Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Sheilbh]

How much is the license fee? Over here it's 138 € per annum (10 % more if you don't pay it on time), and it's coupled to the habitation/housing tax so much harder to dodge.

I never paid it in Germany though by the end it was starting to get difficult to avoid it.

I think it's about £160 here. I pay monthly and I think it's around £12-13 per month.

It's not linked to any tax. It's a separate standalone thing, a bit like a utilities bill.

[Tamas]

Patel confirms military to be asked to help tackle Channel small boat crossings
In the Commons Priti Patel, the home secretary, has just confirmed that the Home Office has commissioned the Ministry of Defence as a "crucial operational partner" to protect the Channel against illegal immigration.

This is such a great success of a government that we have had the military help in hospitals and drive fuel trucks, and now they'll be gunning down inflatable boats crossing the Channel. I guess it's a small price to pay to try and save Johnson's skin and failing that reinforce Patel's leadership bid. Or at the very least help her keep her job when the new PM reshuffles. They can't be seen siding against those sending the military against desperate unarmed civilians.

I reckon next harvest season we'll have the military picking strawberries as well, soon followed by washing cars.

[Richard Hakluyt]

These military deployments merely remind me of how small our armed forces are nowadays.

[Sheilbh]

This is such a great success of a government that we have had the military help in hospitals and drive fuel trucks, and now they'll be gunning down inflatable boats crossing the Channel. I guess it's a small price to pay to try and save Johnson's skin and failing that reinforce Patel's leadership bid. Or at the very least help her keep her job when the new PM reshuffles. They can't be seen siding against those sending the military against desperate unarmed civilians.

I reckon next harvest season we'll have the military picking strawberries as well, soon followed by washing cars.

I think this is about the seventh time Patel has announced this. It hasn't happened, it's not going to happen and, if you spend the entire weekend briefing multiple papers that you're going to announce this to distract from the ongoing scandal, it might not distract people

I think there's a lot to Stephen Bush's quick-take on this:

Boris Johnson's desperate policy blitz won't help the Tories
The Prime Minister is picking an unpopular battle with the BBC at a time when he is already perilously weak.
By Stephen Bush

Can Boris Johnson save his premiership this week? Downing Street certainly hopes so: a sweeping announcement about the future of the BBC here, a commitment to put the military in charge of policing Channel crossings there, rounded off with a healthy dose of "look, Keir Starmer had a beer and some food in his office!" Will it work?

To take the last of that list first: I've been working late in an office, ordered a takeaway, stopped to eat it with colleagues, and then returned to work, and I've been at parties where I got drunk enough to break a child's swing. The two events aren't comparable and it seems politically risky for the government to conflate the two, given that the former is something that plenty of people working in offices for long hours during lockdown did do, and the latter isn't.

The policy announcements look riskier still. The biggest reason why Priti Patel has been one of Boris Johnson's biggest defenders in recent weeks is because her stock among the Tory parliamentary party is currently low. Why? Because the British government has been unable to stop people making the treacherous passage across the Channel to the United Kingdom. Seeking to distract voters from their anger over partygate by reminding them they are also grumpy about the Channel crossings is a strategy without an obvious upside.

Look at the detail of what the government is proposing on Channel crossings and it is essentially the same failed approach of the recent past: offshore processing (which the government has consistently been unable to persuade other countries to do) and noisy but patchy enforcement (whether you are getting the military or someone else to do it, you are still trying to police the busiest shipping lane in the world). Is "look, we're not just prone to illicit parties – we're also unable to deliver policy effectively" the restorative tonic a struggling government needs? Is risking further criticism from a host of national treasures – your David Attenboroughs, your BBC radio hosts – and a bunch of other BBC figures who people think of as "non-political" a battle that will revitalise the government – or is it simply another front to fight on when Boris Johnson is already perilously weak?

I also thought John McTernan's take on what might work was interesting and absolutely right - he was an adviser to Blair, Scottish Labour and then Julia Gillard so from the Labour tradition. But I think this is the type of thing that would help seize the agenda - the same old announcements, plus some new announcements (but no new funding) is incredibly weak:

John McTernan
@johnmcternan
Is there a route through this for No 10? A narrow path, to borrow David Plouffe's image, can be imagined. Not least because, as many have observed, No 10 is very powerful. But it's not a Operation Red Meat that's needed, but an Operation Red Wall.
Successful political realignment means stealing your opponent's clothes as well their voters. So steal Labour's best & most popular ideas. A windfall tax on energy companies. Use it to restore the UC cut. So many seats where there are more UC losers than the Tory majority.
Suspend the NI hike this year. But keep the spending for NHS & social care. Rishi can put it on the "never never". And have a BIG NHS PLAN. Don't wait till you've cut the waiting to sell the spending. Tackle the other crisis everyone knows about - housing. Build 1m council houses
This has the benefit of flushing out the Chancellor. He either backs you buying votes Or makes his own offer clear - which is spending cuts for the Red Wall. Not so much the "never never" as "Never!"
Throw money at a national bus strategy - cut fares and increase services. Again, what's the use of public spending if it doesn't buy public support. Restore defence spending to increase army numbers. Spend, spend, spend. Burn up the road and remind backbenchers voters hate cuts.
Meanwhile, let the questions about the contents of Sue Gray's report multiply. The more complicated it gets, the harder for the public to identify a single charge.  But prepare for a Mea Culpa, indeed a Mea Maxima Culpa. Make the most self abasing apology ever seen in the House.
Admit you let down the public, the country, your office, yourself. Don't say Move On, but just Keep Moving. The strength of your hand is not your cards but your dithering (Tory) enemies. Let them wait till the time is right, while you shape the future and the terrain to fight on.
PS Don't blame the staff. The best leaders take responsibility for errors and give credit for success to their teams.

[Sheilbh]

And the BBC announcement's happening - all that's actually happening is the licence fee is frozen at £159 until 2024, it will then rise with inflation and there'll be a review (announced at a later date) into future funding models ahead of the 2027 charter renewal. They're also going to allow the BBC the power to borrow to grow its commercial arm - which was something the Director General's been pushing for.

So not the imminent threat to the BBC's existence that was being briefed/reported. Another pretty weak announcement that had been pre-briefed as a distraction that probably won't distract.

[Tamas]

So not the imminent threat to the BBC's existence that was being briefed/reported. Another pretty weak announcement that had been pre-briefed as a distraction that probably won't distract.

Almost as if a cabinet assembled on the basis that none of them can look more PM material than Boris Johnson might actually be pretty incompetent.

[Josquius]

I'm not sure that's a good thing though. Labour pioneered parachuting people in with all-women shortlists and have considered all-BAME shortlists (I think it's difficult because of the Equality Act). And not always to increase diversity, as with the Tories, sometimes just to get aides a seat - I'm not sure Ed Miliband has an abiding connection to Doncaster or Peter Mandelson to Hartlepool (though he still talks about Hartlepool a surprising amount).

Oh sure, I'm not going to claim Labour don't parachute candidates in to safe seats too (though that they did it first?).
Though they tend not to do it in a "Prove we're not racist" parachute minority people in way.

But also I think if there's concerns about, say, Labour being too London focused I'm not sure it's great that a big chunk of minority MPs represent London seats - or that minority MPs basically get to run in a certain type of seat (more diverse, probably younger etc). I think the A-list is possibly Cameron's lasting achievement in many ways - he identified that the Tories didn't look like Britain and they fixed it.

I dunno, the majority of the UK's black people are in London so it wouldn't be too weird if the bulk of our black MPs would be there too.
Though I don't think that's the case overall. I can think of a bunch of minority MPs representing other diverse cities. It does make sense that they'd be doing this rather than say representing a super white rural place with virtually zero history of immigration unless they themselves were actually from there.

Basically the way the tories does it, dropping Asians into whitesville, is a bit transparently to fix their numbers. Labour's minority MPs tend to actually represent areas with large minorities or who come from those areas.

Though down the line who knows. Khan and Lammy, Lammy, and Nandy are potentials for the future.

That's putting a lot of pressure on Lammy
[/quote]

I do like him quite a lot.
So much so there has to be something horrible beneath the surface. :p

[Sheilbh]

Oh sure, I'm not going to claim Labour don't parachute candidates in to safe seats too (though that they did it first?).
Though they tend not to do it in a "Prove we're not racist" parachute minority people in way.

I think parachuting in big name/loyalist candidates is probably a thing that's always existed. But all women shortlists were a Labour thing in 1997, way before the A list and the route from Special Adviser to MP seems to have been strongest then: the Milibands, Ed Balls, James Purnell, Douglas Alexander, Andy Burnham etc.

I think by the Brown government a third of cabinet had gone through that route of special adviser, MP (in a safe seat), immediately promoted to cabinet/minister.

I dunno, the majority of the UK's black people are in London so it wouldn't be too weird if the bulk of our black MPs would be there too.
Though I don't think that's the case overall. I can think of a bunch of minority MPs representing other diverse cities. It does make sense that they'd be doing this rather than say representing a super white rural place with virtually zero history of immigration unless they themselves were actually from there.

Yeah that's true - there's Birmingham, Manchester, Bradford etc. But I don't think that's a requirement on other Labour high-fliers who are parachuted into seats. Maybe it isn't an issue but my thought is that Miliband gets Doncaster and Mandelson gets Hartlepool - there'll be a scramble for Chorley when the Speaker retires because it's one of the safest Labour seats in the country. And I'm not clear that Labour would necessarily consider whether they should try to use that safe seat to boost their overall diversity in the way the Tories have.

Basically the way the tories does it, dropping Asians into whitesville, is a bit transparently to fix their numbers. Labour's minority MPs tend to actually represent areas with large minorities or who come from those areas.

Also black politicians like Kwarteng, Cleverley, Badenoch or (though he's doing less well) Afriyie.

But isn't that what they should do? Historically the Tories have not had any support in minority communities. They've built that support slowly (so the last few elections are their best ever and there's growing signs that basically British Indian voters are breaking for the parties in roughly the same way as white voters - and early signs British Africans may be going the same way).

Ultimately it's about how you use safe seats (for the Tories they are likely to be very white, for Labour it's more mixed) - Labour has tended to use them to parachute in advisers, political loyalists or people backed by powerful union bosses and consciously seeking minority candidates is primarily a thing for "minority seats"; the Tories, since Cameron, have used them to consciously increase the diversity of Tory MPs (weirdly there's no ideological element to this - the A list included lots of people who went to be very difficult for Cameron).

I think Cameron's use of those seats was good, made the parliamentary party more diverse which means they're possibly a bit more alive to what issues matter and what messaging works/doesn't than when there were only two non-white MPs in 2010 - and it's possibly helped contribute to the Tories winning more votes from minority communities.

[crazy canuck]

And the BBC announcement's happening - all that's actually happening is the licence fee is frozen at £159 until 2024, it will then rise with inflation and there'll be a review (announced at a later date) into future funding models ahead of the 2027 charter renewal. They're also going to allow the BBC the power to borrow to grow its commercial arm - which was something the Director General's been pushing for.

So not the imminent threat to the BBC's existence that was being briefed/reported. Another pretty weak announcement that had been pre-briefed as a distraction that probably won't distract.

Maybe, although the UK academics I follow on twitter are all over this.

[Sheilbh]

Maybe, although the UK academics I follow on twitter are all over this.

UK academics in Twitter panicking about a Tory government - but surely not!

Has there been a point in the last eleven years, or any policy announcement when this hasn't been the case?

It's the same as the impending privatisation of the NHS, which has been pending for most of the last 75 years.

[crazy canuck]

Yep, the BBC; stupidity of Brexit; the survival of the NHS and the utter incompetence of Boris dominate my UK twitter feed.

[Tamas]

I guess these would be happening at some point this Spring anyhow but it seems the next step in Operation Save Boris is ending all covid restrictions from March.

[Sheilbh]

I guess these would be happening at some point this Spring anyhow but it seems the next step in Operation Save Boris is ending all covid restrictions from March.

Yeah - and it also looks like omicron has peaked everywhere in the country both from testing and the ONS survey data. Looks like admissions have plateaued too.

I honestly think this is probably it with covid. Basically until the treatments are better and widely available. Israeli studies indicate that a fourth Pfizer booster is ineffective so it'll probably be a course of three doses of the vaccine with an annual winter booster based on what variants are around at any given time (like with flu) with recurrent re-exposure and occasional re-infection that is relatively mild because of vaccinatioin status and, increasingly, treatable. I'm not convinced we'll see any covid restrictions again unless a significantly more lethal variant emerges.

Edit: Unrelated - Cummings posted on his blog about the 20th May party and said the PM lied about it in his apology to parliament and Cummings (and others) will testify to that on oath. Sky now have two other sources confirming Cummings' comments and this seems like it might contradict what Johnson told Sue Gray today

Meanwhile, I think Cummings is basically right here:

Dominic Cummings
@Dominic2306
Tory MPs: every day you delay the inevitable is a day the new PM ISN'T spending *doing stuff to save your seat*.
In 2024 youre asking for 18 yrs & 5th term. V v tough. Promises wont cut it. New PM must have DELIVERED. Tick tock...

And the Sun's political correspondent have discovered that the military to the channel announcement is just a re-hash:

Harry Cole
@MrHarryCole
This 'send in Navy to fix the migrant boats' thing has been ridiculously overspun...

A Whitehall restructuring with epaulets on, basically.

Full details in the paper tomorrow... but "red meat" shaping up to be a wafer thin slice of salami rather than a haunch of venison.

Everything is going very, very well.

[Jacob]

I know there's much more to the man that this, I just don't know about it... but I am really enjoying Dominic Cummings sticking the knife in Boris time and time again. He does it with a certain style and verve, not to mention timing. It's like watching an artist at work.

[Richard Hakluyt]

Long but interesting article about Dominic Cummings :

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jan/14/intoxicating-insidery-and-infuriating-everything-i-learned-about-dominic-cummings-from-his-10-a-month-blog