told you he wouldn't answer.
Thanks for clearing things up Duckman.
Thm I owe you an apology I should have read on from where I previously left off before posting. Sorry.
Meantime Thm I believe your question about 16-17 year olds has been answered yet I see no links about the 18 ships.
Or did BBC Scotland actually get this one right
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-37871888
Edit
told you he wouldn't answer.
How do you know?
😀
No need Gordi.
(pleased to say that D and I have had more pleasant comments elsewhere 🙂 )
Aracer 😀 Sometimes you wished that people were good to their word!! 😉
Gordi, will do the link, sorry. Just watching Parks and MTB and physical geography - Cwm Idwal now where I spent lots of my school days.
Crikey, Scotland not independent yet? 😆
Sturgeon really needs to up her efforts with this one agenda party. Yes?
Scotland will only gain independence when the world is at peace ... long long time into the future when all our brains have developed a bit better.
The announcement confirms claims that orders on the Clyde have now increased over what was previously promised with the Clyde building 5 Offshore Patrol vessels, 8 Type 26 Frigates and “at least” 5 Type 31 Frigates. [b]That’s 18 ships compared to the 13 originally promised.[/b]Showing further commitment to the Type 26 programme, the Defence Secretary also announced a £100 million contract with MBDA to deliver the Sea Ceptor self-defence missile system for the ship.
UK Defence Journal 4 November 2014
What do you do for a living THM?
Why even ask, any pigeon holed "right winger" is ridiculed and insulted anyway ?
I owe you an apology as well THM, that was a pretty unpleasant post I made.
Me too (although I enjoyed the line about reading 😉 it was really only a joke,if a cheeky one,!)
As well that ends well
Why even ask, any pigeon holed "right winger" is ridiculed and insulted anyway ?
Because he commented on other posters professions and I wondered which profession he himself represents poorly.
😀
15 hundred
Well I read your quotes from the 2014 article and this,
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/where-will-type-31-frigate-built/
Which leads me to agree with Douglas Fraser
Sorry Gordi, my typo erro. My quote is from [b]4 Nov 2016[/b] so I stand by my comments too
I was watching TV while posting earlier link!
So still typical SNP BS designed to fool the gullible or those who are too trusting of those who are supposed to represent THEM
Ah Yes BBC Scotland that well known snp mouthpiece
Possibly one of the only positives of a Trump win tomorrow would be watching the SNP suck up to him as POUS, an iS couldn't join NATO without US backing 😉
Come on jambalaya you're a secret Trumper
Both sides can spin it.
13 frigates! Westy ahead
Actually 8. SNP and the unions pull one back
More wee ones! Westminster score again.
But not if you leave! Late equaliser.
In these times with the amount of subbied work to the Pacific, I am delighted that the industry that built a third of all tonnage on the ocean before WW1 is safe for approx 20 years. ( surely can't take 20 years to build 8 ships?) Both sides have used the shipbuilding/ defence industry as a football. IMO
Not really. The only deviation has been a defecne review in the middle of the process. Other than that Scotland is getting more than was promised which should be good news not a cause for Nats scoring their usual own goals. In what way would fewer ships be a goal for the unions??? That seems a particular twist of logic.
Bottom line, Scotland has won the business. Good news or bad? There is no need to spin anything
#SDBMB
It allowed the Unions to shout at the current government about broken promises, last paragraph. Which in all fairness isn't a exclusively Scottish trait.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-37861162
jambalaya - Member
Possibly one of the only positives of a Trump win tomorrow would be watching the SNP suck up to him as POUS, an iS couldn't join NATO without US backing
Aye, right.
NATO couldn't possibly see any benefit on having a nation with a huge North Atlantic coastline that commands half the entrance to the North Sea as a member. Perhaps the Russians could see the benefit of a naval base here... 🙂
Not that It bothers me either way. There's pluses and minuses. (Well not the Russians 🙂 )
As for the frigates, has anything concrete been signed? Something irrevocable? Because until it has been, I'll regard this as just an early "vow" to dangle in front of the voters prior to the next referendum. And we all know how good those vows are.
No contracts have been signed yet. Its just a promise
My understanding is that the T26 order has been confirmed plus the bonus patrol vessels "to be signed shortly."
It's v easy to overlook that there was a Defence Review in the middle of all of this that reviewed what was required and that at the moment, the only thing that we now is that Scottish yards have had good news for jobs etc.
Very odd that this needs to be twisted at all but duckman, the Union rep seemed pretty upbeat in your link. So he should be, good news.
Except of course for those who oppose the level of defence spending and claim that this is a problem for Scotland and should be reduced -[s] fortunately that camp is quiet at the moment 😉 a welcome development too[/s] edit: as you were
No contracts have been signed yet. Its just a promise
The thing about defence procurement is that you usually know what is coming well before the contracts are signed. There may be no contractual obligation on either party yet, but both know what they are planning.
The guys I know from Naval Ships seem pretty chuffed at the moment, I don't get why we are talking both Scotland and MoD down.
...because the ends justify the means. There is nothing new here tactically. Same old, same old.
Say after me, "The positive outlook for Shipbuilding on the Clyde is another strong reason why Scotland should vote for independence." Apparently, after the 249rd repetition, you might start to believe it.
grumpysculler - Member
...The guys I know from Naval Ships seem pretty chuffed at the moment, I don't get why we are talking both Scotland and MoD down.
We're not talking them down.
We're just treating a promise from Westminster as being worth the paper it's written on. And unless it is set in stone, Westminster is quite capable of having another review....
It's good news - if it really happens.
teamhurtmore - Member
...Say after me, "The positive outlook for Shipbuilding on the Clyde is another strong reason why Scotland should vote for independence." Apparently, after the 249rd repetition, you might start to believe it.
It is. You do realise Scotland will need a Navy, and ships will have to be built, so it's fairly obvious where that would happen. A win either way.
epicyclo - Member
You do realise Scotland will need a Navy, and ships will have to be built
I'm struggling to find a good reason why we need a navy? To scare off those pesky spanish fishermen?
As for royal navy orders, ho hum, the clyde should develop itself in to a civilian ship building industry, if it can't do that it doesn't deserve to exist.
As for royal navy orders, ho hum, the clyde should develop itself in to a civilian ship building industry, if it can't do that it doesn't deserve to exist.
Sod shipbuilding;
The big money maker is going to be the reintroduction of Slavery post Brexit; Glasgow has the skill, expertise and history to be at the forefront of that, as long as we can see off Bristol and Liverpool.
We're just treating a promise from Westminster as being worth the paper it's written on. And unless it is set in stone, Westminster is quite capable of having another review....
True, and so it should. Totally proper that Defence Spending should be subject to review and scrutiny - not something to be considered lightly, We have had one since then and the results are out. Plus, if the Scottish Government and a minority of its people are agitating for independence, the Government should maintain an appropriate level of flexibility in terms of future procurement. Basic common sense.
You do realise Scotland will need a Navy, and ships will have to be built, so it's fairly obvious where that would happen.
Norway?
The shipyards have always had the problem of keeping enough work to maintain the workforce, and they have a reasonable (if fractious at times) relationship with MoD to make that happen. If you cannot sustain the workforce full time then the yard would close.
Where will an independent Scotland find the money to keep the same volume of orders going as the UK does? BAE Systems have not been able to develop much of an export business - some of the competition has too much advantage over them. So are you relying on BAE being able to do something it has never been able to do so before?
BAE Systems cannot afford the investment that would be needed upfront to make it commercially viable and for the government to provide it would be illegal state support.
That's the same reason only warships are built there and not support vessels - the British/Scottish shipyards are quite expensive and so it is a strategic decision to build ships domestically and not an economic one.
They could look for orders from Europe - wee nippy could start by lobbying the Swiss Navy
They could look for orders from Europe - wee nippy could start by lobbying the Swiss Navy
I suppose that investment from the Chinese is out then?
😉
I suppose that investment from the Chinese is out then?
Yeah, funnily enough all that carping from the Unionist politicians and parties gave them cold feet. They moaned so much when the deal was proposed that they ruined it, and now they're moaning that the deal was ruined.
Can't please some people.
all that carping from the Unionist politicians and parties gave them cold feet.
Ah, Quelle Surprise - “it wisnae me, a big boy did it and ran away”.
Ah, Quelle Surprise - “it wisnae me, a big boy did it and ran away”.
[i]the Chinese pulled the plug in August due to the outcry, with a senior insider close to the talks saying the fallout was received "very badly" in the Far East[/i]
I understand the logic. If you want to keep Scotland in the Union, you need to keep pretending that we can't survive on our own. So of course you have to complain about everything the Scottish government does - even if that leads to actually damaging Scotland's prospects. Because the result is what matters, keep Scots convinced that we need English money to survive.
Or maybe they pulled the plug because Nicola started harping on about another indyref?
Or maybe they pulled the plug because Nicola started harping on about another indyref?
Find me a quote that says that - all the newspaper reports say it was the fallout from the carping that did it.
The Chinese aren't daft - do you really think they met with the leader of the Scottish National Party and only realised later that she might be keen on Scottish independence?
Yeah, funnily enough all that carping from the Unionist politicians and parties gave them cold feet.
Too bloody right IMHO. We should never have done that deal and the SNP know that otherwise they wouldn't have tried to keep it quiet.
If it had been subject to proper parliamentary scrutiny at the time, perhaps something could have been done. But trying to hide it created a ticking bomb of political reaction.
"All that carping" is called democracy - not something the chinese would know about, mind you. What you are suggesting is akin to saying all opposition MPs (including SNP ones) should keep their mouths shut and leave the government alone to do what it wants.
And now the Scottish Government is sticking it's nose into a court case to try and look good.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-37909299
I hope the government loses the appeal, but I also think the SNP should butt out. Jumping on a bandwagon does them no credit and within the scope of the executive vs parliament argument Scotland has no particular status. If the appeal loses, I'm sure the SNP will be quick to claim credit despite minimal participation.
I know, imagine the SNP sticking its noses into a situation that they should just "butt out" from, I mean they aren't even representing the will of the Scottish people by opposing Brexit... Oh wait...
If you want to keep Scotland in the Union, you need to keep pretending that we can't survive on our own. So of course you have to complain about everything the Scottish government does - even if that leads to actually damaging Scotland's prospects. Because the result is what matters, keep Scots convinced that we need English money to survive.
Sorry ben but that is hogwash IMO - of course Scotland can survive on its own. That is not the question. Rather the question is, or at least should be, under what structure are the interests of the Scottish (and British) people best served. That is equally clear. [end of thread 😉 ]
Ben I for one have said many times Scotland would of course survive outside of the UK
Duckman the SNP have 59 (?) MPs at Westminster where they can and do represent the interests of the Scottish people.
