What is being conveniently overlooked in all of this is that the Government's defence spending commitments have been known for a considerable period of time. There has been no sudden reversal of policy. The commitment remains to increase defence spending to 3.3% of GDP by 2027, rising further to 3.5% thereafter.
The reality is that there is no magic money tree. Any government has to balance defence, public services, infrastructure, welfare and economic growth whilst remaining within its fiscal rules. This Government was elected on a manifesto that promised both national renewal and financial responsibility. Those obligations do not disappear simply because some ministers demand more money for their own department.
The timing of these resignations therefore raises legitimate political questions. Both individuals have long been associated with alternative leadership camps. Whether they wish to admit it or not, the perception created is that this is as much about internal Labour politics as it is about defence spending.
If, as has been suggested, ministers were told that anyone unable to support the Prime Minister's leadership should make their position clear, then resigning was the correct course of action. No Prime Minister can govern effectively whilst members of the Government are actively positioning themselves behind rival candidates.
Sir Keir Starmer has appointed a new Defence Secretary and the Ministry of Defence must now get on with the job. The focus should be on delivering the defence investment plan, strengthening Britain's armed forces and ensuring the country is prepared for the challenges ahead.
Personally, I suspect that if the Government made a clear and transparent case that additional revenue was required specifically for national defence, many people would be willing to support it. The defence of the nation is one of the first responsibilities of government.
At the same time, welfare reform cannot be avoided. A welfare system should provide support for those who genuinely need it, but it cannot become an unlimited commitment with no regard for affordability. Every pound spent must ultimately be paid for by taxpayers, and governments have a duty to ensure that public money is used responsibly and sustainably.
How is quitting good for the country? How is resigning good for the Labour party. How is changing PMs every 2 years good for the country? How is installing a man, who has been out of Parliament for years, as the new PM good for the country?
None of this makes sense.
A good day for investigative journalism! Congrats to @RepublikMagazin who've just won a legal case against Palantir.
Republik found Swiss officials repeatedly rejected Palantir's sales pitches..& Palantir sued.
Have a good weekend @MayorofLondon! (Latest recipient of Palantir legal threats)
Applebaum: What binds Russia, China, Iran and North Korea is not religion or ideology.
China is communist, Russia nationalist, Iran theocratic. What binds them is fear of liberal language: rights, rule of law, separation of powers and independent courts. 1/
"Treating COVID as a transient cold while the biology keeps pointing at durable, mechanistic, multi organ dysfunction is a choice - and at population scale, the cost of not preventing infections lands on real bodies."
➡️LC: persistent mitochondrial dysfunction, suppressed oxidative phosphorylation, and immune dysregulation.
Excellent study explanation 🧵👇
Thanks @ZdenekVrozina 👏
This is a damning indictment of our UK media.
Trevor Philips cosies up to Reform UK and the Tories. CBS have deemed him a worthy hire because of this.
In case you don't know, CBS is owned by David Ellison, long term Trump buddy that paid him $16M to settle a spurious lawsuit.
Bari Weiss was installed and immediately ruined 60 Minutes by imposing Trump positive bias to this bastion of American news.
She is very much at the vanguard of the culture wars, so Trevor Philips should fit in well.
I’ve just listened to the fuller version of Keir Starmer’s interview with Chris Mason. Every day I’m grateful that he’s our Prime Minister, there’s currently nobody in the Labour Party that comes close. There’s a maturity and seriousness that’s lacking in almost everyone else.
Bev from GB News doesn’t believe there were riots in Belfast.
Bev doesn’t believe anyone was hurt in Belfast.
Bev believes houses being set alight isn’t dramatic.
@beverleyturner is a propagandist who’s contributed to this climate of hate.
@beverleyturner@MatthewStadlen These were riots.
You've effectively condoned this behaviour.
Your denial makes everything worse because if there's a next time, the rioters will say "this isn't a riot" to excuse extreme violence & intimidation.
19 people now arrested.
Time to admit you were wrong and apologise.
The fact that adult men groom children is abhorrent and a stain on the soul of humanity.
However, this has been turned into a racist attack despite the fact that the biggest threat to children comes from white British men (likewise the risk to women).
Rommel gave them one chance to surrender. They said no.
3,600 Free French soldiers held a desert fortress called Bir Hakeim against the full weight of Rommel's Afrika Korps for 16 days. They were surrounded, outnumbered, and running out of everything.
On the night of June 10-11, with the position finally collapsing, General Koenig ordered a breakout into the open desert in total darkness.
The Germans discovered the movement. The retreat became a brutal close-quarters fight. Men broke into small groups. Some crawled for miles. Most of them made it out.
What they bought with those 16 days: enough time for the British Eighth Army to withdraw to El Alamein, where the tide of the entire North African war would eventually turn.
Rommel later said the Free French fought magnificently. It meant something, coming from him.
France had been occupied for two years. These men had no country. They held anyway.
What fresh hell is this? The Spectator goes all in on Palantir, calling its critics victims of "Palantir Derangement Syndrome". What the magazine won't say:
🔺Spectator is owned by Paul Marshall, co-founder of Marshall Wace - which holds some 2.3 million shares worth $380m in... Palantir.
🔺Michael Gibson, who wrote this pro-Palantir screed for The Spectator, co-ran the Thiel Fellowship with Palantir owner Peter Thiel from 2010 to 2015. Thiel then backed Gibson's 1517 fund.
🔺Palantir's primary owner, Peter Thiel, was a happy business partner with convicted serial child rapist Jeffrey Epstein - Epstein's other business partner, former Israeli PM Ehud Barak, described Thiel and Epstein as "co-owners" of their venture fund. Thiel's investment w/Epstein contributed to the single largest asset in Epstein's estate.
🔺We don't need a democracy hating giant surveillance-defence contractor owned by Epstein's business partner and alleged fund "co-owner" to infiltrate the NHS. Estonia, Denmark, and Israel manage complex national electronic health records without reliance on private defence platforms.
🔺There is a war on for your mind being waged by investors and media owners who have benefited directly from Peter Thiel and Palantir.
Maybe Britain doesn't need friends and business partners of child rapists, nor people who would profit from them, running our health and security systems? Who is really deranged here? 👀
This was tweeted by @GBNEWS presenter @Alexarmstrong.
He deleted it. He’ll face no consequences.
The most extreme, unhinged opinions are being mainstreamed.
If that carries on, this country will fall into the abyss
@beverleyturner I never posted it as some kind of victory (I mean hardly! Its literally scathing about me)
I posted it to show people what a deluded, arrogant and condescending woman you are.
Today, the European Union took a major step forward.
All Member States agreed to open the first accession negotiations cluster with Ukraine and Moldova.
At the first Intergovernmental Conference on Monday, we will open the cluster on fundamentals; the backbone of the accession process.
It covers the core values and principles on which the EU is built, from the rule of law to strong democratic institutions.
This is a recognition of the determination, courage and hard work shown by both countries in advancing reforms, even in the face of immense challenges.
And a signal that the EU’s offer of peace, stability and opportunity is unmatchable.
Enlargement is a strategic choice.
By bringing our nations closer together, we strengthen peace, security and prosperity across our continent.
In a world marked by growing uncertainty, a larger European Union is in our common interest.
Enlargement remains one of the EU’s greatest success stories and our best investment in our shared future.