Slalled on the line,- Hinckley Point.

The signing venue was ready, the champagne on ice . The Chinese were in town, the French all set to cross the Channel , EDF having finally signed off the deal, and suddenly the bride in this case the new lady in Number 10 gets cold feet and calls the whole thing off,- for now at least.

What happened?

Probably two things.

First the projected building costs and then the very way over market rates charges needed to cover them over succeeding decades may may have given , if not nightmares, the irresistable urge to halt the seemingly unstoppable horses. Whereas the glistening eyed Osborne had been totally smitten by the Chinese apparent financial and technical offerings and on his visits to the country looked very much the innocent abroad, Mrs May is much less impressionable by guards of honour, banquets or anything else. The glistening eye is replaced by a much steelier one.

Secondly Chinese involvement in the (now dated) technology and its control throughout its life may have raised her security antennae. Who could possibly believe, as did other British government purchasers of telecommunications equipment that the whole thing would not come riddled with bugs that could be accessed by the Chinese state if they so desired. The notion that the suppliers are at arms length from the country's security or other political services is naive and stupid. There is no such separation in the way China operates.

So there we are. Despite it being a minute to midnight the lady has seized control of events and crucially the timescale. She will not be bulldozed into anything. A review lasting through till the autumn is entitrely sensible.  A lot of people who had thought they could look forward to long summer holidays without a care in the world are having their illusions shattered. And no she is not another Margaret Thatcher. She is her very own Theresa May and she will do things her way.

Footnote:  The unions have raised a howl of anguish about what is at least a delay (No it is not dithering).is a good sign that the decision to conduct a gross error check is absolutely right.

Junior Doctors ,- What part of "No" is difficult to understand.?

The junior doctor's leader Johann Malawana has appealed that paediatric units should not be included in their total walkouts has fallen on deaf ears.

According to The Times a spokesman for the BMA has said "No junior doctor wants to have to take any action (funny how all unions say that when they are about to take their members out the door) , but they have  already done everything in their power to make their voices heard. By continuing to ignore them the government has left them with no alternative"(also a pretty stock unionspeak  statement).

The fact is the government has listened to them,negotiated, made some concessions (more money) and now says "No more". That's not unreasonable.

The union position seems to be that unless they say "Yes" (more money) , then they haven't listened.

The idea that the parties should always "get around the table" comes from the Harold Wilson beer and sandwiches era so beloved of the union heavies. It meant that whether the cause/claim was reasonable or unreasonable there would always be a deaL No surprise that there were a lot of claims, a lot of strikes and a lot of  ultimately expensive evenings at Number 10. The notion  of a Prime Minister getting involved was absurd. Equally so for  CEOs in the private sector. Once unions can get to the top that's where they and everything will go.  Everyone lower down the tree is disenfranchised and may as well not bother to try to negotiate or impose a settlement lower at a sensible working level.

It seems that Mr Malawana may be discovering how difficult it is to put the genie back in the bottle once it as been encouraged to come out all guns blazing. His committee, presumably a rather unsmiling hardcore of activists is developing a life of its own and in the process running the risk of the so far onside,- one might say inexplicably gullible if Mr Hunt's own PR wasn't poor enough to perhaps excuse it public,-beginning to say they don't like what's going on after all because their children or grannies have suffered problems during all this sanctimonious carryon.

All that apart, the junior doctors' reckless abandonment of their core professionalism risks not just lives but the whole way they are seen for evermore. Can they really afford or do they want to risk perceived trust, integrity and capability just for a few more percentage points more in their already far from impoverished pockets?  Professionalism is under attack from mercenaries all the time. It would be sad to see the doctors led into being just another example of the latter. They will have to make their own minds up though. It's not something the brothers lose much sleep about.

Junior Doctors say new deal is "Unfair, Unsafe". Is it?

"Unfair, Unsafe " are two words parotted and placarded at many of the junior doctor's demos. One might be more inclined to believe them if the simple fact is that if a bit more money is offered these words will magically disappear and the deal be presumably both fair (ie they've got more money) and safe which then by definition can't have been a worry in the first place.

Strange

The trouble with Corbyn.......

... is that sometimes he is just plain right.

He is on the subject of Bomber Dave's desire to join his mates who are already doing a pretty extensive job of reducing Isis held towns in Syria to heaps of rubble. Like Tone snuggling up, hands thrust into waistband of jeans, to George Bush by joining him in the Iraq misadventure, Dave seems to  be driven by a fatal attraction to the glow of being at the top table with the big boys and the German lady. Being in the thick,- and thick it is,-of the action is his way to keep his place there. That's a dose hubris as dangerous as Tone's.

Enough bombs are already being delivered to Syrian territory daily. Isis dig themselves nice secure tunnels so the brunt of the casualties must fall on the unfortunates who just happen to live there and haven't managed to escape. Wrecking infrastructure,homes, businesses, schools , hospitals just adds to the eventual difficulty and cost of eventually rebuilding each one that is destroyed. The future is delayed with each hit. It had always been thus from World War 2 to the first Bush "Shock and Awe" bombs to hit buildings in Baghdad. There is a case for very limited, highly accurate attacks on Isil's ability to function. Taking out oil trucks is fine. Hitting the vaults containing the dollar bills used to pay the extremists would also be fine as would be other razor sharp targets. It's something the RAF Tornadoes are particularly skilled at but are plenty of other people's aircraft already on the case.

However many bombs are dropped, everyone knows that only ground troops can remove Isil from all the strips of territory they control. Again only small scale surgical attacks by special forces and larger ones by modest sized specialist groups can do the job effectively without further massive and counter productive destruction. And yet there is still talk of it needing tens of thousands of troops and good old fashioned tanks. Dave promises two brigades of 10,000 for this kind of work by 2025. Was there a misprint here? Can't the military professionals reshuffle their antiquated structures and start work on them right away?

Back to Comrade Jeremy. He may generally live in a la la land of student demos and protests past when repressive and even murderous dictators were seen as the rightful owners of the masses but in some things he states the blindingly obvious. This is the danger of the man. Given the right combination of circumstances it could, regardless of all other logic and the mayhem it would cause  enable him to push past opposition and win in 2020. One shudders to think of the consequences.

He has already correctly identified the whole current Middle Eastern fiasco on the western bombing and invasion of Iraq. He is correct. Worse, it was totally unnecessary from a western point of view. Saddam Hussein ran a hard line and, for his opponents unpleasant, secular state but he kept the disparate tribes and interests in formation. The invasion wasn't about his human rights abuses, persecution of the Marsh Arabs, Kurds or anyone else he didn't like but about a Bush led obsession about unfinished business from the first Iraq war (Its invasion of Kuwait) when action was actually justified but the victors betrayed their Iraqi opposition supporters when, with victory a certainty they suddenly pulled back leaving these supporters exposed and to their inevitable grisly fates. The weapons of mass destruction accusation was an over hyped and absurd justification. One day maybe son or grandson of Chilcott may actually say so. For saying it's we who started it Corbyn gets volleys of "You can't say that " from many vested interests in the various establishments and even his own Labour Party. Away from the Westminster and media bubble though, many "ordinary people" say he's spot on.

Yesterday he also questioned whether Britain joining in the Syria bomb fest might make Britain less rather than more safe. Dave responded predictably. But think for a moment. So far despite its inevitable and unalterable vulnerability Britain hasn't  experienced any "outrages" since 7/7. If you were Isil what would you do to show that joining in the bombing makes the country less safe? And if there is a big bang or series of bangs here who will be able to say "I told you so. It was obvious"?  It wouldn't only be the country shown as less safe. Dave's judgement will look seriously flawed and many of the 2020  "ordinary people "voters would also be saying "It was obvious". Corbyn wouldn't have to say anything at all.

  That would be very serious for Dave and for Britain. A Corbyn- led real left wing government would be far more dangerous to the country than any terrorists could ever be.

Summer is over........

What passed for a British summer is over. It was a strange one. No long weeks of sun, lots of dark,cold, rainy,days. It just never really got going. OK we won the Ashes but in a peculiar and somehow unsatisfying way which precluded any thoughts of triumphant open top bus parade followed by cricketers behaving badly at Number 10. With the holidays over and schools back this is the real New Year and the slide into autumn and then winter begins. It's enough to make one shiver,- if not already doing so.

Politics was been a largely desert area since the May General Election with two vanquished leaders , Ed and Nick,doing a runner and Nige just doing a quick nip around the block before returning to reclaim UKIP's crown. Nobody seems to quite know or care what the unfortunate Nick did . Ed, after a couple of shorthaul former man the people sorts of breaks, ultimately got as far as far as Australia having abandoned his party at their hour of greatest need of some continuity and stability. He has grown a beard. Maybe the holidaying Ed is about to disappear on a walkabout in the outback where he might meet his political self doing the same thing.

Meanwhile in the smoldering ruin of the Labour Party someone thought it would be a good idea to throw a bit of excitement into the otherwise near dead Labour leadership contest by drafting veteran left winger Jeremy Corbyn into the pot "Just to widen the debate". It did that and barring a miracle the man will now be the next Leader and take the party off to the far, union led, left. The unions and other outposts of the left had never gone away. Always much more organised than any equivalents on the right, they bided their time through the Blair years , felt a bit more perky under Brown and got ready for a takeoever bid under the Ed. They have now launched their very well planned and effective offensive. The moment looks like being theirs. Labour moderates and modernisers can expect to be tidying their shadow ministerial desks as the remnants and replicas of Militant Tendency  (To most barely distinguishable from the Communist Party but possibly less attractive move in. Mr Corbyn is promising to use every possible Parliamentary means to frustrate the democratically elected Conservative government's attempts to do almost anything. As the cargo cult SNP are determined to behave likewise it could be a rough four and a half years unless the Tory right and oddballs behave themselves, something which seems unlikely. Just when the voters are saying the are pretty sick of party pantomimes and would just like to see some cooperation to get things done the mice look like playing. The nightmare scenario is that the Tories somehow stuff things up so badly that they lose the 2020 General Election and in comes Mr Corbyn by default. It might solve the net migration problem but it would not be good for the longer term health of UK Plc.

On the migration score we have are seeing a flood of migrants head to the Mediterranean. The genuine refugees, mainly  from Syria, have mostly entered Europe via Greece while the generally economic migrants from Africa have made the crossing from Libya.

 The EU's programe to rescue those at sea between the Libyan and italian coasts and land them in Europe rather than back in North Africa has meant that the people smugglers selling and logistical jobs have become much easier. Instead of providing seaworthy boats, all they now have to do is push overloaded rubber dinghys out to sea and then send distress calls, or maybe not even those, knowing that most will be picked up. Some drown. The traffickers don't care. No refunds. This was always going to be the result of a "pull through" rather than "return to origin" policy .Only the naive (notably politicians and NGOs in the refugee business,- for that's what it is)- would think otherwise. Europeans generally are confused. They like to talk liberal and hardly dare appear to be reactionary. They speak therefore in moralising tones and with shaking heads and much tutting, about having to do something for these people "who must be desparate". Much of the media routinely use the phrase "Desperate migrants". Many, especially the Syrians, are genuinely that. Some though are not. There is almost no mention of fact that the potential flow of economic migrants from sub Saharan Africa is almost limitless.  Families tend to be large. That means maybe ten people to follow in the wake of every one who is given leave to stay. So as to keep away from the uncomfortable truth that most of the refugees from sub Saharan Africa and non combat zones such as Bangladesh are economic migrants, the media has in the last few days almost exclusively focused on the eastern Med where most are indeed Syrians. Today's tragic picture of a soldier carrying a young drowned boy is being almost relentlessly used to fuel shouts that Europe's borders must be opened. How many have any idea of where that could lead and what it would mean?

In order to develop a fair and coherant policy Europe first has do decide what it really wants to do and be. The conclusions should not come in the form of diktats by Messrs Junker, Merkels, the beaurocrats of Brussels or any other self appointed person or body. The definition of what needs to be done then flows from that rather than a series of disjointed ad hoc emotionally driven responses. Europe and its constituent nations need to understand the dynamics of  the current shambles so that they can clearly identify what needs to be done long term about huge volumes of migrants now being pushed by warfare, misgovernment  or poverty at home and pulled by the attraction of a new life.  They also need to understand that the issue is far far bigger than the short term one of how to deal with the thousands or tens of thousands already in transit. It's about the potential millions or even tens of millions who could follow .Is Europe happy about and ready for the future massive cultural and social changes and for existing majorities to become minorities and ruled accordingly? These might not smack of the democracy or mainly secular foundations they are used to. If it is happy with or even ready to accept these new realities then it can relax and take in all comers.


 Many would reasonably conclude that Europe's failings have destabalised the Middle East . In Africa particularly it has ever since the 1960s squandered billions on aid projects which have achieved absolutely nothing lasting and this nothing is at the root of much we are seeing. While handing out the funds, often with grossly inadequate  monitoring of how the money is spent and turning a blind eye to poor governance, corruption and even the effective rule of law the western world has behaved with almost total disregard of the man or woman in or on the street. Too often they have been left in abject poverty with no prospects while the big men have grown more opulent and oppressive by the day. If all the money poured into  recipients had been spent on building and maintaining infrastructure, developing and training training expertise there would be no reason for anybody to want to leave. Why is Tanzania for example not a glittering tropical state with wonderful schools, hospitals, roads and other infrastructure?

The aim of refugee programes should be to improve conditions in the countries of origin so that they are able to return home to rebuild their homes and lives as soon as possible .That point is becoming lost in the current wave of media emotional outpourings.The issues around economic migrants are very different and needs to be separated from those who really are seeking refuge.

Before the refugee "Crisis" Greece had been enjoying daily headlines about "Grexit-Yes or No?" Would they stay in the EU and Eurozone or not? At least until after the new snap election the answer was a sort of "Yes" between gritted teeth, Other than Mr Junker and other drivers of "the Great Project"  nobody anywhere really seemed to believe it. Maybe even they didn't. The opportunity to regain their freedom from the straitjacket of an essentially northern European currency and constant frowns and lectures from Brussels must be very tempting to the Greek voters, whatever the short term pain.

Across the Atlantic they have as usual been squaring up for another of their all too frequent elections. This time it's the big one, the 2016 Presidential in which the incumbent is barred from standing. Incredibly for the world's most powerful nation (Sorry Mr Putin of the bare chest), there is no sign of a battle of the Titans. Hillary Clinton, for long the assumed winner, is losing ground. Where is the next Democrat big hitter? On the other side the very idea that Donald Trump could be a serious contender is difficult for a foreigner to comprehend. Maybe to many Americans too?  Where is the Republicans giant of a personality and obvious front runner? Not another Bush surely?

Happy New Year/Autumn!

Dave hands an easy one to Jeremy.

For far out left Labour leadership contender Jeremy Corbyn, David Cameron's dissolution honours list looks as dissolute and off the planet as it possibly could be.

What was Dave thinking about on his imaginative holidays in Portugal and Cornwall ( Seems it was a "no" again to Far East, Kenya's Great Migration, or even the USA but perhaps they were never considered as not man of the people places)? Even if he'd knocked up this list of cronies and sponsors and hangers on (of all the former main parties) before he went away, surely anyone with political nous would have woken up in the middle of the night sweating that he was just about to fall into a bear/Tory trap of his own making and do a hasty rewrite and cull. Where were his advisors?

The dreary list adds £1.2 m a year to the bill for running the already absurdly large ( in a former life Dave had said he wanted to reduce it) unelected legislative body which is now becoming a blot of Britain's democratic credentials. It looks more and more like an old mates club and less and less a place where some of the nonsenses which get barely a glance in the Commons can be examined in a less political atmosphere.

The 2020 General Election is there for the Conservatives to lose. One of the ways they snatch defeat is to confirm to voters some of Corbyns shouts and dogwhistles about an inward looking,inbred, corrupt and self serving establishment. Even if Corbyn doesn't win the very old Labour crown for sure whoever does will pick up the same theme on this issue. It's just too good for them to miss. Dave's inept, insensitive and appalling list is a step in that direction.

Why does he keep doing this sort of thing? It's probably down to the reality that his life has always been centered in very refined London and Oxfordshire English circles. Genuine encounters with and experiences of the world inhabited by most people have been relatively few. Sensibly he would have very close to him a few "ordinary people" as Labour likes to call them who could steer him away from cliff edges, but he doesn't appear nearly so comfortable with them. His successor will have to be very decisive in putting these images to rest, ideally starting by slashing House of Lords numbers and cleaning up and de-politicising and de-cronyising further appointments from the start. It has to be done before 2020.

MPs go off on hols and Labour ponders a swerve off the road.

They've gone. The first short term of the new majority government Parliament is over. For those who  survived the election it's been quite a year since their last long break. There was the tedious winter with its everlasting preaching and whinging about how awful things were from the power seeking Messrs Miliband, Cooper, Burnham and others, carping from the LibDems who were meant to be part of Government and the dreadful thought that either or both of those tribes could together form a majority government in the May General Election. Fortunately the pollsters got it all hideously wrong and when the likely result flashed up on the outside of the BBC building seconds after 10pm on the big night there was was a palpable sense of relief, not to mention amazement. Within hours some big names were gone. Ed Balls was toast, his defeat confirming that it really was a bad night. For the new bugs, especially the non House trained SNP horde descending from the north the first two months of their parliamentary careers has been a great learning experience. The seven week gap will allow them to come back with the confidence of not now being new.

Since the big night the Labour Party has in disarray and left as a smouldering ruin, mainly one of denial. The Party needed the steadying hand of the leader to settle them down and start working on the future, first of all figuring out that they had simply been trying to flog an out of date product that people no longer wanted to buy even though they weren't exactly in love with the alternative. Instead their former Dear Leader did a runner. He dropped everything in the lap of the hapless Harriet Harman and flitted off to the Med with his Mrs, who could throw all those measurements for new Number 10 curtains in the bin. They had a couple of holidays. OK he was exhausted and beaten but so was his party. Those Labour MPs who survived or freshly joined Parliament had no such luxury .Above all they needed gathering together and leadership to help them recover from the shock of the night. They didn't get it.

The Tories have thoroughly enjoyed this first session as the new majority government. The absence of hand wringing LibDems holding their ankles has been a wonderful feeling. They know that five years is a short time to get things done so have set off at a good pace. The 2010 coalition failed to do that as did Tony Blair in 1997. Blair wasted his first term and threw away his potential legacy because he thought he had all the time in the world.  Early in his second term he was taken over by Iraq and adulation for George Bush. Hubris was in the driving seat and out of the window went all the visions of New Labour party and public sector reform. That was it .Any dreams of being the great reformer were over.

After May 10th Labour needed  to steady themselves, follow their former leader on holiday , dust themselves down and take stock of what had happened. After a summer pause there should have been a thorough review of policy and then decisions on whether they wanted to satisfy the existing small core party and probably never see power again or return to the election winning stance of New Labour. That hasn't happened and it's become a gory process. The leadership cart has been put before the policy horse. There is now a long process involving three essentially left candidates leaning towards the past and one forward looking one who is branded (dirty word)) Tory or ,even worse, Blairite.

Several dynamics are at work here.

First the dark socialist real heart of the core Labour Party is exposed. New Labour was an aberration and never won the hearts and minds of the old lags or the new idealistic protest movement anti austerity etc. young. Both these groups have watched Quantative Easing and, like Mr Corbyn concluded that it proves you can just print more new banknotes and all economic problems are solved,  Many accepted New Labour as a way of gaining power but they never believed in it. They saw it as a means to an end but not one they could ever commit to. And as for the cave dwelling unions.....

Second it would be unwise to welcome Mr Corbyn as leader on the basis that he would keep Labour out of power for a decade or more. If the Conservative Government were to seriously come off the tracks by its policies not working over the next 5 years then Labour could get in by default in 2020 whatever its programme and whoever its leader. Corbyn, although speaking left wing nonsense much of the time, has one big plus over most of the leading current Labour and Conservative politicians. He speaks English rather than other world Politician. That in itself will get quite a stack of votes, as , counter to recent fashion, will be the fact that he's older. Wiser no ,but attractive to a receptive revolutionary audience with his thirsting for nationalisation, love of socialist comrades and causes around the world, and belief in higher taxes on and general emasculation of the better off.

If Mr Corbyn does win it is possible that the Blairites may break away either into a separate David Owen style Democratic Socialist Party or simply join up with the LibDems who would warmly welcome any hand to to bring them back from the dead.

There are many days and nights to go before we know how this contest will play out. Finding out what it means will take longer but we can expect a lot of noise from the left, especially now it has been reinforced in the Commons by the much more eloquent and vociferous cargo cult Scottish Nationalists.