You can tick whichever of the options you choose; including "other" to write in your own - I chose to do that without specifying any form of British.Zhivago wrote:Does it preclude the possibility of a multi-layered sense of national identity?Which Tyler wrote:Completed my census today - Nationality = European
I didn't think to do that, ah well, there'll be another one along soonWhich Tyler wrote:Completed my census today - Nationality = European
You can free text if you want to. Some poor sod at ONS will love you for doing that mind.Zhivago wrote:Does it preclude the possibility of a multi-layered sense of national identity?Which Tyler wrote:Completed my census today - Nationality = European
Son of Mathonwy wrote:From the Express article (further corroboration required):Digby wrote:Digby wrote:I'm not really sure if this deserves to be in this thread or the Brexit one, either way it's a lot of money being used to get something at best comparable to Galileo
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-53279783
And it's only a lot of money to buy into an American company that we'd joint own with an Indian communications company, we could still face hurdles with the US dependent on what we want to do with the technology, especially when it comes to any Chinese involvements. It's certainly not the UK alternative we were told we'd have, and it's only a few hundred million to buy in, it's going to take billions more for an idea that might not work out.
Yet another giant fuck up courtesy of Brexit, but with Boris in charge debt is a problem for the future and providing that's not his future he doesn't seem to care
OneWeb as a construct wasn't intended to be used for a navigational system payload, so we're going to have to see if as a concept it can be converted despite it operating at an orbit height around 1/17th of other navigational systems proven to work. I'm sure OneWeb did a terrific job selling the UK government this wouldn't be a problem, but they were failing and looking for any path out of bankruptcy having laid off more than 80% if their workforce and simply keeping enough people in place to keep current satellites (or their capital spend to date) in orbit whilst desperately seeking new investment, but this isn't proven and the UK government has a miserably bad record on technology projects.
I presume we're buying into OneWeb rather than starting our own UK company because of the hope it'll be cheaper to try and piggy back a system that was meant for something else, though Galileo was better and cheaper than either of those options, so again hearty congratulations to team Brexit you useless lying wankers
In new nobody saw coming reports suggest the pissing up the wall of the money spent so far on our alternative to Galileo is to be abandoned.
The only news site obviously reporting the story is the Express, and somehow it doesn't seem right to click on that to see if they've actually got the story. But for now it would seem 'experts' are advising the equipment we spent a shitload acquiring cannot be re-purposed. If they'd agreed to me idea of paying me £5 million to tell this idea wouldn't work they'd have wasted a lot less money. I suspect if the Express do have the story it's the EU's fault
Beyond wasting even more money than Cummings and Johnson like to reserve for handing out to private companies run by their friends and family without proper recourse to the legal tender process we still have the problem of no functioning plan for a GPS system.
Just a multi million pound punt by Johnson and super predictor Cummings. No problem, it's not their money.Galileo blow: £5bn UK rival set to be SCRAPPED with MP branding idea a 'vanity project'
HOPES of a British satellite navigation project to rival the EU's Galileo system at a cost of up to £5billion are on the verge of crashing down to Earth with the UK Space Agency poised to terminate the project.
In 2018, Boris Johnson's predecessor as Prime Minister, Theresa May, allocated £92million in cash to investigate the feasibility of the UK building its own system after being frozen out of Galileo, despite having invested upwards of £1billion and developed much of the technology. However, widespread reports have suggested the UKSA has concluded the concept is not a viable one, with the agency declining to comment on the reports when questioned by Express.co.uk today.
Now some in the industry, and within the civil service, now believe the UK's best bet is to try and regain access to Galileo.
Tory MP Tobias Ellwood, chairman of the defence select committee, agreed, stressing the UK is currently without a back-up to the United States's Global Positioning System (GPS), on which it is completely reliant.
Mr Ellwood, MP for Bournemouth West, told Express.co.uk the push for a UK system had essentially been a "vanity project".
Brexit is still a live issue and the Govt will get some credit for "getting it done". That may change the more the limitations and weaknesses of the agreement with the EU comes into focus. Right now, its a tick in the plus column.Sandydragon wrote:After last night results, Boris won’t be too worried about the next election.
I’m not sure at the moment how much of the huge swing was due to Brexit, a Labour leadership that isn’t connecting, or a covid bounce. Whether any of that will be a positive for the conservatives at the next election, but this should be setting alarm bells ringing for Labour and see some kind of course change.
Corbyn lost two general elections, including the worst results for decades. A revert to a Corbyn alike isn’t your answer.Zhivago wrote:Just to remind folks where the bar was set when Corbyn was in charge
https://labourlist.org/2016/02/corbyns- ... ions-test/
Starmer must go
Starmer needs to reshuffle. Too many shadow ministers who no one knows. I agree this is a difficult time for the opposition and the events are helping the government.fivepointer wrote:Brexit is still a live issue and the Govt will get some credit for "getting it done". That may change the more the limitations and weaknesses of the agreement with the EU comes into focus. Right now, its a tick in the plus column.Sandydragon wrote:After last night results, Boris won’t be too worried about the next election.
I’m not sure at the moment how much of the huge swing was due to Brexit, a Labour leadership that isn’t connecting, or a covid bounce. Whether any of that will be a positive for the conservatives at the next election, but this should be setting alarm bells ringing for Labour and see some kind of course change.
The vaccine bounce is considerable. That, allied to the opening up of the economy over recent weeks, is a factor in how people are feeling. The mood in the country has changed.
Labour and Starmer arent cutting through. In part that is due to the present situation where Covid is going to dominate and opposition parties arent going to get the exposure that the Govt is getting. That said, they have to do better. Its one thing making Johnson look like an incompetent fool at PMQ's but landing blows that stick, as well as articulating an alternative position requires a bit more.
Corbyn wasn't the answer either, but at least he had an ideology. The worst politicians are those without any fixed political compass, just like a weather vane they move where the wind blows. Labour needs to move away from London elite (which Corbyn also was). There's more to the country than SW1 and its surrounds.Sandydragon wrote:Corbyn lost two general elections, including the worst results for decades. A revert to a Corbyn alike isn’t your answer.Zhivago wrote:Just to remind folks where the bar was set when Corbyn was in charge
https://labourlist.org/2016/02/corbyns- ... ions-test/
Starmer must go
All the time that Corbyn was leader, the right wing of the party was harping on that someone with strong convictions and ideology wasn't the solution and that the only route to power was through an inoffensive Aaron Burr "Talk less, smile more" type who could occupy the middle ground. Turns out that that wasn't the answer either.Sandydragon wrote:Corbyn lost two general elections, including the worst results for decades. A revert to a Corbyn alike isn’t your answer.Zhivago wrote:Just to remind folks where the bar was set when Corbyn was in charge
https://labourlist.org/2016/02/corbyns- ... ions-test/
Starmer must go
It's got nothing to do with class, and everything to do with nationalism. Tories are doing so well because they became the English nationalist party in all but name. That's what England wants, so that's what England gets. Freud regarded nationalism as collective narcissicm, but viewed narcissicm as a form of idealism. They love Boris because he presents an idealistic nationalistic vision of Britain to the masses (with 'Britannia Rules the Waves (Global Britain) crossed with Churchillian WWII Britain vs Europe (Brexit)' motifs). Labour need someone who can present a Labour equivalent.Digby wrote:You still need someone to appeal to the middle classes. But there are disconnects all over the shop at this point, and I don't know if anyone has a good idea how to start joining the dots back up.
I would also note during a pandemic whilst in local election we might be getting some results returned which aren't reflective of the broader picture. Okay if it turns out the voter turnout is over 70% there are some huge problems.
I voted for Labour in the mayoral vote, first time I've ever voted Labour. Partly to give them something, also the Lib Dei candidate just annoyed me with their appeal along the lines of 'if you're fed up being ruled over by Westminster' in a polite rewording of a UKIP take from recent history. I didn't even vote Lib Dem as 2nd choice, that went to the Greens.
Popular? You got slaughtered in 2019. It wasn’t a loss it was a demolition. Even against May who did everything wrong Corbyn still lost.Puja wrote:All the time that Corbyn was leader, the right wing of the party was harping on that someone with strong convictions and ideology wasn't the solution and that the only route to power was through an inoffensive Aaron Burr "Talk less, smile more" type who could occupy the middle ground. Turns out that that wasn't the answer either.Sandydragon wrote:Corbyn lost two general elections, including the worst results for decades. A revert to a Corbyn alike isn’t your answer.Zhivago wrote:Just to remind folks where the bar was set when Corbyn was in charge
https://labourlist.org/2016/02/corbyns- ... ions-test/
Starmer must go
Plus, I'd argue that the policies under Corbyn were pretty popular and sold to the public pretty well. He lost on his personal brand, history, and inability to sell himself. Someone from the left wing of the party who doesn't have skeletons and has charisma with the public at large might be just what is needed - gods knows being utterly inoffensive and offering no vision whatsoever isn't working.
Puja
First off, enough with the *you*.Sandydragon wrote:Popular? You got slaughtered in 2019. It wasn’t a loss it was a demolition. Even against May who did everything wrong Corbyn still lost.Puja wrote:All the time that Corbyn was leader, the right wing of the party was harping on that someone with strong convictions and ideology wasn't the solution and that the only route to power was through an inoffensive Aaron Burr "Talk less, smile more" type who could occupy the middle ground. Turns out that that wasn't the answer either.Sandydragon wrote: Corbyn lost two general elections, including the worst results for decades. A revert to a Corbyn alike isn’t your answer.
Plus, I'd argue that the policies under Corbyn were pretty popular and sold to the public pretty well. He lost on his personal brand, history, and inability to sell himself. Someone from the left wing of the party who doesn't have skeletons and has charisma with the public at large might be just what is needed - gods knows being utterly inoffensive and offering no vision whatsoever isn't working.
Puja
Time for some serious review and if anyone thinks a move to the left is the solution then good luck with that and standby for a generation in opposition.
Since 1979 the only Labour leader to win any kind of majority was Tony Blair. All the other candidates failed. Labour have an identity crisis which they need to resolve.
I'm not a Labour person. They were slaughtered in 2019, but are you actually telling me that was because of the policies or because Corbyn was a Remainer/Leaver (delete as appropriate depending on constituency) IRA-supporting Britain-hating Marxist traitor? The policies, stripped of their provenance, polled well.A level of stupidity Priti Patel aspires toZhivago wrote:It's got nothing to do with class, and everything to do with nationalism.Digby wrote:You still need someone to appeal to the middle classes. But there are disconnects all over the shop at this point, and I don't know if anyone has a good idea how to start joining the dots back up.
I would also note during a pandemic whilst in local election we might be getting some results returned which aren't reflective of the broader picture. Okay if it turns out the voter turnout is over 70% there are some huge problems.
I voted for Labour in the mayoral vote, first time I've ever voted Labour. Partly to give them something, also the Lib Dei candidate just annoyed me with their appeal along the lines of 'if you're fed up being ruled over by Westminster' in a polite rewording of a UKIP take from recent history. I didn't even vote Lib Dem as 2nd choice, that went to the Greens.
Corbyn was directly responsible to a large degree. Short of Dianne Abbott, I can’t think of a worse leader. The problem is that many of the Labour left aren’t that different in mindset. They may not have the years of cosying up to the IRA etc but it wouldn’t take long for their personal opinions to be just as obvious.Puja wrote:First off, enough with the *you*.Sandydragon wrote:Popular? You got slaughtered in 2019. It wasn’t a loss it was a demolition. Even against May who did everything wrong Corbyn still lost.Puja wrote: All the time that Corbyn was leader, the right wing of the party was harping on that someone with strong convictions and ideology wasn't the solution and that the only route to power was through an inoffensive Aaron Burr "Talk less, smile more" type who could occupy the middle ground. Turns out that that wasn't the answer either.
Plus, I'd argue that the policies under Corbyn were pretty popular and sold to the public pretty well. He lost on his personal brand, history, and inability to sell himself. Someone from the left wing of the party who doesn't have skeletons and has charisma with the public at large might be just what is needed - gods knows being utterly inoffensive and offering no vision whatsoever isn't working.
Puja
Time for some serious review and if anyone thinks a move to the left is the solution then good luck with that and standby for a generation in opposition.
Since 1979 the only Labour leader to win any kind of majority was Tony Blair. All the other candidates failed. Labour have an identity crisis which they need to resolve.
I will absolutely agree on the bolded statement, but disagree that further tacking to the right is the way to accomplish it. Labour need to have an identity, of some kind and if, "We are the party of adequately funding public services and looking after the social safety net," is not it, then what the hell are they?
Puja
While I wouldn't've put free broadband front and centre, it's hard to argue after the lockdown that it's not a utility rather than a luxury.Sandydragon wrote:Corbyn was directly responsible to a large degree. Short of Dianne Abbott, I can’t think of a worse leader. The problem is that many of the Labour left aren’t that different in mindset. They may not have the years of cosying up to the IRA etc but it wouldn’t take long for their personal opinions to be just as obvious.Puja wrote:First off, enough with the *you*.Sandydragon wrote:
Popular? You got slaughtered in 2019. It wasn’t a loss it was a demolition. Even against May who did everything wrong Corbyn still lost.
Time for some serious review and if anyone thinks a move to the left is the solution then good luck with that and standby for a generation in opposition.
Since 1979 the only Labour leader to win any kind of majority was Tony Blair. All the other candidates failed. Labour have an identity crisis which they need to resolve.
I will absolutely agree on the bolded statement, but disagree that further tacking to the right is the way to accomplish it. Labour need to have an identity, of some kind and if, "We are the party of adequately funding public services and looking after the social safety net," is not it, then what the hell are they?
Puja
As for policies, are you suggesting free broadband was ever a good idea? Nationalisation may poll well with some people, it also sends many running for the hills. If Labour can recapture the sense of aspiration that new Labour had, pro business but also on the side of the little guy. Then they have a constituent base to work with. I still think that Starmer is trusted more than his party and a good way to move on is to completely refresh his front bench with some heavy hitters who get some visibility. Starmer would make a good PM but he need some of the shadow cabinet to be carrying the load.
The point is Labour need to deliver an optimistic vision of Britain. A vision that's relevant to people. Tories have delivered a nationalistic ideal of Britain, but Starmer lacks any vision at all. All Starmer stands for is negatives. Anti-corbyn, anti-brexit, anti-johnson etc etc. That isn't inspiring. It is insipid.Digby wrote:A level of stupidity Priti Patel aspires toZhivago wrote:It's got nothing to do with class, and everything to do with nationalism.Digby wrote:You still need someone to appeal to the middle classes. But there are disconnects all over the shop at this point, and I don't know if anyone has a good idea how to start joining the dots back up.
I would also note during a pandemic whilst in local election we might be getting some results returned which aren't reflective of the broader picture. Okay if it turns out the voter turnout is over 70% there are some huge problems.
I voted for Labour in the mayoral vote, first time I've ever voted Labour. Partly to give them something, also the Lib Dei candidate just annoyed me with their appeal along the lines of 'if you're fed up being ruled over by Westminster' in a polite rewording of a UKIP take from recent history. I didn't even vote Lib Dem as 2nd choice, that went to the Greens.
I think the main problem was that it made Labour look uncredible. They need to focus on a few main goals and push those.Puja wrote:While I wouldn't've put free broadband front and centre, it's hard to argue after the lockdown that it's not a utility rather than a luxury.Sandydragon wrote:Corbyn was directly responsible to a large degree. Short of Dianne Abbott, I can’t think of a worse leader. The problem is that many of the Labour left aren’t that different in mindset. They may not have the years of cosying up to the IRA etc but it wouldn’t take long for their personal opinions to be just as obvious.Puja wrote:
First off, enough with the *you*.
I will absolutely agree on the bolded statement, but disagree that further tacking to the right is the way to accomplish it. Labour need to have an identity, of some kind and if, "We are the party of adequately funding public services and looking after the social safety net," is not it, then what the hell are they?
Puja
As for policies, are you suggesting free broadband was ever a good idea? Nationalisation may poll well with some people, it also sends many running for the hills. If Labour can recapture the sense of aspiration that new Labour had, pro business but also on the side of the little guy. Then they have a constituent base to work with. I still think that Starmer is trusted more than his party and a good way to move on is to completely refresh his front bench with some heavy hitters who get some visibility. Starmer would make a good PM but he need some of the shadow cabinet to be carrying the load.
I'm not sure Starmer is more trusted - no-one knows what he stands for, what he believes in, what his Labour party means. Until he finds a policy to stand behind, he's nothing but a cipher in a suit.
Which heavy hitters would you bring in?
Puja
This "crisis" is overblown. One by-election result under freakishly unusual national circumstances. This is the constituency who were happy to vote for a corrupt New Labour politician, so what if they now vote for a Tory?Zhivago wrote:I think the main problem was that it made Labour look uncredible. They need to focus on a few main goals and push those.Puja wrote:While I wouldn't've put free broadband front and centre, it's hard to argue after the lockdown that it's not a utility rather than a luxury.Sandydragon wrote:
Corbyn was directly responsible to a large degree. Short of Dianne Abbott, I can’t think of a worse leader. The problem is that many of the Labour left aren’t that different in mindset. They may not have the years of cosying up to the IRA etc but it wouldn’t take long for their personal opinions to be just as obvious.
As for policies, are you suggesting free broadband was ever a good idea? Nationalisation may poll well with some people, it also sends many running for the hills. If Labour can recapture the sense of aspiration that new Labour had, pro business but also on the side of the little guy. Then they have a constituent base to work with. I still think that Starmer is trusted more than his party and a good way to move on is to completely refresh his front bench with some heavy hitters who get some visibility. Starmer would make a good PM but he need some of the shadow cabinet to be carrying the load.
I'm not sure Starmer is more trusted - no-one knows what he stands for, what he believes in, what his Labour party means. Until he finds a policy to stand behind, he's nothing but a cipher in a suit.
Which heavy hitters would you bring in?
Puja
-Making the super rich (note not just 'rich' because affluent people might see themselves as targetted) pay their fair share of tax should be one.
-Fixing Britain's infrastructure (NHS/Rail/etc)
-Giving employees more of a say (Worker representation in companies etc)
Stick to a few key messages with detail backing them up and repeat the headlines.
Blair was only as successful as he was because of the good progress made by John Smith before his untimely death.Son of Mathonwy wrote:This "crisis" is overblown. One by-election result under freakishly unusual national circumstances. This is the constituency who were happy to vote for a corrupt New Labour politician, so what if they now vote for a Tory?Zhivago wrote:I think the main problem was that it made Labour look uncredible. They need to focus on a few main goals and push those.Puja wrote:
While I wouldn't've put free broadband front and centre, it's hard to argue after the lockdown that it's not a utility rather than a luxury.
I'm not sure Starmer is more trusted - no-one knows what he stands for, what he believes in, what his Labour party means. Until he finds a policy to stand behind, he's nothing but a cipher in a suit.
Which heavy hitters would you bring in?
Puja
-Making the super rich (note not just 'rich' because affluent people might see themselves as targetted) pay their fair share of tax should be one.
-Fixing Britain's infrastructure (NHS/Rail/etc)
-Giving employees more of a say (Worker representation in companies etc)
Stick to a few key messages with detail backing them up and repeat the headlines.
No doubt the right-wing press are over the moon about this as it takes headlines away from the Tory corruption stories. And plenty of the left can snipe at Starmer with their pre-prepared articles.
There's a lot that Starmer can do better, but he's clearly electable, a potential PM, and Labour have considerably improved in the polls under him.
IMO this is what he should do:
Stop making a point of agreeing with or supporting the government. No one can seriously accuse him of making political mileage out of the pandemic. He does look like the grown-up in the room, but enough is enough. Trying to look helpful just looks weak. Therefore...
He needs to look strong, so he needs to attack (eg on corruption, on the massive Covid-19 deathtoll due to delayed lockdowns). Maybe he needs to find someone like Alastair Campbell (but not Alastair Campbell) to help him with this.
On policy, still well away from the next general election, too much clarity is a problem: the Tories will simply re-brand their policies with the name of any novel Labour idea which seems popular; and obviously unpopular policies should be avoided. (NB that arsehole Blair was successful by having no policies, beyond crushing the left of his party, until just before the 1997 election when his policy was "change nothing".)
At this stage it would make sense to stand for general principles which are (a) self-evidently good, and (b) which do not sit easily with the Conservative party. I suggest the Labour party should set out to make the UK an Honest, Kind and Fair place to live. Then all issues and developing policies can be fitted into the framework.
I agree on Smith. His death was possibly the greatest tragedy for this country (not to mention Iraq) in the last 30 years. It's painful to think how much better a course we would be on now, had he lived (or if Blair had not!).Zhivago wrote:Blair was only as successful as he was because of the good progress made by John Smith before his untimely death.Son of Mathonwy wrote:This "crisis" is overblown. One by-election result under freakishly unusual national circumstances. This is the constituency who were happy to vote for a corrupt New Labour politician, so what if they now vote for a Tory?Zhivago wrote:
I think the main problem was that it made Labour look uncredible. They need to focus on a few main goals and push those.
-Making the super rich (note not just 'rich' because affluent people might see themselves as targetted) pay their fair share of tax should be one.
-Fixing Britain's infrastructure (NHS/Rail/etc)
-Giving employees more of a say (Worker representation in companies etc)
Stick to a few key messages with detail backing them up and repeat the headlines.
No doubt the right-wing press are over the moon about this as it takes headlines away from the Tory corruption stories. And plenty of the left can snipe at Starmer with their pre-prepared articles.
There's a lot that Starmer can do better, but he's clearly electable, a potential PM, and Labour have considerably improved in the polls under him.
IMO this is what he should do:
Stop making a point of agreeing with or supporting the government. No one can seriously accuse him of making political mileage out of the pandemic. He does look like the grown-up in the room, but enough is enough. Trying to look helpful just looks weak. Therefore...
He needs to look strong, so he needs to attack (eg on corruption, on the massive Covid-19 deathtoll due to delayed lockdowns). Maybe he needs to find someone like Alastair Campbell (but not Alastair Campbell) to help him with this.
On policy, still well away from the next general election, too much clarity is a problem: the Tories will simply re-brand their policies with the name of any novel Labour idea which seems popular; and obviously unpopular policies should be avoided. (NB that arsehole Blair was successful by having no policies, beyond crushing the left of his party, until just before the 1997 election when his policy was "change nothing".)
At this stage it would make sense to stand for general principles which are (a) self-evidently good, and (b) which do not sit easily with the Conservative party. I suggest the Labour party should set out to make the UK an Honest, Kind and Fair place to live. Then all issues and developing policies can be fitted into the framework.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opende ... -not-take/
If Labour have good policies and the Tories steal them I have no problem with that. I don't buy into this notion that Labour needs to keep their cards close to their chest. Advocate loud enough and influence the Tories into legislating if need be. There are always more policies to advocate in the run up to an election. There is so much to fix.
Starmer isn't electable. He burnt too many bridges with the left of the party. You can't get elected without a base.