Wow, well done you. 
A man of self proclaimed morale standing, feels he has the right to judge someone yet fails to reflect on his own perceived conception of people from different race/religion.
Also, if I remember correctly, you tried to slander me on a previous occasion and when I responded in kind you reported my post, and got it deleted. Youāre a bit of a snake really.
Just trying to nip this one in the butt, because I feel one poster has taken it a bit far. I respect @Noo_Noo for not jumping on the back of the post even if he feels I am a racist.
I am white British/Irish my pregnant GF is Black African. So our Child will be of mixed race. So I am aware that my child will be born into a world that despite progress is still very intolerant.
My GF works and every 2 years has to renew her Right to Work which is not cheap. When we go on Holiday she has to get a visa, again at a cost.
I am proud of my GF for travelling to the UK to further herself, educate herself and to work in a sector that helps people. I am also proud that the UK although not perfect gave her that opportunity.
People can call me racist, I really donāt care. I know who I am and what I stand for. Unfortunately too many people on here try to label/stereotype me because my views are considered RW. My views arenāt RW as in Far Right, they are just further Right than their LW views.
I try not to and believe I have never attacked any other poster for having LW views, because my views are not too different to theirās. Yes, I have questioned their views but I donāt dismiss them without debate or by shutting them down.
I will leave it as that.
And, even though I have already clarified my point which was supported by @odin_telamon my reference to their Nationality was purely for information purposes, and showing a trend. And not to suggest that only people of foreign nationality are potentially committing fraud.
You literally brought up the suffragettes apropos of nothing. It was a bizarre comparison to draw.
Just to be clear that isnāt what you are doing. You are posting on a forum actively arguing against people who are concerned.
As I said, I donāt feel race should be part of that conversation and attempting to trend off anecdotal evidence just makes it worse.
Working in construction lord knows how many companies have gone bust and pop back up next week under their partners name etc.
Thanks and I never said you were and wouldnāt. My only knowledge of you as a person is what you post on here. Thatās not enough for me fully judge anyone.
What do we make of Burnhamās speech then? Decentralisation seems to be at the absolute heart of it.
Dunno to be honest.
Iām mixed on devolution, given the deal weāve been given in Wales with it. On the one hand itās great to be able to govern āyourselfā, but on the other itās a handy tool to hang any Welsh government that isnāt the one sitting in Westminster. To add detail to that, it depends on the deal and the details you get. You can quickly find that youāre so restricted that you have very little room to manoeuvre, yet carry 100% of the blame. And of course very few actually look at the details.
I am completely on board with the concept, particularly the idea of moving some of the executive function to the north. Devil will be in the detail, of course.
A stateās seat of government absolutely does not need to be located in said stateās economic centre. There are dozens of examples of this the world over, and given the crippling malaise affecting the UK, I cannot see any good reason why not.
In fact, I would go a step further and start the conversation about a new Parliament somewhere closer to the geographic centre of the UK. Westminster is not fit for purpose and the cost of bringing it up to scratch dwarfs the cost of an entirely new facility.
Westminster can then become a nice money spinner as a full-time museum; still needs money spent on it, but maintaining it at that level would surely be less than bringing it up to scratch as the heart of a G7 government.
Havenāt heard or read it yet. Starmer was also looking to decentralise more so it will be interesting to see how much of what Burnham is announcing is new.
What is wrong with him taking that picture ? I donāt really understand that itās critique worthy myself. Just looked like a happy moment right after he was elected. Maybe it is socially tasteless in the UK, thatās ok. But I would rather attack him for politics myself.
I would be much more concerned with this, which is a disaster beyond words and have been ongoing now for months (your defence minister famously abandoned his posts due to lack of funding and inconsistencies with the threat assessment, the obligations to NATO and the absurdly mediocre rearmament:
https://x.com/TomCotterillX/status/2071349488770564125
The UK is now set to have exactly 0 air defence ships and one wonders then, how the intention is to use these cheap drone-motherships without dedicated US or French air defence in the flotilla.
Instead of finding the funding that Starmer himself has claimed is needed (war ready for 2030, which is the strategic threat assessment agreed upon by the UK, France, Germany and everyone; this happens). Itās fundamentally unserious.
Foreman is exactly right here:
https://x.com/John_ForemanCBE/status/2071401853711958170
The UK is a naval power (supposedly), not principally a land power. To then be credible short of nuclear war, you kind of need a fleet and not just submarines that can launch nukes.
I cannot fathom what the UK is thinking. Because it is going to be even less ships than Foreman claims above in his doomsday forecast of future hulls. Why ? Because the UK sold ASW frigates to Norway (good and all of that), but without expanding shipyard capacity, resulting in 2 of the first ships going to Norway (since we, unlike the UK, are serious and understand the need to be war ready for 2030). HMS Birmingham is going to be a Norwegian ship. Why the UK are selling ships to Norway without expanding shipyard capacity, should probably be an important debate in the UK (but I see nothing except from naval people, which is odd, given it is a rather important issue).
So far, it looks like the UK will not get 8 Type-26 frigates. Looks more like it will be 5 now (no extra funding for shipyard expansion, at a time when it is more needed than in many decades).
And now worse, Destroyers are abandoned. Can then probably forget to escort ships through places where potential enemies can have long range fires capacity.
I really have a lot of questions as to what the fuck you guys are doing in the UK regarding defence and why there is no public outrage to it (wich would lead to political pressure and change). This is supposed to be the greatest priority during these days.
Why do this to yourself as a state ? Itās one thing to not have Great Power ambitions, but you are going to be utterly dependant on allies, at a time when relations with the USA are worse than ever. Cannot deploy to dangerous places without destroyers and an air defence umbralla really. Incredibly ghastly priorities.
The obvious problem of course. You only ever get one chance to rearm. If you do not take it, you will have 1-2 decades where you are very, very weak and highly politically confined. Seems inceredibly odd, mildly stating, to want those decades to be in between 2030-2040, given the times where itās all about āgathering all Rus into the empireā. Fundamentally unserious (let no one ever again say a bad word about Neville Chamberlain, who actually did prepared the UK for war, in case negotiations failed).
I remind you all that it is supposedly the responsibility of the UK and Norway to monitor and be first line defence visa vi the Northern Fleet located here:
The UK is supposed to be the Big Brother in this relationship, but has problems having a single attack submarine sailing these days, and will in the future have no destroyers at all. This detterance is rather more important than Corona and Hormuz straits economical problems, at least if the goal is to avoid war, or if the worst happens; make it survivable without disastrous losses and many years spent fighting. I sure as hell do not want to experience war in my lifetimeā¦
But instead, UK MoD writes threat assessments and agrees on having defence obligations to allies, but ends up not taking it seriously.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld5804/ldselect/ldintrel/8/806.htm
I have a lot of questions, when there is no healthy debate in the UK over these actually critically important issues.
Iāve got it on good authority the army has just taken delivery of 100K spud guns.
As unhappy as we are with the shit fest constantly delivered from Westminster (regardless of who is in power), at least 50% of Scotland are equally unimpressed by the devolved government up here
Just wondering how aware are Scots regarding what is devolved and what limits are placed on the Scottish government on various things like investment and borrowing?
Iād say it gets muddied, because you will get opposition parties berating the devolved government over issues that they donāt control, and the government blaming Westminster for things that they can still affect.
There has still been a lot of things that they have improved in terms of infrastructure and legal things (e.g. getting rid of Feudal tenure, which was a complete pain in the arse.)
Exactly my experience. Thereās an argument that Wales receives more money per head from Westminster via the Barnett formula, but there are restrictions on how Wales can borrow, manage their budget and what they can and cannot charge for. Water and energy for example. In reality itās not a good deal. HS2 was a prime example. Scotland got paid for it by the way. Wales hasnāt.
A new Downing Street team based in Manchester and labelled āNo 10 Northā will āoversee the biggest rebalancing of power our country has ever seenā, Andy Burnham has said in his first speech since launching a bid to be the next prime minister.
In a speech which outlined his broader vision, he pledged to redistribute power across the UK in an effort to ādrive good growth in every postcodeā.
Great idea Andyā¦ Iām going to suggest a term you can use for this concept.
How about ā¦ Levelling Up.
Youāre welcome.
Probably not very, similarly to most Welch.
There is no money. Armament to that degree is going to cost a fortune, and the question becomes what cash strapped public service do you cut further to pay for it.
I get itās important but so is healthcare, education, social care etc. Everything is fucking cut the bone already.
Here is my proposal. We want to pay for a massive investment in our war readiness? Letās fund it with a one off wealth tax on estates worth than five million pounds. Call it the āPatriot Taxā and see if the fuckers dare moan.
