Starmer's vision quest

[briantrumpet]

Well, just as a starter, a lot of apps monitor messaging to check for bullying and inappropriate conversations. You know, the sort of thing to give parents peace of mind. However, none of them can monitor Whatsapp because it is encrypted.

🤦

(That's a facepalm, just in case that's not in your repertoire of emojis 😉)

(That's a wink, in case...)

 

[briantrumpet]

Some interesting replies to Stephen Bush opining on Wes Streeting, notably the ones who don't agree with his economic views at all, but are starting to appreciate his political instincts and some of his themes.

https://bsky.app/profile/stephenkb.bsky.social/post/3mofytdjs3226

 

[BoldonLad]

Even if those children are "a special case", all their friends will not be using Social Media so they'll have a lonely time using it.

Doesn’t that rather depend on how many “special cases” there are?

 

[briantrumpet]

No wonder Starmer's so screwed if he's still listening to Glasman, who also praises Steve Bannon.

 

[Psamathe]

I see Starmer is now trying to "buy off" Burnham with offer of a Ministerial job ...

Starmer says he will offer Burnham ‘big role’ - as Streeting says he will challenge for leadership next week if PM won't quit
This morning Starmer has responded. In an interview with Sky News, he said that he would offer Andy Burnham, the Greater Manchester mayor who is expected to win the Makerfield byelection tomorrow, a cabinet job.

To me that suggests he is getting concerned that Burnham might win a leadership challenge.

And I saw Streeting interviewed on TV last night and whilst I don't like him/his policies/etc. some of what he was saying made sense mainly that Starmer would not beat Reform next General Election so change is necessary of Labour will be toast.

 

[icowden]

And I saw Streeting interviewed on TV last night and whilst I don't like him/his policies/etc. some of what he was saying made sense mainly that Starmer would not beat Reform next General Election so change is necessary of Labour will be toast.

But still not acknowledging that instead of already trying to run a general election campaign they could just ignore Farage and Badenoch and get on with governing.

 

[Psamathe]

But still not acknowledging that instead of already trying to run a general election campaign they could just ignore Farage and Badenoch and get on with governing.

I suspect it all depends on what one thinks Streeting meant but didn't say.

One interpretation is that Starmer will lose to Reform next General Election because he is now very unpopular with the electorate (as shown at the recent Council elections) and that people are too set in their view for enough to return to Starmer's Labour. Could be that Starmer is now so weak within the Commons and Labour backbenchers he won't be able to get difficult legislation through needed to turn the country round eg some think welfare reform is needed but Starmer has already failed to get that through once and he's a lot weaker now.

But I do agree they need to govern rather than electioneer. Maybe they are still sorting themselves out after McSweeney's non-departure?

On TV last night a fairly senior (non-Labour) MP suggesting that Starmer's very quick announcement of the Social Media ban was driven by the treats to his position. Her case being that so much other urgent important stuff has taken forever for Starmer to make decisions on but this uncharacteristically quick.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Starmer would apparently offer Burnham a cabinet post if elected as an MP... and Burnham would decline it, according to Sky News anyway. The pair of them kind of deserve each other. One's desperate, the other's desperate and ambitious.

 

[Psamathe]

Section in the latest The Rest is Politics Podcast discussing then increase in the defence budget which made me shift my view of Starmer not funding the full Strategic Defence Review.

When it started I assumed Rory Stewart, being ex-military, would have been seeking the full requested funding. But he wasn't and raised some aspects I thought do question the funds the forces are seeking.

eg Fair amount of money going to developing a new fighter jet jointly with Italy and Japan. But it is not scheduled to be ready until 2040 and does anybody think that in 2040 we'll have few very expensive fighter jets with pilots sitting at the controls (being targeted by £10k drones). Money "well spent"?

I suspect Al Carnes had a good point in his resignation letter when he said "We are still purchasing capability suitable for the last war while our adversaries arm for the next one. Platforms that cost billions can be defeated by systems that cost thousands."

The "Defence Investment Bank" suggested by Carney and favoured by Healey might get mound the fiscal rules but we would still be paying interest and having to repay the borrowed money.

 

[C R]

Section in the latest The Rest is Politics Podcast discussing then increase in the defence budget which made me shift my view of Starmer not funding the full Strategic Defence Review.

When it started I assumed Rory Stewart, being ex-military, would have been seeking the full requested funding. But he wasn't and raised some aspects I thought do question the funds the forces are seeking.

eg Fair amount of money going to developing a new fighter jet jointly with Italy and Japan. But it is not scheduled to be ready until 2040 and does anybody think that in 2040 we'll have few very expensive fighter jets with pilots sitting at the controls (being targeted by £10k drones). Money "well spent"?

I suspect Al Carnes had a good point in his resignation letter when he said "We are still purchasing capability suitable for the last war while our adversaries arm for the next one. Platforms that cost billions can be defeated by systems that cost thousands."

The "Defence Investment Bank" suggested by Carney and favoured by Healey might get mound the fiscal rules but we would still be paying interest and having to repay the borrowed money.

Not to mention how poor value for money the likes of BAE are in their projects.

 

[laurentian]

. . . I suspect Ukraine will become one of the world's leading arms suppliers

 

[Pblakeney]

Section in the latest The Rest is Politics Podcast discussing then increase in the defence budget which made me shift my view of Starmer not funding the full Strategic Defence Review.

When it started I assumed Rory Stewart, being ex-military, would have been seeking the full requested funding. But he wasn't and raised some aspects I thought do question the funds the forces are seeking.

eg Fair amount of money going to developing a new fighter jet jointly with Italy and Japan. But it is not scheduled to be ready until 2040 and does anybody think that in 2040 we'll have few very expensive fighter jets with pilots sitting at the controls (being targeted by £10k drones). Money "well spent"?

I suspect Al Carnes had a good point in his resignation letter when he said "We are still purchasing capability suitable for the last war while our adversaries arm for the next one. Platforms that cost billions can be defeated by systems that cost thousands."

The "Defence Investment Bank" suggested by Carney and favoured by Healey might get mound the fiscal rules but we would still be paying interest and having to repay the borrowed money.

We should put the money into being self sufficient regarding drones.
I say that as someone who has worked for BAE and Babcock.

 

[Psamathe]

We should put the money into being self sufficient regarding drones.
I say that as someone who has worked for BAE and Babcock.

It was another aspect raised in some report recently how too much of our defence budget doesn't generate growth as too much goes to the US.

Also, the continued buying so much from US is a vulnerability as they can just without warning decline to supply or delay delivery even after accepting the order eg munitions ordered by UK to be passed on to Ukraine delivery delayed as US decided they wanted them for their own use in their war of choice. They have already proved themselves an unreliable supplier.

It not uncommon eg India used by buy a lot of arms from Russia but after invading Ukraine, Russia started needing what India had ordered for their own use and was failing to make delivery so India started more domestic manufacturing and diversifying suppliers.

 

[briantrumpet]

It was another aspect raised in some report recently how too much of our defence budget doesn't generate growth as too much goes to the US.

Also, the continued buying so much from US is a vulnerability as they can just without warning decline to supply or delay delivery even after accepting the order eg munitions ordered by UK to be passed on to Ukraine delivery delayed as US decided they wanted them for their own use in their war of choice. They have already proved themselves an unreliable supplier.

It not uncommon eg India used by buy a lot of arms from Russia but after invading Ukraine, Russia started needing what India had ordered for their own use and was failing to make delivery so India started more domestic manufacturing and diversifying suppliers.

I've commented previously how the US is willingly making itself increasingly irrelevant. And that's good news, I think.

 

[Dorset Boy]

Public sector borrowing for May was £23 bn, up 30% from May last year ......