figures to work on that... surveys and professional fees were £7.2m.
I think Bibi is too much of a chickenhawk to actually take on Iran. Posture but no follow through.
I hope I'm wrong.
Bibi is like Big Brother. He needs the war to continue, because it creates the weird national psyche that keeps him in office and out of prison.
Which is why I don't think he'll hit Iran.
Knock out Iran and peace in the Middle East becomes a lot more viable, and Israel's enemies lose their primary state sponsor.
Keep Iran there, there's an ever-present enemy to hate.
If Israel and Iran go to war, you think Israel wins?
If you do, describe day one after that war, and the terms of the ceasefire.
Yes I think Israel wins. No idea what comes after, but the world would be a far better place without the Mullahs. Victory might not lead to regime change though, maybe just knocking their military back a peg or two.
I think Bibi is too much of a chickenhawk to actually take on Iran. Posture but no follow through.
I hope I'm wrong.
Bibi is like Big Brother. He needs the war to continue, because it creates the weird national psyche that keeps him in office and out of prison.
Which is why I don't think he'll hit Iran.
Knock out Iran and peace in the Middle East becomes a lot more viable, and Israel's enemies lose their primary state sponsor.
Keep Iran there, there's an ever-present enemy to hate.
That does actually make some sense, but the problem is that you can't knock out Iran easily, as he will well know. The regime has built in all sorts of preparations for attacks like this, over many, many years.
So instead, it's more likely that you get a wider war.
The reason Israel are trying to persuade anyone who'll listen to attack iraq is because it's the one country in the area that israel can't subjugate. The only reason they probably don't have nuclear weapons is because the Ayatollah decared them unislamic in that their destructive force is indiscriminate. Israel have no such qualms
The NHS incease doesn't include any capital spending just day to day so we will see how much gets eaten by paying off the strikers.
Is it true the NHS no longer treats children who are attending private schools? Saw that on BlackBeltBarrister who said it was in a newspaper. Sounds very whacky.
Not exactly. If the privately educated child turns up at A&E with a a broken leg, of course they will still be treated. The story is about an extra service for children with difficulties with I think speech/comprehension that are not eligible if they are not in the state system.
Reasonable, considering that parents who educate their children privately don't pay towards the state school system.
What do you mean?
I mean it would be reasonable to disqualify children who are not in the state school system from an NHS service intended for children who are in the state school system, if their parents were not funding state schools anyway. But since those parents pay twice, in my view it is not reasonable for their children to be disqualified. A sort of sarcasm by inverted statement.
A glorious evening here in the Reform heartland of Amber Valley. Drove through last week’s by-election town of Somercotes which Reform of course won. Talking to some of the locals, I’m beginning to get more of an insight about why Reform are doing so well. It’s not about immigration, it’s far more complex and nuanced.
Belper is an interesting place - it's a market town of 20k which has done relatively well, but had a very diverse industrial base up until say 1990-2000-ish when a lot gradually closed down. It gave the world Swarfega.
It is blessed because there are not many larger places too close by so it has a decent hinterland, and it has almost a White Peak feel whilst being closer to Derby than say Matlock. It's a nice place for bringing up families or early retirement - not very touristy but much of the future is tourism, around the World Heritage Site and the Derwent..
It is less gritty than Bolsover or Ripley or Heanor, and was always a happy hunting ground for Homes Under the Hammer. I suspect there are decent numbers of incomers, who may be more at cricket matches alongside long-term locals.
For politics, I'd perhaps expect nostalgia amongst some, and an attitude to Reform that would be based on "the other parties have not helped us enough here". I'd expect them to be less from the hard-edge (like say Heanor) and perhaps more pragmatic. And perhaps some resentment of "city Labour". The architecture is quite Peak District - stone not brick iirc in the older parts. It's iirc in Mid-Derbyshire not Amber Valley.
Has anyone noticed how impressive Darren Jones is? Surely worth a flutter on next Labour leader. No known skeletons I hope?
One to watch maybe, but not next leader. That's Angela's job.
The one I don't get is Wes Streeting as favourite. He has a very thin majority and health secretary is both a tough job and one with very high expectations. I think he's good at generating soundbites but don't personally see much progress so far. And a tendency to just say NHS trusts need to try harder.
Ending strikes is fine, but is kind of the minimum level of performance I'd expect. Your view may differ!
Brexit syndrome. He appeals to the well-off due to his wish to bring in more private involvement. And wealthy people bet more money. He is also the designated Blair candidate (see "Get In" and "Taken as Red")
If memory serves, surveys show he is the least- or second-least liked candidate amongst Labour members
£68 million already spent on the project without it even being started.
WTF!?
There's an issue with these projects. They're not just planned by an ignoramus crayoning lines onto a map. Potential routes need surveying; geological, environmental, archeological and flora and fauna data all needs to go into the decision of which route to take. And if you want prices anywhere near accurate, you don't just say: "We'll put a concrete beam bridge over that stream"; you say: "Actually, the ground there is mud and peat down to twenty feet. We'll need piles down to the bedrock, and because the area often flash floods, we'll put in culverts either side to relieve floodwaters. Oh, and one can be used for an access track for a farmer, meaning we don't need to build that occupation bridge over there. We'll spend £5 million on the culverts, but save £8 million on not building the occupation bridge. Lifetime maintenance costs should also be lower for the culverts, and electrification clearances are not relevant."
This is outline, not detailed design, but until such decisions are made, costs are incredibly vague. This early work saves vast amounts of money later.
The surveys along cost money. Some work is being done on the EWR rail route near us, and some scrotes stole (from memory) over £200,000 of metal track that had been placed across fields to allow the surveys to occur. That's stuff needed just to support the surveys.
So the question becomes how much of these things do you do before detailed planning and construction starts: none, and have costs balloon during design and construction, or a large amount, and risk the money being lost if the project does not go ahead?
(And yes, there will be stupid costs in there, such as legal costs... )
Oh I'm sure some costs are legitimately incurred before a project commences, absolutely.
But £68,000,000 spent on a 13 mile route without it being commenced? You don't think that takes the piss a little bit?
That's £3,400 spent per metre of route without even commencing the project.
This level of gold-plating projects is why we can't get anything done.
“Infrastructure inflation”
It’s related to “Military Inflation”, “Aerospace Inflation” and the rest. The problem with cost in government projects is the assumed cost of line items. Then everyone adds from last time.
The numbers no longer connect to reality.
When you point out projects done better with lower costs in other countries, silence…
I'm pretty sure you're wrong about that wrt civil engineering projects. Many projects *are* delivered on, or below, cost and on time or early. I believe the >£1 billion A14 upgrade was one such. But the many successful projects don't get remarked upon. (The A14 upgrade partially opened six months early)
The problem I am talking about is high estimates, and cost of work being done.
In the example above, the survey cost £32.50. Per millimetre.
Out by a factor of 10 I think ? Plus everyone so far has given a pretty rubbish approximation of km/mile
Has anyone noticed how impressive Darren Jones is? Surely worth a flutter on next Labour leader. No known skeletons I hope?
One to watch maybe, but not next leader. That's Angela's job.
How do you think she'd get on with say Trump or Macron?
I think you can safely say that if Angela were in a press conference with Trump in the Oval office we would all, with the entire nation, be watching live. Pure gold.
A glorious evening here in the Reform heartland of Amber Valley. Drove through last week’s by-election town of Somercotes which Reform of course won. Talking to some of the locals, I’m beginning to get more of an insight about why Reform are doing so well. It’s not about immigration, it’s far more complex and nuanced.
Belper is an interesting place - it's a market town of 20k which has done relatively well, but had a very diverse industrial base up until say 1990-2000-ish when a lot gradually closed down. It gave the world Swarfega.
It is blessed because there are not many larger places too close by so it has a decent hinterland, and it has almost a White Peak feel whilst being closer to Derby than say Matlock. It's a nice place for bringing up families or early retirement - not very touristy but much of the future is tourism, around the World Heritage Site and the Derwent..
It is less gritty than Bolsover or Ripley or Heanor, and was always a happy hunting ground for Homes Under the Hammer. I suspect there are decent numbers of incomers, who may be more at cricket matches alongside long-term people.
For politics, I'd perhaps expect nostalgia amongst some, and an attitude to Reform that would be based on "the others have not helped us enough here". And perhaps some resentment of "city Labour". The architecture is quite Peak District - stone not brick iirc in the older parts.
Am I right in thinking that Matlock is not a particularly friendly sort of place? I have some dim memories of it from a school trip, about 45 years ago.
It may be perfectly nice or improved since then, ofcourse
Matlock is incomparably different to when I knew it well in the 1990s; the new road through Cawdor Quarry has massively improved traffic. And traffic was always a major problem in the town centre. I've strolled around a few times since the new road opened, and it all feels a bit more open. And I'm pleased to see Twigg is still open.
But it's also really different to Matlock Bath, a mile or so down the road. Of the two, I much prefer Matlock, despite its lack of cable car and touristy tat.
(My family apparently built Smedley's Hydro on the hill in Matlock; when they closed down the family business a few decades back, they found detailed plans of it.)
£68 million already spent on the project without it even being started.
WTF!?
There's an issue with these projects. They're not just planned by an ignoramus crayoning lines onto a map. Potential routes need surveying; geological, environmental, archeological and flora and fauna data all needs to go into the decision of which route to take. And if you want prices anywhere near accurate, you don't just say: "We'll put a concrete beam bridge over that stream"; you say: "Actually, the ground there is mud and peat down to twenty feet. We'll need piles down to the bedrock, and because the area often flash floods, we'll put in culverts either side to relieve floodwaters. Oh, and one can be used for an access track for a farmer, meaning we don't need to build that occupation bridge over there. We'll spend £5 million on the culverts, but save £8 million on not building the occupation bridge. Lifetime maintenance costs should also be lower for the culverts, and electrification clearances are not relevant."
This is outline, not detailed design, but until such decisions are made, costs are incredibly vague. This early work saves vast amounts of money later.
The surveys along cost money. Some work is being done on the EWR rail route near us, and some scrotes stole (from memory) over £200,000 of metal track that had been placed across fields to allow the surveys to occur. That's stuff needed just to support the surveys.
So the question becomes how much of these things do you do before detailed planning and construction starts: none, and have costs balloon during design and construction, or a large amount, and risk the money being lost if the project does not go ahead?
(And yes, there will be stupid costs in there, such as legal costs... )
Oh I'm sure some costs are legitimately incurred before a project commences, absolutely.
But £68,000,000 spent on a 13 mile route without it being commenced? You don't think that takes the piss a little bit?
That's £3,400 spent per metre of route without even commencing the project.
This level of gold-plating projects is why we can't get anything done.
“Infrastructure inflation”
It’s related to “Military Inflation”, “Aerospace Inflation” and the rest. The problem with cost in government projects is the assumed cost of line items. Then everyone adds from last time.
The numbers no longer connect to reality.
When you point out projects done better with lower costs in other countries, silence…
I'm pretty sure you're wrong about that wrt civil engineering projects. Many projects *are* delivered on, or below, cost and on time or early. I believe the >£1 billion A14 upgrade was one such. But the many successful projects don't get remarked upon. (The A14 upgrade partially opened six months early)
The problem I am talking about is high estimates, and cost of work being done.
In the example above, the survey cost £32.50. Per millimetre.
Which example was that?
Dualling the A1
Of course, what actually happened is that various consultancies “refreshed” the previous reports with copy and paste and a change in graphics. Actual road engineering was the minority of that spend.
I can't get your figures to work on that... surveys and professional fees were £7.2m.
Pentagon launches review of Aukus nuclear submarine deal
Ending pact would be blow to security alliance with Australia and UK
The Pentagon has launched a review of the 2021 Aukus submarine deal with the UK and Australia, throwing the security pact into doubt at a time of heightened tension with China.
The review to determine whether the US should scrap the project is being led by Elbridge Colby, a top defence department official who previously expressed scepticism about Aukus, according to six people familiar with the matter.
Ending the submarine and advanced technology development agreement would destroy a pillar of security co-operation between the allies. The review has triggered anxiety in London and Canberra.
If Trump's minions kill AUKUS that will do catastrophic damage to relations with Aus and the UK. I wish I could believe Trump isn't that stupid, but he very much is.
On the bright side it would be a significant opportunity for the UK to sell SSNs (or at least designs and reactors) to selected allies if the US decides they're uninterested in doing that.
AUKUS was a branchild of the last administration, therefore it must be bad. It's oppositionalism at it's worse.
There's an extraordinary blindness to the fact that the US gets its gear cheaper, because the cost of development is subsidised by the British, the Japanese and a host of other nations, while the US gets first dibs, and (ulimately) control.
But if you cease to be a reliable partner, then who will buy your defence exports? Who wants to be dependent on a country that doesn't seem interested in keeping its commitments?
Which in turn means that the US will need to spend more money to be in the same position.
European defence companies have been handed the most extraordinary lifeline by the US.
Even from their own viewpoint, the actions of the Trump administration are stupid and self-defeating.
One can say the same of Putin’s government. In return for gaining some territory of dubious value, they’ve reinvigorated Europe’s military capacity, brought Finland’s and Sweden into NATO, and severely damaged their military reputation.
Colby, the Def Sec, is a harder line "China not Europe" man, and perhaps an outrider for Trump. I don't see how canning AUKUS would help his China stance - since that is what a lot of Oz having SSNs is about. For an isolationist, it could be one answer to the USA being not very effective at building its own submarines other than very, very slowly.
One concern is if they try to unravel tech-cooperation agreements around submarines that are art of AUKUS, and I am not sure what happens to the other pillar.
Has anyone noticed how impressive Darren Jones is? Surely worth a flutter on next Labour leader. No known skeletons I hope?
One to watch maybe, but not next leader. That's Angela's job.
How do you think she'd get on with say Trump or Macron?
I think you can safely say that if Angela were in a press conference with Trump in the Oval office we would all, with the entire nation, be watching live. Pure gold.
She'd batter the f*ck out of him. It would be a glory.
Even if she didn't go though with it - we'd all know she'd be thinking it. Along with us.
Swinney has worked hard at being boring. He has a natural talent for it. Most of the lunacies that infected the government when they were in hock to the Green nutters have been quietly forgotten or dropped. But there has been nothing to replace it. No ideas, no vision, no inspiration, nothing.
And no attempt to address Scotland's multiple problems: an overly large and overly comfortable public sector drawing too much of the available wealth and income to itself. An NHS that is simply not keeping up with rising demand. An education system that is in absolute meltdown. A very serious lack of entrepreneurial drive or ambition. Scots would rather regulate something than do it. There is no viable route to independence in such circumstances and enough of the population know that to make it vanishingly unlikely we will even be asked.
Pentagon launches review of Aukus nuclear submarine deal
Ending pact would be blow to security alliance with Australia and UK
The Pentagon has launched a review of the 2021 Aukus submarine deal with the UK and Australia, throwing the security pact into doubt at a time of heightened tension with China.
The review to determine whether the US should scrap the project is being led by Elbridge Colby, a top defence department official who previously expressed scepticism about Aukus, according to six people familiar with the matter.
Ending the submarine and advanced technology development agreement would destroy a pillar of security co-operation between the allies. The review has triggered anxiety in London and Canberra.
If Trump's minions kill AUKUS that will do catastrophic damage to relations with Aus and the UK. I wish I could believe Trump isn't that stupid, but he very much is.
On the bright side it would be a significant opportunity for the UK to sell SSNs (or at least designs and reactors) to selected allies if the US decides they're uninterested in doing that.
AUKUS was a branchild of the last administration, therefore it must be bad. It's oppositionalism at it's worse.
There's an extraordinary blindness to the fact that the US gets its gear cheaper, because the cost of development is subsidised by the British, the Japanese and a host of other nations, while the US gets first dibs, and (ulimately) control.
But if you cease to be a reliable partner, then who will buy your defence exports? Who wants to be dependent on a country that doesn't seem interested in keeping its commitments?
Which in turn means that the US will need to spend more money to be in the same position.
European defence companies have been handed the most extraordinary lifeline by the US.
Even from their own viewpoint, the actions of the Trump administration are stupid and self-defeating.
One can say the same of Putin’s government. In return for gaining some territory of dubious value, they’ve reinvigorated Europe’s military capacity, brought Finland’s and Sweden into NATO, and severely damaged their military reputation.
Putin's worldvierw is that great Russian leaders are those that increase its territory, while bad leaders are those that see its territory shrink. If Russia has grown (in landmass), then he has succeeded.
Of course, it has been at a terrible cost in a country that already had a paucity of young men. To lose even more to a war of conquest and the emigration of your best and brightest is utter insanity.
And all for, as you say, some land of dubious value.
It's harder to work out Trump's worldview. Because he wants other countries to be vassals to the great America: but a lord and vassal relationship rather requires the vassal to get something out of the arrangement (like the Belorussian leaders get out of Moscow). It's not clear what cancelling arms agreements which your allies (for which you are very handsomely rewarded) does for the vassal or for the US.
If Israel and Iran go to full-scale war, expect Iran to destabilise as much of the Middle East as possible; particularly Iraq, Syria, Joedan and Lebanon.
An important question would be Saudi Arabia's reaction. They generally don't get on well with Iran.
Israel cannot beat Hamas quickly in a small little plot of land. I do think it will win eventually.
What chance would it have against Iran. I cannot see western nations being as keen to go into bat for Israel.
Hamas and Iran are very different opponents, and Israel's aims will probably be very different. In the case of Hamas, depending on viewpoint, their aim may be to crush Hamas as opponents or to gain total control over Gaza.
With Iran, the aim may well be to finally stop Iran from fully developing a nuke and to stop Iran sponsoring all sorts of anti-Israeli entities. As those entities are also distinctly anti-western, and we really don't want Iran having nukes, those aims might be in our interests as well.
If Iran's oil export capability gets destroyed, its nuclear ambitions will have the same level of funding available as mine would...
I think Bibi is too much of a chickenhawk to actually take on Iran. Posture but no follow through.
I hope I'm wrong.
Bibi is like Big Brother. He needs the war to continue, because it creates the weird national psyche that keeps him in office and out of prison.
Which is why I don't think he'll hit Iran.
Knock out Iran and peace in the Middle East becomes a lot more viable, and Israel's enemies lose their primary state sponsor.
Keep Iran there, there's an ever-present enemy to hate.
That does actually make some sense, but the problem is that you can't knock out Iran easily, as he will well know. The regime has built in all sorts of preparations for attacks like this, over many, many years.
So instead, it's more likely that you get a wider war.
The reason Israel are trying to persuade anyone who'll listen to attack iraq is because it's the one country in the area that israel can't subjugate. The only reason they probably don't have nuclear weapons is because the Ayatollah decared them unislamic in that their destructive force is indiscriminate. Israel have no such qualms
Iraq=Iran.
You don't like Israel. Fair enough, there are good reasons not to. But Iran is, if anything, far worse. And they really, really want to build a nuke; your last sentence seems really at odd with reality.
Has anyone noticed how impressive Darren Jones is? Surely worth a flutter on next Labour leader. No known skeletons I hope?
We can't have a PM called Darren.
We had one called Liz.
It was Dorian in "Birds of a Feather" who pointed out you should never give a child a name if you couldn't see a monarch with that name. So George yes, but Wayne no.
I've always thought you should give a child a name they can make their own. Charlotte - Lotty, Charlie, Cherry, ... whatever.
Has anyone noticed how impressive Darren Jones is? Surely worth a flutter on next Labour leader. No known skeletons I hope?
We can't have a PM called Darren.
We had one called Liz.
It was Dorian in "Birds of a Feather" who pointed out you should never give a child a name if you couldn't see a monarch with that name. So George yes, but Wayne no.
He's the best Darren known to me in politics. The others are Darren (aka "Mr Caroline" *) Henry, and Darren Grimes.
* When I met 2 coppers walking round a local lake doing a pass to check for a patient who had self-absented himself from the hospital, we were chatting about things including the new PCC. I asked "Has the new one got herself banned from driving yet?", and there was a huge guffaw followed by a studied "can't comment" clamming-up.
£68 million already spent on the project without it even being started.
WTF!?
There's an issue with these projects. They're not just planned by an ignoramus crayoning lines onto a map. Potential routes need surveying; geological, environmental, archeological and flora and fauna data all needs to go into the decision of which route to take. And if you want prices anywhere near accurate, you don't just say: "We'll put a concrete beam bridge over that stream"; you say: "Actually, the ground there is mud and peat down to twenty feet. We'll need piles down to the bedrock, and because the area often flash floods, we'll put in culverts either side to relieve floodwaters. Oh, and one can be used for an access track for a farmer, meaning we don't need to build that occupation bridge over there. We'll spend £5 million on the culverts, but save £8 million on not building the occupation bridge. Lifetime maintenance costs should also be lower for the culverts, and electrification clearances are not relevant."
This is outline, not detailed design, but until such decisions are made, costs are incredibly vague. This early work saves vast amounts of money later.
The surveys along cost money. Some work is being done on the EWR rail route near us, and some scrotes stole (from memory) over £200,000 of metal track that had been placed across fields to allow the surveys to occur. That's stuff needed just to support the surveys.
So the question becomes how much of these things do you do before detailed planning and construction starts: none, and have costs balloon during design and construction, or a large amount, and risk the money being lost if the project does not go ahead?
(And yes, there will be stupid costs in there, such as legal costs... )
Oh I'm sure some costs are legitimately incurred before a project commences, absolutely.
But £68,000,000 spent on a 13 mile route without it being commenced? You don't think that takes the piss a little bit?
That's £3,400 spent per metre of route without even commencing the project.
This level of gold-plating projects is why we can't get anything done.
“Infrastructure inflation”
It’s related to “Military Inflation”, “Aerospace Inflation” and the rest. The problem with cost in government projects is the assumed cost of line items. Then everyone adds from last time.
The numbers no longer connect to reality.
When you point out projects done better with lower costs in other countries, silence…
I'm pretty sure you're wrong about that wrt civil engineering projects. Many projects *are* delivered on, or below, cost and on time or early. I believe the >£1 billion A14 upgrade was one such. But the many successful projects don't get remarked upon. (The A14 upgrade partially opened six months early)
The problem I am talking about is high estimates, and cost of work being done.
In the example above, the survey cost £32.50. Per millimetre.
Out by a factor of 10 I think ? Plus everyone so far has given a pretty rubbish approximation of km/mile
I'm a bit confusled about it. £32.50 per mm would be £32,500 per metre. Or £32 million per km. Which would mean the 66km route would be a little over £2 billion for the survey work. That not only smells wrong; it goes against what is said in an article.
Pentagon launches review of Aukus nuclear submarine deal
Ending pact would be blow to security alliance with Australia and UK
The Pentagon has launched a review of the 2021 Aukus submarine deal with the UK and Australia, throwing the security pact into doubt at a time of heightened tension with China.
The review to determine whether the US should scrap the project is being led by Elbridge Colby, a top defence department official who previously expressed scepticism about Aukus, according to six people familiar with the matter.
Ending the submarine and advanced technology development agreement would destroy a pillar of security co-operation between the allies. The review has triggered anxiety in London and Canberra.
If Trump's minions kill AUKUS that will do catastrophic damage to relations with Aus and the UK. I wish I could believe Trump isn't that stupid, but he very much is.
On the bright side it would be a significant opportunity for the UK to sell SSNs (or at least designs and reactors) to selected allies if the US decides they're uninterested in doing that.
AUKUS was a branchild of the last administration, therefore it must be bad. It's oppositionalism at it's worse.
There's an extraordinary blindness to the fact that the US gets its gear cheaper, because the cost of development is subsidised by the British, the Japanese and a host of other nations, while the US gets first dibs, and (ulimately) control.
But if you cease to be a reliable partner, then who will buy your defence exports? Who wants to be dependent on a country that doesn't seem interested in keeping its commitments?
Which in turn means that the US will need to spend more money to be in the same position.
European defence companies have been handed the most extraordinary lifeline by the US.
Even from their own viewpoint, the actions of the Trump administration are stupid and self-defeating.
One can say the same of Putin’s government. In return for gaining some territory of dubious value, they’ve reinvigorated Europe’s military capacity, brought Finland’s and Sweden into NATO, and severely damaged their military reputation.
Putin's worldvierw is that great Russian leaders are those that increase its territory, while bad leaders are those that see its territory shrink. If Russia has grown (in landmass), then he has succeeded.
Of course, it has been at a terrible cost in a country that already had a paucity of young men. To lose even more to a war of conquest and the emigration of your best and brightest is utter insanity.
And all for, as you say, some land of dubious value.
It's harder to work out Trump's worldview. Because he wants other countries to be vassals to the great America: but a lord and vassal relationship rather requires the vassal to get something out of the arrangement (like the Belorussian leaders get out of Moscow). It's not clear what cancelling arms agreements which your allies (for which you are very handsomely rewarded) does for the vassal or for the US.
His worldview is he wants attention. Whatever gets him (or the US=him) attention is all good.
If Israel and Iran go to full-scale war, expect Iran to destabilise as much of the Middle East as possible; particularly Iraq, Syria, Joedan and Lebanon.
An important question would be Saudi Arabia's reaction. They generally don't get on well with Iran.
Israel cannot beat Hamas quickly in a small little plot of land. I do think it will win eventually.
What chance would it have against Iran. I cannot see western nations being as keen to go into bat for Israel.
Hamas and Iran are very different opponents, and Israel's aims will probably be very different. In the case of Hamas, depending on viewpoint, their aim may be to crush Hamas as opponents or to gain total control over Gaza.
With Iran, the aim may well be to finally stop Iran from fully developing a nuke and to stop Iran sponsoring all sorts of anti-Israeli entities. As those entities are also distinctly anti-western, and we really don't want Iran having nukes, those aims might be in our interests as well.
If Iran's oil export capability gets destroyed, its nuclear ambitions will have the same level of funding available as mine would...
F-all income didn't stop North Korea from developing a nuke.
£68 million already spent on the project without it even being started.
WTF!?
There's an issue with these projects. They're not just planned by an ignoramus crayoning lines onto a map. Potential routes need surveying; geological, environmental, archeological and flora and fauna data all needs to go into the decision of which route to take. And if you want prices anywhere near accurate, you don't just say: "We'll put a concrete beam bridge over that stream"; you say: "Actually, the ground there is mud and peat down to twenty feet. We'll need piles down to the bedrock, and because the area often flash floods, we'll put in culverts either side to relieve floodwaters. Oh, and one can be used for an access track for a farmer, meaning we don't need to build that occupation bridge over there. We'll spend £5 million on the culverts, but save £8 million on not building the occupation bridge. Lifetime maintenance costs should also be lower for the culverts, and electrification clearances are not relevant."
This is outline, not detailed design, but until such decisions are made, costs are incredibly vague. This early work saves vast amounts of money later.
The surveys along cost money. Some work is being done on the EWR rail route near us, and some scrotes stole (from memory) over £200,000 of metal track that had been placed across fields to allow the surveys to occur. That's stuff needed just to support the surveys.
So the question becomes how much of these things do you do before detailed planning and construction starts: none, and have costs balloon during design and construction, or a large amount, and risk the money being lost if the project does not go ahead?
(And yes, there will be stupid costs in there, such as legal costs... )
Oh I'm sure some costs are legitimately incurred before a project commences, absolutely.
But £68,000,000 spent on a 13 mile route without it being commenced? You don't think that takes the piss a little bit?
That's £3,400 spent per metre of route without even commencing the project.
This level of gold-plating projects is why we can't get anything done.
“Infrastructure inflation”
It’s related to “Military Inflation”, “Aerospace Inflation” and the rest. The problem with cost in government projects is the assumed cost of line items. Then everyone adds from last time.
The numbers no longer connect to reality.
When you point out projects done better with lower costs in other countries, silence…
I'm pretty sure you're wrong about that wrt civil engineering projects. Many projects *are* delivered on, or below, cost and on time or early. I believe the >£1 billion A14 upgrade was one such. But the many successful projects don't get remarked upon. (The A14 upgrade partially opened six months early)
The problem I am talking about is high estimates, and cost of work being done.
In the example above, the survey cost £32.50. Per millimetre.
Which example was that?
Dualling the A1
Of course, what actually happened is that various consultancies “refreshed” the previous reports with copy and paste and a change in graphics. Actual road engineering was the minority of that spend.
It's going to be interesting to see how the consultancies deal with the rise of the new LLM 'agents'. The new o3-pro seems especially geared to that segment.
Possibly just claim they have their own secret sauce 'agents' that are worth £10k a pop. Nice tidy profit selling to the simpler exec's who want to believe they're getting a bespoke service I guess.
Has anyone noticed how impressive Darren Jones is? Surely worth a flutter on next Labour leader. No known skeletons I hope?
We can't have a PM called Darren.
We had one called Liz.
It was Dorian in "Birds of a Feather" who pointed out you should never give a child a name if you couldn't see a monarch with that name. So George yes, but Wayne no.
I've always thought you should give a child a name they can make their own. Charlotte - Lotty, Charlie, Cherry, ... whatever.
That's why we went with: Boy One, Girl One, Girl Two.
Comments
So instead, it's more likely that you get a wider war.
London
Paris
Avignon
Marseille
London
Devon
Milan
Toronto
Charlottetown
Montreal
Los Angeles
London
An important question would be Saudi Arabia's reaction. They generally don't get on well with Iran.
I imagine Saudi Arabia's reaction would be to tut, call for peace, and sit back with a bucket of popcorn.
They certainly responded to the "most Conservative budget since 1986".
What chance would it have against Iran. I cannot see western nations being as keen to go into bat for Israel.
How many times have we been here before? Bibi is the Grand Old Duke of York, constantly marching troops to the top of the hill, then back down again.
Hopefully Bibi is out of office and in prison where he belongs sooner rather than later, and Israel can get a proper leader who will take the gloves off and actually fight Iran properly.
Get the Mullahs down to the level of Hamas and Iran won't be remotely such a threat anymore, nor would Hamas or Hezbollah for that matter.
I called July 4th election day right, weeks before when Sunak’s shower cloud was mere drop in the Caribbean Sea. I still fear being summoned to court about it.
“Your honour. How can these defendants be guilty of the charge, when PB.com has been crowing they told them to do it from ingenious political betting analysis?”
I’ll ask TSE if he knows a good lawyer.
Brian Wilson today, Sly Stone yesterday
The Israelis know how to keep a secret.
To the ward of Weaste and Seedley...
There's an extraordinary blindness to the fact that the US gets its gear cheaper, because the cost of development is subsidised by the British, the Japanese and a host of other nations, while the US gets first dibs, and (ulimately) control.
But if you cease to be a reliable partner, then who will buy your defence exports? Who wants to be dependent on a country that doesn't seem interested in keeping its commitments?
Which in turn means that the US will need to spend more money to be in the same position.
European defence companies have been handed the most extraordinary lifeline by the US.
Ending strikes is fine, but is kind of the minimum level of performance I'd expect.
Your view may differ!
“I'm a cork on the ocean
Floating over the raging sea
How deep is the ocean?
How deep is the ocean?
I lost my way
Hey, hey, hey
I'm a rock in a landslide
Rolling over the mountainside
How deep is the valley?
How deep is the valley?
It kills my soul
Hey, hey, hey
I'm a leaf on a windy day
Pretty soon I'll be blown away
How long will the wind blow?
How long will the wind blow?
(Until I die)
Until I die
These things I'll be until I die”
https://youtu.be/46IQu0yuJzU?si=2GKCDmJaboHW368f
County Durham
Cornwall
County Durham
Manchester
County Durham
London
Paris
Manchester (in passing)
County Durham
And I thought that was an insane amount.
"Ofcourse one does want time for one's own projects. My people in Monte Carlo, Paris and London, they all want me. To be loved so much, it's such a responsibility. We must bear it."
Paris
London
Munich
Everyone talk about pop muzic.
(Actually, JM was Chief Secretary, like Darren Jones; it's probably a pretty good job for a PM apprenticeship, given that it requires knowing quite a lot about everything. Truss and Sunak both had spells in the role as well, though they may be counterindicators.)
His last answer to Badenoch was, in its entirety:
"Err, urr ah, the wrong choice they made was making her leader of the opposition"
That's just fucking childish
Can a grown up not take over?
By contrast, today's long trailed Reeves review was addressed to no possible audience. To most it was meaningless slogans + numbers, to experts it was sloganising drivel, to those who love decent speeches and well crafted English it was a barbarity, to those who wanted to be better informed it was futile, to those who wanted sane inspiration it was empty, to those wanting urgent answers on social care or the funding crisis in local government it was vacant.
Som people look at Reform.
It is blessed because there are not many larger places too close by so it has a decent hinterland, and it has almost a White Peak feel whilst being closer to Derby than say Matlock. It's a nice place for bringing up families or early retirement - not very touristy but much of the future is tourism, around the World Heritage Site and the Derwent..
It is less gritty than Bolsover or Ripley or Heanor, and was always a happy hunting ground for Homes Under the Hammer. I suspect there are decent numbers of incomers, who may be more at cricket matches alongside long-term locals.
For politics, I'd perhaps expect nostalgia amongst some, and an attitude to Reform that would be based on "the other parties have not helped us enough here". I'd expect them to be less from the hard-edge (like say Heanor) and perhaps more pragmatic. And perhaps some resentment of "city Labour". The architecture is quite Peak District - stone not brick iirc in the older parts. It's iirc in Mid-Derbyshire not Amber Valley.
And there's a fun railway through the middle completely hidden in a cutting.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/5skq66eopYTZkjhGA
Of course, what actually happened is that various consultancies “refreshed” the previous reports with copy and paste and a change in graphics. Actual road engineering was the minority of that spend.
One can say the same of Putin’s government. In return for gaining some territory of dubious value, they’ve reinvigorated Europe’s military capacity, brought Finland’s and Sweden into NATO, and severely damaged their military reputation.
With Iran, the aim may well be to finally stop Iran from fully developing a nuke and to stop Iran sponsoring all sorts of anti-Israeli entities. As those entities are also distinctly anti-western, and we really don't want Iran having nukes, those aims might be in our interests as well.
It may be perfectly nice or improved since then, ofcourse
It was Dorian in "Birds of a Feather" who pointed out you should never give a child a name if you couldn't see a monarch with that name. So George yes, but Wayne no.
I'm a touch surprised it is not a wider range of European countries.
If memory serves, surveys show he is the least- or second-least liked candidate amongst Labour members
But it's also really different to Matlock Bath, a mile or so down the road. Of the two, I much prefer Matlock, despite its lack of cable car and touristy tat.
(My family apparently built Smedley's Hydro on the hill in Matlock; when they closed down the family business a few decades back, they found detailed plans of it.)
One concern is if they try to unravel tech-cooperation agreements around submarines that are art of AUKUS, and I am not sure what happens to the other pillar.
Do they run double shifts at Barrow?
Even if she didn't go though with it - we'd all know she'd be thinking it. Along with us.
And no attempt to address Scotland's multiple problems: an overly large and overly comfortable public sector drawing too much of the available wealth and income to itself. An NHS that is simply not keeping up with rising demand. An education system that is in absolute meltdown. A very serious lack of entrepreneurial drive or ambition. Scots would rather regulate something than do it. There is no viable route to independence in such circumstances and enough of the population know that to make it vanishingly unlikely we will even be asked.
Of course, it has been at a terrible cost in a country that already had a paucity of young men. To lose even more to a war of conquest and the emigration of your best and brightest is utter insanity.
And all for, as you say, some land of dubious value.
It's harder to work out Trump's worldview. Because he wants other countries to be vassals to the great America: but a lord and vassal relationship rather requires the vassal to get something out of the arrangement (like the Belorussian leaders get out of Moscow). It's not clear what cancelling arms agreements which your allies (for which you are very handsomely rewarded) does for the vassal or for the US.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran
- Place where I live
- Place where I work (including weekday digs)
- Place where I live
- Place where I work (including weekday digs)
- Place where I live
Trains and taxis are involved. I may have mentioned this.* When I met 2 coppers walking round a local lake doing a pass to check for a patient who had self-absented himself from the hospital, we were chatting about things including the new PCC. I asked "Has the new one got herself banned from driving yet?", and there was a huge guffaw followed by a studied "can't comment" clamming-up.
(If my maths is correct; I'm dog tired atm)
Possibly just claim they have their own secret sauce 'agents' that are worth £10k a pop. Nice tidy profit selling to the simpler exec's who want to believe they're getting a bespoke service I guess.
Lots of options for personalisation there.