New Royal Yacht project likely to be scrapped

The personal debt burden is much lower now than it was prior to 2008. The major difference is that peoples incomes have been getting squeezed since the late 90’s. There has been almost no wage inflation adjusted wage growth since 98. That was partly offset by a reduction in interest rates making goods bought via credit more accessible and mortgage payments lower. However the main thing that’s made inflation adjusted wages go down is the rise in house prices fulled by lower interest rates.

The only government’s who are willing to do all those things aren’t Liberal or western. You pretty much described communism. I don’t see health prevention as market lead or government lead, we all know what’s good and bad for us. Just we all at times make the wrong choices. I certainly don’t want government meddling in the internet. I’d sooner have the choice than government impose it upon me. Markets do look medium term most large companies plans extend beyond a government’s 5 year term for instance as investorslive stability. Markets are also much quicker to adapt, governments have a track record of being woefully slow at reacting. Crack downs and control on the grounds if national security tend to also limit choice and freedom of ordinary people. Lastly you need to remember markets don’t have free rain, great example is energy, the market has not been free to invest as it saw fit in the North Sea for at least a decade instead we choose to import oil, largely from autocracies. Another on shore wind is largely blocked by the government, by far the best ROI for renewables is on shore wind. There are some things that need to be looked at water is a good example, I have no choice in my provider so does private ownership make sense, I wouldn’t advocate government ownership but perhaps other models can be looked at.

secur of key national infrastructure is not communist or authoritarian, it’s a fundamental requirement of modern government. It’s not about crack Downs ect. It’s about making sure there are correct levels of things live power generation, transport systems work ect…markets don’t do that complex planning, they just aim to make profits quickly and can only really be left to run in simple supply and demand systems ( which they do very very well). But complex and chaotic systems, like national infrastructure, markets are shit at supporting.

Take public health

I can pretty much guarantee most people really don’t know as much as you think about what is good or bad for them as most of the information the average person access is very much lead by the industries trying to sell them stuff.

Also most damaging behaviour is related to addiction ( sugar being that classic) and people have no idea.

did you know for instance and do you think anyone else knows that the time of day you eat, the order you eat your food in etc, have massive impacts on health and wellbeing. The impact on low cal diet foods on ill health ( low cal diet drinks make you fatter) etc.

you can let the markets ( food and drink ect) lead on the What and when people eat…but then you get a population that needs untold billions in healthcare to manage long term conditions.

in point of fact the nation that most focuses on the market led personal health choice, is the nation that Has a health system that is falling apart due to unmanageable cost (US). If you want to go down that road get ready for the U.K. to be pissing 15% of its GDP into the wind.

Government needs to lead on those areas that cannot ever make a profit but are fundament to the wellbeing of our nation and public health is one of the key ones. It’s not about forcing choice it’s about making sure people have the same level of information on what a good choice is as they are bombarded with trying to get them to make an unwise choice….as well has providing honest evidence bases on what will happen to them if they make the unhealthy choice. Keep eating sugar and carb like you are and you will get diabetes and more than likely have bit cut off you. Don’t treat you gut biome and feed it with 20+ plant based foods and you will end up with increased inflammatory responses, that will impact on every organ on your body.

From a health point of view the population of this country are making poor health choices but then expecting to be looked after…we cannot afford to just let those a happen without making a massive effort to change people’s mind….or we will reap that whirlwind.

Not sure where you get the impression markets are only after quick profits. Most investors are institutions and need regular income to make payments ie pension funds. Take a drugs company as an example, if it takes the portion of profits it puts to RnD and pays it out, investors will flee as the long term value ie earning per share can’t be maintained as there will be no new products. The share price will fall. Investors look at capital growth and profit, the 2 are linked. yes there’s practices like shorting which are not value investing and short term focused and perhaps should be banned. Most large companies have long term plans and reinvested of profits is key to that.

I think the average person understands quite a bit about what’s good and bad for them. But as you say there’s an expectation the NHS will fix them . To some degree we have a broken social contract.

But and this important, they are not that long term and profit is their only driver. Take exon…in the 1980s they had the best research dept in the world looking at the impact of fossil fuel and global warming, partnered to that they had a massive RD working on renewables. But they looked at what would make them the most money over the next few decades and buried all their evidence on global warming and closed down the renewable RD teams…as a final thing they then employed the old Tobacco company teams to obviscate the climate change science, even though they had the conclusions locked away in a vault before anyone else had really picked up on the impacts…there research was released 30 years later and it completely predicted where we would be now, if we did not change our energy usage….they effectively gambles on humanities future to pump oil when they knew the issue.

As for the food industry, they know what their products do, they even know what that their so-called health products are no such thing…but the spend millions to do the same as tobacco and oil, muddy the water, till even health care professionals struggle.

As for most people knowing the evidence base around what is a good choice, As a healthcare professional even I get suckered into the dialogue of the food industry. So the average person really has no idea the interaction between the types of food and choices they make and long term health….quick question what is better…butter, margarine, low fat spreed or olive oil based health spread……

Not that long term. GSK was founded in 1715. Nat West 1727. There’s a long list of companies that have been around hundreds of years and predate both UK political parties.!!!! Yes there’s bad examples and mistakes do get made, Ford famous covered up exploding fuel tanks in the 70s but they understand the demage this does and know it must be addressed. Governments also make mistakes however politicians tend to be more belligerent and wedded to their ideology thus defend it no matter what. Prime example of how government is about to.put energy security at risk is by locating most power generation off shore. We can’t properly protect current off shore infrastructure and we going to increase it many times. Yet they’ve telling us this will provide energy security, so just like those companies you mentioned politicians are also lying to the public.

I would think olive oil but I’m partial to butter,you can’t beat it for taste :).

Well you will be please to know butter is not that bad. The big bad wolf is artificial transfats, these are found most in your traditional margarine, which is essentially heart disease in a tub.

Will the olive type Spreads, it depends on how they are made ( so you have to ask the manufacturer). If they use partial hydrogenation ( adding hydrogen to the vegetable oil) then they are still effectively death in a spread as this creates a ton of trans fats. If they use full hydrogenation that prevents the production of trans fats. But many will use interesterification to improve the texture of the products this creates interesterified fats and as yet we have no idea if they are as harmful as transfats.

What makes it difficult for the U.K. consumers to make a healthy choice is they have no idea which manufacturering process is used…unless you phone and ask the producer…. so you have no idea…..most sane nations have got fed up of food producers killing off the public or cost the state a fortune in social care costs on the buggered and have band artificial transfats In food production ( even the US) But the U.K. in its wisdom still let’s our marg and spread produces destroy the public’s health by allowing artificial transfats in our food.

For reference artificial transfats are a way for manufacturers to extend the shelf life of products…which is what makes them so bad…bacteria do not have the enzymes to effectively break them down…and neither do we ( which is why they end up coating your arteries) so it’s an early death and disability for a better self life.

As for butter, it’s 4% natural transfats, which are not as bad as artificial transfats. So toss the marg, enjoy the butter in moderation and if you want to be supper healthy find an oil spread manufacture That does not use partial hydrogenation or interesterification in its production…..

If you want I can go onto insulin resistance and the western carb obsession or sugar and liver damage, Our destroyed gut biome and the need to eat around 30 plant based products..or the impact of gut health on your mental health, life expectancy and long term conditions.The Damage 24/7 eating culture does to you.basically the entire food industry is built around making products that harm you…then they sell you a diet which is the worst thing to do…when infact what we should be going eating a nice Big bit of meat to build muscle and a plate of veggies and moving a lot.

In reality they only bits of the supermarket that offer healthy food are the fruit and veg section and meats and dairy section ( with the tinned section around beens and pulses). Literally everything else in that supermarket is trying to make you take a bad choice…even the weight watchers section etc.

If it just impacted in the individual that’s fine, but it does not the west is heading towards bankruptcy by ill health, with the US leading the way spending 4 trillion dollars a year ( around £8,000 dollars a year per person). The simple truth is the west must get control of the epidemic of long term conditions or we will simply be swallowed up in ill health…all for the profit of the food industry.

Why is this important and why is health promotion/prevention a nationally important issue:

As an example the U.K. now has just shy of 5 million type 2 diabetics and 13 at risk of getting it, that’s doubled since 2007 and will double again in another 15 years..,at present it cost the U.K. 23.7 billion pounds a year and is estimated to be costing 39 billion a year by 2035….that’s the cost of the nuclear deterrent every year due to the food industry selling shitty food to our population.

As a final thought health Prevention/promotion and public health developed in the main to preserve the ability of a nation to fight and defend itself….The U.K. lead the way as it found it’s fine body of men needed to fight The boar war had become an unhealthy body of individuals crippled by disease and not fit for much at all.

So the question is do you ban the products, give people the information to make a choice, go nanny state or withdraw services….

I agree most people don’t know in as much detail as you’ve posted but in general people do understand processed foods are not good and most foods are processed as you point out.

I’m 100% in favour of educated choice, as why shouldn’t I be allowed to indulge once in a while, otherwise Christmas’s are looking rather dull. We know that moderation is really the key to this not blanket bans. Otherwise stopping manufacturers selling it altogether is akin to putting the whole class in detention because some misbehave.

As discussed companies will change, like Ford, if its called out in the right way. They’re in it for the long hall and they hate their brand being tarnished. Boeing is a more recent example of a company that took its eye off the ball with the 737 and is having to do a lot to install confidence back. Putting it simply most people don’t buy products that they know will kill them. So for food it looks to me as if the messaging needs to get much stronger.

Other alternative are going down the Chinese route of social credit scoring but that’s difficult politically and even technically. Supermarkets use their loyalty programs to understand shopping habits but there’s after the foods left the shop there’s no way to understand who’s consumed it within a house hold. So its a fairly blunt tool, but supermarkets could notify shoppers that there habits are unhealthy. Some may argue they have a duty of care to do so, like banks not pushing loans on those who can’t pay.

Another option is to withdraw the service, this was muted with smoking. Not sure it got anywhere. This obviously puts pressure on healthcare professionals to make a choice and they have more pressing concerns. Or like the airline industry has considered people who have to pay more as they consume more fuel or encroach on others space. This does tend to bring life choices front and central. Sugar tax is one example of this, but in this form the cost is too small and again penalises those who moderate in take.

The media also don’t help, I recently saw a story where the media said a person could only afford to live on process meals. But as most of us know this is rubbish you can put together a far healthier meals from fresh produce at a lower cost than microwave or fast food meals. The media left and right need to challenge not use these sort of headlines to sell stories. Doing so removes responsibility from the individual and preserves an incorrect narrative, its irresponsible.

Certainly 5 year terms and never ending promises by politicians are not helping matters. Health has been used as a political football for too long and its clearly holding us back from making real progress. Perhaps it needs to be taken out of the hands of political parties and instead run by a group of educated and logical individuals who can plan long term, work within parameters and have to explain why things stray beyond those parameters.

The whole issue is very complex, some politicians don’t like, they like a clear binary message for the purpose political capital.

The ex BMA head paints a far worse picture than you, with the NHS consuming UK entire GDP by 2070, of course it’ll be unsustainable way before then.

In regards to what do you do. As you say it needs to be a very mixed approach depending on need, so you need a very wide ranging and complex set of public health policy. But a founding principle should be that its better to manage health problems up stream ( prevention) that down stream ( treatment).

Around what a good public health health protection policy should look like it needs to be layered, from top to bottom, top being the most widespread, bottom being used least

1) very good health education at school, how to take care of yourself, from fitness, good diet, preventing ill health and self care of basic diseases and injuries should be a key part of school curriculum. There is no choice without this basic knowledge.
2) adult education and highlighting good choices through life. As well as making sure new evidence is clearly presented to adults to aid decisions. Again if your not updated your not making a choice.
3) very good evidence base collection, scientific study. This needs to be on producers to evidence their products are safe. With prosecution if evidence is falsified or hiden ( their is a lot of bad science that has historically cause a lot of harm, the tobacco industry is the classic).
4) access to healthcare professionals for advice and guidance when needed, you should be able speak to your GP practice about how to be healthy, not just call when you are sick. ( it’s cheaper to prevent that cure).
5) health monitoring screening, a classic example is prostate cancer, the US screen ( regular finger up the bum) in the U.K. we just wait till you have symptoms and hope your not terminal)
6) very robust controls of advertising that encourages bad behaviour…I have no issue with people Choosing a McDonald’s but I don’t think they should be allowed to spend untold millions on brainwashing people to make bad choices.
7)industries that products do damage health, but are on sale for public choice reasons, should have a specific, health tax….if they make a profit from giving people long term conditions they should pay their way in treating treating them ( this is part of choice, you can make a bad choice, but you don’t have a choice about paying a bit extra to help pay for your future care needs.
8)restrictions: products that are needed or really wanted but need some control, medications and drugs ( tobacco and alcohol ) fall under this group…you don’t want people to buy antibiotics when they feel like it.
9)where a produce or ingredient is evidenced as very harmful and really gains no benfits to the consumer they should be banned from use..transfats are a great example, you don’t choose to eat them and you would not know the difference between a spreed with out without transfats..it’s just for producers convenience, that sort of product should be banned. Where there is a realistic choice and people like to use that product ( alcohol etc) banning is not appropriate but some restrictions may me needed to prevent wider social problems ( smoking in public, drinking in public to excess).

OK your starting to convince me but. A few points. Media neess to be held to account for false or politically motivated headlines. This is in the same category as advertising and is counter the education policy proposed.

Adult education is key, kids get fed by there parents or guardians and kids are influenced by their peers. So one parent making bad choices can impact a number of kids, . Its better to.prioritise teens and adults imo this will by default impact young kid’s. Younger kids if theres budget to do so. There’s a balance here, some schools are forcing fully vegetarian school dinners on kids, more from the climate communism perspective than health as pizza and other unhealthy options are still on the menu. But it shows how agendas quickly remove freedoms.

Interesting you didn’t mention cure? I find it astounding that some research into cures us still carried out largely by charities.

The problem with taxing industry is food manufacturing produces a number of healthy and unhealthy products. It would be challenging to identify what portion of profits is attributed to each product. Yes breweries and distilleries are obvious. So it’s better to tax the products at sale like we do with alcohol, tobacco and sugar.

The other point is to promote the lesser of 2 evils. Whilst not ideal vaping is better than smoking and we have to accept we never solve a problem entirely, humans are complex and consume for different reasons. So have a healthier alternative that may not be perfect should be an option.

On the flip side of taxation providing tax breaks to companies that create alternatives could be a worthwhile investment as the end result is a huge reduction in the tax bill. Trouble is some of these ideas don’t sit well with politicians wedded to their ideologies.

Withdrawal of products doesn’t always work, prohibition in the US basically gave organised crime its biggest cash injection ever and post prohibition they were able to fund ither illicit drugs. People still die today by consuming homemade alcohol in countries where there’s restrictions. Iran has a huge heroin problem as its easier to obtain than alcohol.

To much taxation can also have a similar effect creating a black market. You can end up spend large sums having to police and enforce.

Hi expat

yes it’s all very complicated. Let me go through a couple of things you have said as they are interesting.

1) the media thing is massive and I completely agree with you, people forget media is not neutral or good public health messaging. It’s a product which is sold like any other and overblown untrue sells a lot. There have been media stores that have done untold harm, but they get away with it. A classic example was the reporting around MMR…they took sudo science that was at best a single study needing further review and ran with it creating decades of harm and increased measles cases. I blame the media as much as the crap science. One study is not conclusive evidence, it needs robust challenge and repetition Of at least a couple more years before it can considered the fact at that time..media just go all out and blurt a study…we’ve cured cancer or this is good/bad…it confuses people ( that’s why very few people actually understand what is a good food choice).

2) education, yes it’s a real chicken and egg thing this one and really complex. Children learn more and it tends to stick when learnt as a child more than as an adult ( a lot of what we are is set in childhood). But and this is the big one you pointed out. Children learn most not from school but from their parents, so if the parents are making bad choices they tend to teach that to to kids. The other really key thing here is a lot of your good and bad health is laid down in uterus ( your mothers diet can have a massive impact on your brain develop and other organs, as well as the obvious fatal alcohol or drug issues), Then choices around bottle vs breast ( this one his huge as well, as the weight of research now indicates intelligence and brain development is impaired to an extent by bottle feeding as well as, future health, such as gut and allergy issues as an adult and poor immune response as a child…so the present massive increase I. Allergies and autoimmune disease has a causal link with bottle feeding….it’s choice and many women’s need to be economically active will counter the health benefits of Breast feeding ( poverty itself is a determination of health and well being) but most people are not really aware the choice they make is a lifetime harm issue for their child…interestingly if I I have a row of babies put in front of me and with Almost 100% accuracy I can tell you if they are bolted feed or Brest feed, by head shape, body shape and how they move and interact with their environment as this differs in bottle feed baby’s. So the question is adult or child…..for me it’s all three, a lifetime event, health and health choices are some of the most important decisions we make in life…it leads to either a successful adult that contributes to the wealth of society as a whole or an adult that takes from the wealth of society.so hopefully at some point we can if we focus on lifetime education get a population that really does understand the fundamentals of a health life as well as self care…because as we both know the west will not be able to afford the option of a population that does not get it and expects to be taken care of and cured.

3) your comment around the fashion for vegetarianism. This is actually really worrying from a health point of view as there is more and more research that says one of the great indicators for good health, especially as we get older is muscle mass ( the more muscle you have the more protection you have from injury, arthritis and also getting fat as muscle activity prevents obesity). You can only develop muscles mass by in taking a lot of protein, there are three groups of protein and generally the best sources of all three are meat. Not feeding children meat ( or adults) is not a good health choice at all and will stack up future health problems.

4)The whole cure, thing I do agree, we invest far to much money in developing and inventing cures. But even though prevention is far better for the person and cost effective for society…cures sell and make money, the sickness part of healthcare is big business, drug companies don’t make money out of health prevention, they make it selling a cure, the US healthcare market has not created a 4 trillion dollar market by preventing ill health..even the NHS which is not there for profit and tries its level best to manage demand is still obsessed with cure and treatment…it did not health when the Osborne government actually removed public health and health prevention from the NHS and gave it to local authorities ( one of the UKs other problems is separation of health care treatment, social care and public health functions as they are all intertwined and need to be be balanced and considered as a whole). In the end it makes a lot of companies money by creating many trillions in markets by Developing an “it’s fine do what you want and we will cure you”…even healthcare professional in none profit organisations like the NHS have fallen into this trap ( it’s after all what pays my and meany other healthcare professionals wages).

5) The bit you discuss about vaping and alcohol, agree if there is a need in the public, you just cannot ban it as you say prohibition has never worked. We are never going to stop the illegal drugs trade. Governments are a bit Delusional about this, the only things you can real ban are things that can be replaced by something not harmful, so it’s the ingredients and how you manufacture, as I discussed earlier it’s possible to make either a healthy Spread or a spread that causes untold harm in a population….if the government banned artificial transfats in products, you would literally never know and could still pick butter or spread, but you would live a longer healthier life and not cost as much in healthcare when your cardiovascular system nackers our in your mid 60s. If the government banned say alcohol…that we would notice and drive it underground…it’s like drugs, if you legalised heron in a controlled way, you would remove almost all of the most damaging effects on society as it’s a very cheap drug that can be managed far better in a safe way if it’s legal….take the tax and throw it in prevention….no crime, less deaths and no money to organised crime and terror groups.

6)with the taxation, I agree we could give more tax breaks to people that grow and produce health good food or sell healthy good food, it could have other benefits, remove rates from greengrocers, butchers and restaurants that serve good food ( an I use that into true sense proper food like a nice bit of meat or fish and vegs etc remove tax on farmers producing healthy foods. Tax does work on some things but you need to be carful that you don’t just punish the poorer and let the rich have their pleasure. But driving down the price of good food and reasonable tax on poor food types is the way to go as well as encourage the sellers of good foods…not rates would see independent butchers and greengrocers on every high street.

so I think in principle we agree public health is really social engineering on a massive scale, using every option you have to create a population with the tools and understanding to make good choices as well as, managing those messages that encourage damaging chooses and reward and encourage business that provide those good choices…..( no rates on greengrocers, would soon see Tesco express greengrocers, Tax breaks for proper restaurants over fast food chains ect Would see more and cheaper restaurants). Find the really harmful substances that don’t really add any benefit to lives or are even wanted and remove them from the food chain completely as well as balanced controls of those substances we know cause harm, but people want ( alcohol etc), with more research and money on prevention instead of pissing untold billions on sticking plasters when the damage is done.

Not long ago I think. Could all happen today. Charles’s second PM in as many months – only two more PM’s until Christmas.😀

Nice comment to finish. Never been superstitious, but gatting twitchy about Halloween 😨

Slow support for Ukraine? Are you a Ukraine loyalist or British loyalist? Why should British tax payers fund Ukraine a former Soviet country that comes at the top of the most corrupt countries in the world ? Do you realise the desperate situation many Brits are in financially including many Falklands veterans? There are more food banks than McDonald’s restaurants now in the UK ! Fund Ukraine with your pocket, but not with British tax payers money!

Former soviet country, corrupt… Speak to the point not 20-year ideas.

Go take a flight and fight for oligarch buddy Zelensky the most corrupt country in Europe! But don’t come on here with your Zelensky Propaganda that serves not British national interest! Want to deter Russia ? If that much afraid increase the defence budget and build a credible British army which is cut to the bones currently. But don’t on come here whole Brits can’t even afford food for us spend billions on Ukraine a country related more closely to Russia culturally linguistically geographically and religiously .

I’m afraid none of us bought that nonsense about Ukraine. Indeed I suspect people have a more positive view of Ukraine now than ever before.

Because we are a guarantor of Ukraine soveriegnty, encouraged them to be free of Russia, a permanent member of the UN security council & failed miserably to deter Russian neo-colonialism in their direction. That & it is the right thing to do. Ultimately is also contributes to peace in Europe which is always in our best interests.
There is plenty of money in the UK, it is just that we choose to keep it mainly for the rich rather than funding the things that make us a decent civil society.

So you want Britain national security to be put at risk for Ukraine?? Why dont you go to Ukraine yourself and die for Ukraine rather than encouraging others ?

Ukraine serves zero interest to Britain ! Yes Russia is a rival , however Ukraine serves not British national security at all. Russia is a nuclear power and the idea to engage Russia directly while they pose no direct threat to us all for Ukraine betrayal of the British people.

Specially after Iraq who is going to trust politicians fear mongering? A government with 3 PM’s in less than 3 months! Seriously? Get a grip

Come on James you know perfectly well Russia & China are hard at work fighting against us. They oppose free democratic societies & have been trying to undermine & subvert us. Russia has happily spread nerve agents about to eliminate “traitors” & anyone who accidentally get in the way on our own soil. You’re welcome to think standing back is best, but that is exactly what all Putins threats are aimed at acheiving. All that will do is fuel their atrocities & eventually we’ll have to act with millions suffering or dying along the way. Appeasement & isolationism only aid great evil.

Well said Frank.

Modern Britain tends to support free peoples (as does the rest of the free world) against autocrats like Putin especially when they have been invaded for no good reason. Indeed I suspect that the Russian people are against this war. Ukraine has been invaded and have the right to defend themselves.

Falklands veterans fought to free some far away islands from an invasion from a neighbour. Similar circumstances except that was British sovereign territory.

In my view the free countries of the world need to continue to adequately fund defence. The UK is no different.

In future I suspect the UK will change it’s method of dealing with those that cannot work for some reason by paying sufficient units of electricity etc. and funding food and other necessities directly. We can afford that without eating into our defence budget.

I could say ‘We shall see’. My expectation is that out two pennyworth will be cut and the world won’t notice any difference. China, Iran or North Korea will be American issues today and tomorrow just as they were yesterday.

Interesting Times so far on our C21st Discworld. Could be one of those pivotal moments. I’m more or less too old to care, now. Had it good for majority of the time.
As always, it’s the kids you reflect on. And, more strangely I realised from my perspective the other day, the likely fate of indigenous tribes😐 for 🤑

true indeed. But they had never actually promised the ship would be built in the U.K…..so probably no actual loss to industry.

The purpose of the ship was to showcase our industry made clear in the government’s blurb

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-national-flagship-to-promote-british-businesses-around-the-world

Yes but they were very careful not to be pinned down on where it would be built, the question was asked and deflected.

The PIN clearly states uk suppliers. Do not recall any articles stating anything other than uk built. PDF in the link below.

https://www.contracts.mod.uk/esop/toolkit/opportunity/current/53070/detail.si

Appledore would be perfect for the smaller vessels, such as the replacement for the P2000s and the Border Force cutters.

Last I heard this summer, the contract for the 37 BF and port support boats was written in a way to make it less likely that a UK yard would get the job.

This report is dated March 2021
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2021/03/new-details-emerge-on-uk-built-facm-vessels-for-ukraine/

Tht sounds like a good one for Appledore too for the building, but I’m guessing skills transfer work is more a Babcock or BAES thing.

They where on life support before H&W bought them, god knows what they’re on now.

Harland and Wolff building largeauxiliary vessels, Rosyth frigates, Barrow and Camel Laird SSN and SSBN, Tyne building SSK’s with Teesside and Appledore building minor warships. 150 battle force ships creating the third biggest navy in the world and largest submarine force.

Take all UK government cutters and patrol ships in to Navy or RFA.

Very doable with a modest increase in the budget and focus on Navy.

I think for me the big question is can H&W survive long enough to get either FSS or MRSS. CL have repair contracts so although they carry the smallest risk and most benefit (no Navantia), it might be an idea to give FSS to keep H&W afloat to Belfast, and save MRSS for CL.
This is kind of where I saw the National Flagship as having value, because if we palmed that off the H&W they’d have a nice job to keep them ticking over.

For me personally there would be a big budget increase and plenty of works for both HW and CL. However with no budget increase their is not enough work. HW probably has the more important facilities to rebuild and Belfast needs the jobs more. CL seems to be getting on well with ship repair work although if it was up to me it would be building submarines again. Get a fleet of 12 SSK’s to take the pressure off the SSN force.

The issues with Prince of Wales and the need for a large dry dock probably shows the folly of using Rosyth to build large warships as the dock may be needed at any time.

Oh, I see your point. I think they will be more fitting for the new support ships or one of the new specialist ships. CL’s most recent build was the David Attenborough. But It has only been helping with the maintenance and repair of Aux ships and Type 45 fitting.