Tuesday, 9 February 2016

Emily in La La Land

From the Telegraph we hear :-

Trident renewal: Labour MPs tear into Jeremy Corbyn's defence tsar Emily Thornberry as being in 'La La Land'
Emily Thornberry, shadow defence secretary, openly heckled by Labour MPs following suggestion that nuclear deterrent could be updated, not replaced.

La La Land indeed. It's a bit rich coming from Labour MPs, but I wonder what Emily has in mind for the update? A lick of paint or something more substantial? 

I have dark and unworthy suspicion that Emily has no idea what she means, particularly if it involves missile technology, nuclear physics, submarine technology, military strategy or anything else beyond fluffy words. Although she may have been referring to Jeremy's idea about a nuclear free nuclear deterrent


Edward Spalton said...

In the days of the Bookbinder regime in Derbyshire, County Council letterheads and literature carried the slogan " Derbyshire County Council supports nuclear free zones" .

When I had to write to them, I endorsed our business letterhead " Spalton Nutrition supports peace through superior fire power".

Well - it made me feel a bit better as I observed the choke-hold of Politicsl Correctness, ruthlessly enforced down to infants' school level.

I was a co-opted school governor at the time

wiggiatlarge said...

I am pretty sure you are right Emily hasn't a clue about that subject or anything else.
She should be leading Corbyns attack on the obesity crisis, I'm sure a triumvirate of Emily the Abbopotamus and Tom Watson could make real progress in that area, something they do know something about.

DCBain said...

ES wrote : "I was a co-opted school governor at the time"

I, too, have been a member of the select group browbeaten into rubber-stamping the head teacher's decisions.

Anonymous said...

What Emily has not twigged (publicly) is that nice new submarines mean jobs in far flung corners of the realm, political support from old duffers in Whitehall and political and 'intelligence' support from The Cousins. Of course the submarines are a waste of money but the cash is spread over a long time and wasting money and effort is what government is all about.

After all, if we spent more on education say, we would have thousands of Eng Lit and Golf Studies grads all expecting a job on the council and a house too, the extra engineers we create would be wanting factories all over the place - too horrible to contemplate. No, spend the cash on nukes, its quite safe, a British govt will never press the button - not until it no longer matters.

A K Haart said...

Edward - I remember the Bookbinder regime only too well, although I was never quite sure what nuclear free zones were supposed to be. Maybe Rolls Royce on Raynesway had some idea.

Wiggia - the Abbopotamus, I like it... the word that is, not the real thing.

DCB - not something I've ever been involved in fortunately. Were you sent to stand in the corner if you got anything wrong?

Roger - yes, there are more worthwhile and less divisive battles one could choose but Corbyn seems to be fixated on the issue. Doesn't bode well for him - at least I hope it doesn't.

DCBain said...

"Were you sent to stand in the corner if you got anything wrong?"

No, it was more subtle than that. You always got it right because everything was neatly slanted towards a state of no options but what the head wants.