An Anglo-Canadian union – politicalbetting.com
An Anglo-Canadian union – politicalbetting.com
In the icy darkness, an autonomous glider—a torpedo-shaped drone the size of a kayak, drifting on programmed currents—suspends its descent. Its acoustic sensors detect something: a faint anomaly in the background hum of current and marine life, barely distinguishable from the ocean itself. The onboard algorithm processes, classifies, hesitates.
1
Comments
Good, timely article GW. Hope it puts the Brexit discussion to bed (I hope)
The head of state's easy to resolve, but are separate Parliaments retained? If there's a unified political body how would the seats be divided up? If it's giving roughly equal voter weight then Canada might feel short-changed. If it's equal between the UK/Canada then the average British vote will be worth around half that of a Canadian.
That would require constitutional innovation and political courage. But the logic is ineluctable: organize or decline, federate or fragment, achieve scale or accept subordination. In a world of giants, middle powers face extinction. The union offers survival—not through nostalgia, but through ruthless adaptation to the world as it is.
My minor adjustment would render its argument irrefutable.
That's why this plan is a hard no from me.
Plus the SNP and the Bloc Québécois might team up and we'd have rebellious secessionists to deal with.
Oh and then there's guns.
This seems rather (extremely) unlikely, but another straw in the wind.
Former Marine Emerges As Surprise Name In Race To Succeed Keir Starmer
https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/al-carns-surprise-name-labour-leadership
...PoliticsHome understands that the Labour MP for Birmingham Selly Oak considered a bid to succeed Angela Rayner as deputy Labour leader when she resigned from cabinet over unpaid stamp duty in September. In the end, he backed Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson for the role, while also earning a promotion to the Ministry of Defence in the reshuffle.
Now, Labour MPs have told PoliticsHome that Carns has been sounding out support amid a growing feeling within the Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) that it is when, not if, the Prime Minister faces a challenge to his leadership.
“He [Carns] is the most extraordinary man and would be the most impressive leader this country has ever had”, said one particularly supportive Labour MP*..
*that wouldn't be Carns himself, would it ?
"Supporting jobs" = supporting low productivity. We want massive drone factories with only a few dozen employees. We want railways built quickly and efficiently. We want an NHS that depends less on doctors and nurses and more on technology and wider public health interventions. There are national security motivations for retaining production in the UK - but they should be linked to outcomes (e.g. new warships built per year, anywhere in the UK), not the number of people employed on the Clyde.
There is no need for nations to combine, indeed division of nations is more likely. There are plenty of successful countries smaller than us demographically, geographically and economically. What we do need is a rules based order and easy trading relationships (which is why the EU fitted us so well).
No amount of Empire nostalgia is substitute for international rule of law.
On energy, I was having a look at some projections and the UK is set to double its electricity generation over the next 20 years or so, yet still import quite a bit from the continent as demand rockets. While we're part of the European market, and without significant subsidy, the prospect of energy autarky isn't feasible, particularly if we continue to balance intermittency using interconnectors.
On food we are remarkably close to self-sufficiency, in a pinch. Just need to grow more veg, less sheep. On attack submarines, it's all quite hush hush but we didn't put one to sea for the CSG's recent trip, and the rumour is Trident occasionally depends on US attack subs for escort into the Atlantic. Not good.
Talent will out, but... come on.
Or are you thinking of pensioners?
(And most people recieving child benefit are in work, just poor).
Unfortunately, work simply isn't enough to keep many families out of poverty - particularly large ones. And there are some cases where a mother decided to have a large family because there were two decent jobs and a stable relationship - and have ended up single and destitute instead. This effects all of us - poverty is strongly associated with long-term health, education, crime outcomes. If I get mugged today, it will almost certainly be by someone from one of these kinds of backgrounds.
Also
"We need to stop helping out people in work on modest salaries who have larger families"
Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander said that the new design "isn't just a paint job", and that it represents "a new railway, casting off the frustrations of the past and focused entirely on delivering a proper public service for passengers".
As she reintroduces the *BR* logo...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g9kx0je10o
There are loads of train nerds on here - what would be a good livery? Midland? Great Central?
It is the countries with the poorest of financial environments that breed in large numbers. It wasnt that long ago here either that we had large families living in squalid cramped conditions. As we got richer, we wanted children less. The only stand out civilised nation that has bucked the trend is Israel.
France has had a very very modest limited success, with a series of long standing programmes that reward giving birth, but the IFS estimates that this costs the taxpayer between 2.5 and 5 million euros per extra birth it results in. Hungary and poland alos have significant programmes designed to encourage births with a cost of over one million euros per extra child estimated.
Why try to think of ways of trying to get people to do something they don't want to, and instead face up to reality?
General Manager calls his four immediate subordinates into his office.
He has a length of green cotton in his hand. Takes out a pair of scissors. Cuts it in five pieces.
'Take one length each,' he says. 'That's the colour I want all locomotives to be from now on. And if you're in doubt, the fifth length will be in my desk drawer here for you to check.'
There's certainly likely to be a kind of background.
I'm all ready for this, just say the word, Gardenwalker, and I'm off - part of the advanced guard.
See you in Toronto.
No thank you.
But if you choose neither, then ultimately in the long-run you're choosing a declining, ageing population. Managed decline, as per Japan.
There’s a lot of them. Not the most inspiring list, even by the standards of our current political classes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_veterans_in_British_politics
Everything else either doesn't exist or is too small.
Indeed there are only bad and worse options for if the USA continues down the spheres of influence + global autocracy model.
Has anyone checked the UK and French box of matches for the nuclear blue touch paper recently?
But - while this is a complex subject with many causes - my view - and I think this is backed up not just by personal experience and anecdata but also by vaguely remembered polling - is that people want to have children. They just can't afford to. Children are crippling expensive for all but the very rich and very poor. And also essentially incompatible with working for a living if the workplace is not the home.
My wife and I were reflecting on this yesterday as we juggled the various appountments are children needed to be at. How we would have coped before working from home I have no idea, even without the inheritance we received which enabled us to afford our second and third children.
I mean, if you want a federal.union - which is the unchanged goal of the EU - then have the courage and honesty to argue for it rather than pretending the EU is something completely different
As I said. It us ironic that you cite an organisation with the explicit aim of political.union to criticise another proposed union.
It's a nice dream and I'm up for it personally, but do we really think an isolationist and unpredictable USA is going to sit by while its nearest neighbour forges military alliances with potentially hostile states?
It is policy alignment that is key. This is not as easy as Gardenwalker suggests, not least because Canada is actually as advanced as we are in technology. Perhaps common policies can create common alignment, and the military necessities of the new multi-polar world might speak louder than local gripes.
As someone who went to University in Canada and who has many Canadian relatives, I am aware that Canadian culture and the various cultures of GBNI are not the same, but they are rooted in some of the same traditions. However, the French Canadian and First Nations traditions as well as the mosaic of new Canadians makes Canada a distinct set of cultures, and this, by the way, is true of Australia, including the Aboriginal cultures and New Zealand, including the Te-Maori cultures too. Though we may think that we are the same, actually we are as different from them and much further away from them, as we are compared to France and Germany. The English language is the working language of the EU too, and it is not always the case in Canada, New Zealand or even Australia.
Thus, though military and political necessity may require far greater collaboration among the Realms, it will not be easy and those that think we should work with "our own kith and kin" strongly over estimate the common feeling and maybe underestimate the practical, political and cultural differences that beset the non American anglosphere.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesusland_map
As for Anglo-Canada... It's a better cultural fit than Anglo-America, or even Anglo-Australia. But there's no escaping the observation that Canada is an awfully long way away and the resulting unit is still pretty small.
The US even under Trump does not consider Canada or the UK hostile states
(although, we'll need to up the maternity care budget...)
Perhaps a looser Confederation would be an easier start?
Seriously, I suspect that if it weren't for the hiccups around those on 60-100K getting child benefit, the atmosphere would be somewhat more receptive.
And by 2045, with a first in PPE, a BPhil and a charming Canadian girlfriend from Toronto, my son might be ready for the burdens of leadership.
So I'm about 5.5 times less wrong than those saying that the two child cap was about families who don't work.
If it's that important they'd be better off cancelling the contract, buying the redundant factory off GDLS for a nominal price, and retooling it to manufacture the CV90.
Spending billions on propping up failure ends only one way.
Our family embraced UK - Canadian ties when our eldest son married a Canadian and moved to Vancouver in 2015
Canada is a vast country and to inform @HYUFD Vancouver is just 32 miles from the US border and is very different in attitudes to Eastern Canada
British Columbia has just recommenced it's relationship with China, having fallen out over spying issues, and it seems so far away from the UK in culture in many ways but still retains an affection for the UK
I see no problem with closer ties, but at present Carney has far more pressing problems with the need for Canada to develop its mineral and oil wealth irrespective of climate change issues
Of course there is still the Commonwealth though it seems quite more morabund at present
Yes, there is plenty to fix at home, but we’re not living in a dystopia.
Crazy name; crazy guy.
The NHS I’m convinced is unreformable at this point, much of the administration could be easily automated if it was broken down into small chunks and systems worked to defined communications and data protocols.
Trump: In many cases, you need about 185 IQ to turn on a lawnmower.
https://x.com/Acyn/status/1998118443917455595
Maybe it's not so dumb though...you take Toronto and we nuke New York?
https://www.pm.gc.ca/en/news/speeches/2025/11/27/prime-minister-carney-announces-canada-and-alberta-strike-new-partnership
Nice scenario - it all sounds a bit like the CANZUK idea being floated around not so long ago.
It does ask the important question as to Britain's place in a changing world - the Kensington Treaty marks perhaps the beginning of a new non-economic engagement with Europe i.e: outside the EU. If we take that much-derided (often unfairly) organisation and six decades of angst and anguish out of the equation (not easy), the reality of our geographical position dictates a strategic relationship with Europe so we can work with Europe without being part of Europe.
It's long been recognised America's geo-strategic focus will shift increasingly to the Pacific with the Atlantic seen as an irrelevant backwater. We've been fortunate that hasn't happened much until now but even after Trump and MAGA are in the dust, America will have China to consider and Chinese intentions to counter - a future POTUS, especially one from the West Coast, may have little time for Europe and European concerns.
The key will be flexibility and especially in thinking - we may need to adapt quickly and effectively to sudden global power shifts in ways we've not had to for decades - 1989, for example, caught everyone out with conservatives, socialists and liberals all floundering to make sense of what was happening in Central and Eastern Europe and what it meant and would mean.
On modern graphic design, I have a peculiar fondness for the polite sans-serif sentence case font used on British road signs. Always makes me feel glad to be home when coming back from abroad, where the road signs shout at you in block capitals. (Of course, old-fashioned British signposts which you still see from time to time in rural areas are even more beautiful, though perhaps less practical when moving at 30mph or more.)
Matt Gurney: 'We will never fucking trust you again'
Some blunt talk for our American neighbours at the Halifax International Security Forum.
https://www.readtheline.ca/p/matt-gurney-we-will-never-fucking
..The forum is an annual gathering of senior military officers, defence and intelligence officials from across the free world, and representatives from the media, think tanks, large companies and civil society organizations whose work relates to defence and security issues or in some way seeks to promote and preserve a healthy democratic world. Funded by NATO, the Canadian government and private-sector sponsors, the event is a major part of Canada’s “soft power” offering to our allies — we host the big party and show everybody a good time. The actual schedule is split between on-the-record panel talks or presentations, off-the-record sessions, and informal time for mingling and schmoozing. I am grateful to have been invited to participate again this year.
Especially this year. I’ve been going to the forum for years, and the event always had a strongly American flavour.
Not anymore! Yankee went home.
Like, literally. He was ordered to go home, or stay there. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth ordered the Pentagon to avoid a series of high-profile annual defence summits. That includes Halifax, and others in places like Munich and Singapore, and even inside the United States itself. The reason, according to the Pentagon’s press apparatus, was that, and I swear to God this is the actual quote, such events promote “the evil of globalism, disdain for our great country and hatred for the president of the United States.”
Oh. Well, then...
..Let me be clear about one thing: there were indeed a great many Americans at the forum in Halifax. I don’t want to suggest otherwise. There was a large Congressional Delegation, or a “CODEL,” present at the forum, as there is every year. If anything, I think this year had an unusually large CODEL. And it was a bipartisan one, too. But I noticed something interesting. They were all senators. No House reps. I can’t help but suspect that’s because they’re either planning to retire (some have said already they will) or because the longer six-year term afforded senators gives them some ability to withstand White House anger that House reps, with two-year terms, don’t have.
There were plenty of other Americans from private companies, think tanks, academia, and many former and retired U.S. government officials. And I’m going to be extremely careful in how I describe this: I have a pretty good hunch that some U.S. military officers were indeed in attendance, because — gosh! what a coincidence! — they just happened to be in Halifax on vacation at the exact same time the forum was taking place...
...I worry that I might have been a bit brash with my American dining companions that night. (If any of them are reading this and if I was, sorry. Lot goin’ on over here.) But before I could worry about it too much, a senior military officer from a major (non-American) allied nation drove a stake right through the heart of the matter.
America has blown 80 years of accumulated goodwill and trust among its allies, our American moderator was told. A rock-steady assumption of allied defence and security planning for literally generations has been that America would act in its own interests, sure, but that those interests would be rational, and would still generally value the institutions that America itself worked so hard to build after the Second World War. America’s recent actions have destroyed the ability of any ally to continue to have faith in America to act even within its own strategic self-interest, let alone that of any ally.
The officer then said that even a swift return of America to its former role won’t matter.
Because “we will never fucking trust you again.”
The Americans at the table seemed somewhat startled by the heat of that pronouncement. I agreed with it entirely. So, it seemed to me, did most of the non-Americans.
This wasn’t the only such moment at the forum this year, but it was, to me, the most interesting. And it was still being talked about the next day. “Thank God,” one allied official said to me. “Someone had to tell them.”
If there’s one thing I think people should take from my visit to Halifax, it’s that. America’s former role is gone. And I think that Americans themselves are having the hardest time of all coming to terms with what that might actually mean in the long run.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/12/08/trader-wins-court-battle-over-bonus-after-boss-tells-him/ (£££)
A poor, downtrodden hedge fund trader had to sue to get a £4 million bonus. London's shoe shops are on red alert.
The state pension is, of course, contribution based so the pensioners you show your disdain for have contribute to the system to take something out irrespective of the rights and wrongs of it.
However it is very PB and very Victorian for people to radiate their worthiness on the so called virtuous poor and show their disdain for those doing the heavy lifting or have done in the past to pay for them.
Nice one.
That will wind up the ‘you’re all flag shaggers’ if you like our flag brigade a treat 👍
It would be nice if the service from York to Newcastle was actually run competently. Last three times we’ve gone to use it the trains have been cancelled.