The UK has fought too many European wars

When I studied history at Oxford I was able to specialise in economic history and the history of science and technology. I was also made to study European history alongside what was called English or more accurately UK  history. I was not expected to study American history or Chinese or Japanese history, yet these were then the arrived or coming powers. It was a lop sided syllabus with hints of European superiority and bias in its  design.

I found European history deeply depressing. It was a continuing story of changing borders  and countries endlessly fighting over their identities and for control of sufficient resources to feed and clothe themselves. There were too many great Kings, Emperors and thugs seeking dominion over larger areas of the continent. Economic progress was regularly damaged by marauding armies.  Much blood and treasure was shed to achieve a European Empire that never materialised. In the sixteenth century there also came a wave  of wars over religious reform with the continent split not  just between Roman and Orthodox Christianity , but also between Roman and protestant Christianity.

The twentieth century was disfigured by two ruinous world wars as Germany fought to unite Europe under its control. The early nineteenth century  had seen a destructive world  war to establish a French European Empire, mimicking Spain’s failed attempt in the sixteenth century. The UK did Europe a great service by the big sacrifices to defeat Hitler.

It made me proud to be British as we had in the last 500 years dropped any claim to a European empire, had developed Parliamentary checks on monarchs’ powers and given the world the prosperity machines of the Industrial revolution. The pity was we had been drawn into too many land wars on the continent as we tried to help smaller states resist the barbaric invasions by Spanish, French, German and other forces. We had successfully started  settlements in North America which led  on to the creation of two great free nations, the USA and Canada.  The American rebels were better heirs to English democratic thinking than was George III who lost to them.

The UK today should learn from its past. We succeed when we project naval and air power to protect our islands and keep open seas for trade. We do not by history or inclination wish to be a land power risking armies in a continental  cauldron.The cause of a European empire was not worth all the dead who suffered for it.

63 Comments

  1. Wanderer
    December 16, 2025

    Absolutely. They (the EU, NATO, Germany) are gearing up for a war in Europe. There’s no good reason to have one. But for those whose political, military or arms-dealing career will only flourish in an 1984-ish future of continuous conflict, it’s their preferred way forward.

    German rearmament should frighten all of us. Whether they can do it, given their barmy green deindustrialisation tendencies, is in debate. As for the EU, it’s insatiable desire to centralise power and crush dissenting nations could trigger a future conflict. We need to stick well out of it.

    Amongst other things that means restraining MI6, which is implicated in fostering unrest in Europe, the “-stans”, and the middle east. Britain needs to mind its own business, our days of empire are over.

    Reply
    1. PeteB
      December 16, 2025

      Wanderer, Minding our own business is a good mantra for all UK politicians to follow. I note Sir John does not reference all the wars/campaigns the UK has participated in over the last 500 years and particularly the last 50 years. We stepped back from fighting for European territory (overlooking 2 world wars) and fought across the world instead. Was that really progress?

      Reply I was unhappy about wars in the Middle East. The liberation of the Falklands was a necessary war.

      Reply
      1. iain gill
        December 16, 2025

        we should act more like Switzerland

        Reply
        1. a-tracy
          December 16, 2025

          Instead, we are one of Europe’s leading Alliance members 2.1%, 2.33% 2023 of GDP.
          There are EU members who don’t contribute ie Malta, Ireland, armed and military neutrality is fine as long as they pay towards the defense of Europe, why should Scotland, N.Ireland, Wales and England pay up but Ireland not do so?
          Germany was one of the lowest contributors and is only just starting to head for 2%.
          Eight Nato members are not estimated to reach the target in 2024. They are Croatia (1.81%), Portugal (1.55%), Italy (1.49%) Canada (1.37%), Belgium (1.30%), Luxembourg (1.29%), Slovenia (1.29%) and Spain (1.28%). These Countries need to step up FIRST!

          Reply
      2. Lifelogic
        December 16, 2025

        To reply:- Would we still be able to liberate the Falklands today? Would Sir Two Tier Kier and Mastermind Lammy (given their appalling Chagos agenda) even want to try? Given Reeves and Miliband’s vast economic vandalism could we even afford to do so?

        Reply
        1. Berkshire Alan.
          December 16, 2025

          Not the Will.
          Not the manpower.
          Not the equipment.

          Reply
    2. Peter
      December 16, 2025

      Trump is encouraging four nations Hungary, Poland, Austria and Italy to consider leaving the EU. Germany is in economic decline and France has huge national debt.

      So the EU is not well placed to go to war with Russia.

      On the other hand, there is a school of thought when all else fails go to war.

      Reply
      1. Peter
        December 16, 2025

        ‘ We do not by history or inclination wish to be a land power risking armies in a continental cauldron.’

        With a quarter of the globe at one time coloured pink at one time, history suggests otherwise.

        It’s just that there were easier pickings outside the European continent. As for Europe itself, the policy was to maintain a balance of power so that one nation did not dominate.

        Reply
    3. Peter Wood
      December 16, 2025

      Germany’s rearming does worry me, but there is no alternative since they are the largest economy in Europe with every reason to be concerned and with the capacity to build weapons.
      Our error is not being aware of ‘thugs and dictators’ with expansionist ambitions, in hindsight it is of course clear. Another failure(?) of our governments for many years. (2014 should have had the sirens screaming) Since NATO we have lived fat and happy under the US umbrella, we must stand up now to defend ourselves. Even when we were nearly broke after WW2 we spent more on defence than we do now. Will 2TK do this….. I have my doubts.

      https://www.statista.com/statistics/298527/defense-spending-as-share-of-gdp-united-kingdom-uk/

      Reply
    4. Oldtimer92
      December 16, 2025

      Try that argument out on Finland. Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia and Poland. You will discover what they fear are Putin’s openly declared ambitions to expand Russia again.

      Reply
    5. Stred
      December 16, 2025

      The new head of M16 has been talking about our nearly war with Russia. We have had servicemen training the Ukrainian army, including the Azov extreme nationalists and some have been killed in the final stages of the war. The heads of the navy have proudly confirmed that they have been assisting the Ukrainian attacks on ships and the bridge in the Black Sea. The Russians have identified M16 as being behind the drone attacks on infrastructure and bombers.
      The M16 head speaks fluent Arabic and the FO is known to be pro Arabic.

      Is all this in support of a country known to be extremely corrupt and others which may be supporting terrorism in the interests of the UK?

      Reply
  2. Mark B
    December 16, 2025

    Good morning.

    I can only follow the sentiment of that former WWII veteran who, in his minds eye, felt the loss of all his friends not to be worth it given the state of the nation today.

    As the ‘Silent ones’ pass into history we are losing the last links to a past that has shaped the world we now live in and take for granted. They gave their lives to defend this nation, only to see subsequent generation degrade and desecrate both their achievements’ and self-sacrifice. Monuments are raised in their memory but, as we have seen, such monuments can be pulled down by those who do not recognise them.

    For today we have people in power whose actions those of past years would see as naked treason. It is not the use of force that defines power, but the threat of it. And for that threat to be both real and creditable it must those that would be on the wrong end of it must take it seriously, and for that to be so all laws must be upheld.

    Threats come in many forms and not via direct military power but the slow and continuous erosion and demoralisation of a people and its nation. As I have said before. The enemy is within the gates.

    Reply
  3. Ian Wragg
    December 16, 2025

    Today our military is bit a former shadow of its which probably former self. I was a nuclear submariner in the 60s and 70s. The fleet was in top top condition, I never remember cancelling any deployment because we broke down.
    We lead the world in design and manufacture of aircraft tanks and ships. Now we waste billions on Ajax which probably will be scrapped.
    It is only our nuclear deterrent which keeps us safe and that is in a parlous position.
    Prioritising welfare and gimmigrants over defence and security is wrong but unlikely to change with this government.

    Reply
  4. Lifelogic
    December 16, 2025

    Are, effectively open borders, as Labour, the Cameron/May/Boris/Sunak Con-Socialist and the Greens seem to want (with their new Breast Enlargement Whisperer leader) really compatible with a country whose occupants and new changing occupants are prepared to defend? If borders are open for whom are they defending it?

    Reply
  5. Michelle
    December 16, 2025

    I couldn’t agree more. No more war, unless we are directly threatened which of course could happen indirectly should any force ever sweep through Europe crushing all in its path.
    Neither should we be involving ourselves outside of Europe, just because those in Parliament have a wish to do so for personal gains or feelings.
    A little bit of isolationism might be a good thing whilst we are in such poor shape, to concentrate the mind on our own problems.
    The continuous blood letting in Europe over the centuries is basically a dysfunctional family tearing itself apart.
    European people share many elements of culture/history/religion and bloodline, and yet still they fight.
    For some obscure reason many in high places seem to think adding different (often vastly so) cultures in huge numbers will somehow pour oil on troubled waters!!
    It shows they know nothing of human nature.

    Reply
  6. Nick
    December 16, 2025

    Our place is on the open ocean and in the Anglosphere. I hope yet to see wise governments here and in the US taking steps to remedy King George III’s colonial policy catastrophe.

    Reply
  7. Lifelogic
    December 16, 2025

    How many people think a country led by dire deluded people like Sadiq Kahn, Two Tier Kier, anti growth Reeves, Lammy, Phillipson, Miliband is worth defending or even possible to defend given Miliband’s moronic energy agenda!

    Reply
    1. MPC
      December 16, 2025

      You never know you might be inspired to join the new Home Guard when Mr Miliband delivers an Elizabeth the first Tilbury style rousing call to arms speech.

      Reply
    2. Peter
      December 16, 2025

      It is spelt Khan not Kahn. Minor point, but, since you are now referencing him more frequently, worth pointing out.

      Reply
      1. Lynn Atkinson
        December 16, 2025

        Nobody cares how these names foreign to the U.K. are spelt.

        Reply
  8. William Long
    December 16, 2025

    ‘Splendid isolation ‘ had a lot to be said for it!

    Reply
  9. Roy Grainger
    December 16, 2025

    I see yesterday the generals were talking up war with Russia again and saying we’d all have to serve. I suppose this is the usual scaremongering to get more taxpayer’s money because Russia has neither the interest nor capability to invade UK or, in fact, any NATO country. The country which DOES have the capability is China but it seems Starmer and his mates don’t want to call them a threat at all and I believe he’ll be visiting them in January to kowtow.

    Reply
    1. Lifelogic
      December 16, 2025

      We will all have to serve – women too I assume? So how does this square with May’s moronic Modern Slavery Law?

      Reply
  10. Donna
    December 16, 2025

    “The American rebels were better heirs to English democratic thinking than was George III”

    There’s a good reason for that. The rebels had a long English heritage; German George I became King in 1715 and George III was born only about 25 years later. Why would he be an heir to English democratic thinking – he was effectively German – and Hanover had no experience of democratic thinking.

    The EU and Two-Tier-Keir, are deliberately talking up the prospect of war with Russia. It is the means by which the Globalists intend to achieve the next steps in enforced EU integration – an EU military.

    Jean Monnet, Father of the EU, explained the process they would apply to create the latest version of a European Empire “Europe will be forged in crisis, and will be the sum of the solutions adopted for those crises.”

    First create the crisis. Then offer the “solution.”

    We should not get involved in yet another European war, or any outside Europe come to that. WW1 and WW2 destroyed this country. We cannot afford another one.

    Reply
    1. Ian B
      December 16, 2025

      @Donna – WW1 as it is now called, was about one Royal Family(3 cousins) arguing between them selves that resulted 8.5-10 million military deaths and 6-10 million civilian deaths. So 15-20 million humans sacrificed by one family on ‘ego’

      I don’t know about the other nations(not my thing) but in what we call Britain or the UK there was and is no linage back to the founding dynasties in what we call the crown. I would guess (stress guess) there are more people in the general population that have more rights to a UK crown than some German family.

      It would appear all to be a political fudge by backroom political bureaucrats to stamp their image on the country.

      I stress I am neither a Republican or a Royalist, closer to being an anarchist with the proviso you do what you need to but don’t inhibit others. Or in plain English a supporter of real Democracy.

      Reply
    2. Original Richard
      December 16, 2025

      Donna:

      Correct.

      The EU has deliberately caused a crisis by its continual efforts to expand eastwards, for which two particular founding countries have history. We’ve been caught up in all of this through our membership of the EU with even our own PM, Cameron, “heir to Blair”, making a speech in Kazakhstan in 2013 declaring that the EU should extend further into the former USSR and reach from the Atlantic to the Urals. If the EU had remained the original 6, or even limited its greedy expansion to the 15 western European countries, Europe would not be in the terrible mess it is in today. Unfortunately our current Far Left PM wants to join in this debacle in order to further impoverish us as socialism depends upon making and keeping people poor. Hence of course Net Zero and all the other economy destroying policies.

      Reply
  11. Sakara Gold
    December 16, 2025

    In 1939 the sun never set on the British Empire. We had enormous investments across the globe, thousands of tons of gold, a huge manufacturing base making products that sold to the Empire countries.

    12 months after Churchill negotiated the “Lend Lease” deal with Roosevelt in 1940, all this was gone. The Americans demanded that everything be sold off in a massive fire sale and in 1945, we were effectively bankrupt. With debts equivalent to 300% of 1946 GDP

    We made the last debt repayments to America in 2006. The second world war resulted in the biggest transfer of wealth in world history. From us to Roosevelt and Truman.

    Even so, we would be wise to follow the Roman author Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus’ observation “Si vis pacem, para bellum – if you want peace, prepare for war” Once again, we find ourselves bankrupt. If we do not wish our children to speak Russian as their first language, we too need to make sacrifices to invest in our defence.

    Reply
    1. Lynn Atkinson
      December 16, 2025

      We had enormous LIABILITIES across the globe. Sadly we can’t get rid of the countries that constituted the Empire and indeed some which were never in the Empire have joined the Commonwealth which clings to the U.K. lie, the proverbial.
      We still spend billions on them each year. If our wealth was stolen from them as some claim, how have we continued to finance them after the6 all became independent?

      Reply
    2. Donna
      December 16, 2025

      If push came to shove, I’d rather they spoke Russian than Arabic.

      Reply
    3. Mickey Taking
      December 16, 2025

      As I’ve indicated before the US wants us as a friend…who buys ( a sort of hire purchase where they can keep fixing’ faults’ or disable lots of stuff they provide) constantly in spite of alternatives.

      Reply
  12. Kenneth
    December 16, 2025

    Too many are dying today in the Ukraine/Russia war as European leaders egg on the bloodshed

    Reply
    1. Lynn Atkinson
      December 16, 2025

      The egg on bloodshed because this leads to economic collapse of the EU and an excuse for the jackboots to come out.
      You will see the old German politics in tooth and claw.

      Reply
  13. George sheard
    December 16, 2025

    Hi sir john
    We wouldn’t have the problems in the country now if Tony Blair hadn’t got us involved with Afghanistan
    we would mot be bringing planes loads of Afghanistan’s to the uk to live
    it’s a war that caused the loss of young British soldiers and left hundreds mamed for life with terrible injuries.
    Thank you

    Reply
    1. Kenneth
      December 16, 2025

      I agree.

      When the tv news often showed harrowing scenes from wars from somewhere in the world, some UK politicians were eager for us to get involved.

      Now that tv has less of a hold on us, I am hoping the tendancy to fight in other people’s wars will reduce.

      Reply
    2. Original Richard
      December 16, 2025

      Why are we bringing plane loads of Afghans to the UK? We went there to help the Afghans combat Al-Quaeda and the Taliban.

      Reply
  14. IanT
    December 16, 2025

    I came to the same conclusion a while ago.
    We happen to be geographically near to a large continental body that we should try to maintain good neighbourly relations with. However there is no need to bind ourselves to them.
    We had a global empire but that is in the past. What remains is a global family of people who speak the same language and who share the same values. These ties are often close. My family is spread over two continents but we are in daily contact thanks to the internet.
    I have good neighbours. I help them where I can and sometimes receive help back. However, I don’t know very much about their business or family affairs and have no wish to become more closely involved. I think of Europe in the same way. We can be good neighbours but they are not family.

    Reply
    1. Lynn Atkinson
      December 16, 2025

      We can’t be good neighbours because for thousands of years these ‘neighbours’ wanted to subjugate us, impoverish us and take control of our house.
      Face facts!

      Reply
  15. Dave Andrews
    December 16, 2025

    There is something in the British psyche where we stand up to the bully. I believe the NATO route is the best way to do that.

    Reply
  16. Mickey Taking
    December 16, 2025

    Off Topic.
    Ford is backing away from plans to manufacture large electric vehicles, the US carmaker said on Monday, citing lacklustre demand and recent regulatory changes under US President Donald Trump. The company will instead invest in producing profitable hybrid and gas-powered vehicles and smaller, more affordable EV models.
    Ford said it expects its profits to take a $19.5bn (£14.6bn) hit as a result of the strategic shift, which comes as the Trump administration eases fuel economy rules.
    The business case for leaning heavily into EV production, specifically large-sized EV models, has “eroded”, Ford said in a statement, “due to lower-than-expected demand, high costs and regulatory changes”. “This is a customer-driven shift to create a stronger, more resilient and more profitable Ford,” Jim Farley, Ford’s chief executive, said in a statement.
    “The operating reality has changed, and we are redeploying capital into higher-return growth opportunities,” Mr Farley added, pointing to trucks, vans, hybrid vehicles and the company’s energy storage business.

    Reply
  17. agricola
    December 16, 2025

    Most of those European wars we fought were as much for our survival if not more than any other reason. Success of those european antagonists would have led directly to conflict with the UK.

    We are now obligated via NATO membership. We are dependent on Europe for power and food. These latter dependencies are self inflicted or more accurately by incompetent and traitorous politicians.

    The way forward is to be defensively very strong , particularly in the way warfare is going, not the way it was, while retaining the capability of a devastating atomic response. It will not happen as long as we are burdened with the current excuse for a government.

    Reply
    1. Mickey Taking
      December 16, 2025

      the answer is always ‘SELF SUFFICIENCY’.

      Reply
  18. Harry MacMillion
    December 16, 2025

    Certainly our past has been tied up with Europe, perhaps too much, but we have also done much for the world generally. At this time in our history, we need to see beyond Europe, not just because it is a failing entity but because there is so much more out there.

    Starmer wants to tie us to the EU’s apron strings, to loose our independence and be subjugated by an unaccountable bureaucracy – We cannot let this happen.

    What our PM should be doing is making agreements and deals outside of Europe – That’s where the future is. It doesn’t matter that the EU is on our doorstep but it may not be around in 20 years time, but somehow we will, we will survive the treachery, wokeism and socialism of these times, to show our mettle once more.

    Reply
  19. Will in Hampshire
    December 16, 2025

    Given the geography of the Atlantic Ocean and the North Sea coastlines, this is actually a question about free-riding, and very helpfully there are examples of both courses of action – to free-ride or to contribute – in plain sight today.
    It’s a given that the armed forces need to deter the invasion of Great Britain by enemy forces moving on sea or by air. Currently they do so. That bit is simple. The complicated bit is that the other democracies in Europe have land borders which are much easier to cross. The British face a choice: contribute military forces to help those democracies deter incursions from the East, or don’t. The latter choice allows for substantial savings in blood and treasure but earns enmity from those whom our country has decided not to help.
    Look to Ireland and you have an example of a country shamelessly free-riding on the deterrent effect of the British armed forces. They spend nothing on defending either themselves or their neighbours. Personally I find their policy rational but distasteful.

    Reply
  20. Ian B
    December 16, 2025

    “The UK today should learn from its past” .. if only. A generation has been robbed of a chance to understand democracy and be able to live in a democracy.

    The removal of ‘English Law’ crippled the nation, and I would guess 90% of the people don’t even know what that means. Yet the free democratic world has built itself a stronger foundation for them-selves because of it.

    The UK’s political class, still don’t get it, they after more the 40 years of rule from the unelected unaccountable technocrats they have failed to grasp it is the people that own the country. Its is the people that empowered them to act as their legislators, they empowered them alone to create, amend and repeal Laws as are required for the nation as a whole. It is not for a backroom bureaucrat to dictate what happens in a democracy, that is for the people through their elected representatives. Democracy lost

    Reply
  21. Hat man
    December 16, 2025

    I’m surprised, Lord John, with your well-informed economics background you do not mention the cost and logistical requirements of maintaining a substantial Navy and Air Force. Can we afford to? And does the cost of the nuclear deterrent buy us security against the threats you envisage? It might be that we would do better to invest that huge sum of taxpayer money elsewhere, taking account of more recent forms of conflict and warfare.

    Reply
  22. majorfrustration
    December 16, 2025

    Leave European problems to the Europeans – but we have a political class that likes to grandstand
    with our children. If we get sucked into a European scrap I suspect we will have major internal ethnic problems and fighting on two fronts is never a good thing.

    Reply
    1. a-tracy
      December 16, 2025

      We shouldn’t send any more people there than Italy does, or France or Spain.

      Reply
  23. Ian B
    December 16, 2025

    “500 years” undone in 40 years and now seemingly never to return as our Parliament has been taken over by political religious freaks that cant even comprehend what Democracy and English Law is.

    I am not a fan of Farage or Reform but the nation needs a reset, a rebellion, an uprising to reset it on the path democracy once more. There a however a need for a disrupter. This century, a whole generation has been infested by rats, foreign puppets out to demoralise and destruct the country to rebuild it in their own personal religious ‘nuts-ville’ image. Their religious fervour(and that has to be the whole of the Uniparty) has created a fight against the good law abiding and able people of the country. We don’t see ‘service’ any more just political religious diatribe. We don’t see a willingness to work with and create a resilient, resilient tomorrow for all – just a continuous controlling diktats to force a personal image on all.

    Reply
  24. Chris S
    December 16, 2025

    As a student of European history myself, I agree almost entirely with what you have said.
    I would urge anyone looking to learn more about this subject to read the books
    by AJP Taylor.
    If you can find them on You Tube or elsewhere, his unscripted TV lectures are brilliant. They are as relevant today as when they were recorded and it is a pity they are no longer available on DVD.

    However, in 1939 I believe we had no choice other than honour our commitment to Poland by declaring war on Germany. To not have done so would have resulted in Hitler establishing his Third Reich across the whole of Europe and it is hard to see how that would ever have been displaced, once he had complete control over the industrial complex which is now the EU. It would undoubtedly have been more efficient under German military discipline than it is today, but that is not the point.

    Hitler could have passified a very large proportion of the population by increasing living standards.
    Austria was a perfect example : 20 years ago, I spoke to several people who were in the Austrian Alps at the time of the Anschluss, and they readily admitted that they had welcomed the intervention. They were literally starving when they cheered the troops as they marched into the Voralberg. HItler created jobs and wealth in short order so there was little trouble.

    But in this century, I see no reason why we should use our army to defend Poland and the border states with Putin’s Russia, after all, Poland, Germany and France plus others, have enough manpower to defend their borders without us.

    We do need to increase defence spending. We need a much bigger Air Force and Navy to defend our homeland and overseas interests like the Falklands with its new found oil wealth. We can then cooperate with our key European Allies to defend our home waters and the Northern approaches properly, and re-establish a bigger presence elsewhere, including in the Baltic.

    Our army should be returned to its former 100,000 strong establishment which should be sufficient if we limit our direct NATO involvement in Europe to air and sea power.

    Reply
    1. a-tracy
      December 16, 2025

      We have lots of under-25-year-old neets. Conscript those that aren’t physically disabled, even people with other issues can be productive, telephone, admin support, IT, care for injured veterans, after three-six months of claiming and they’ll find jobs for themselves or fill the gaps.

      Reply
    2. Mickey Taking
      December 16, 2025

      I remember a teacher at grammar school waxing lyrical about AJP Taylor, don’t think I ever had time to turn the pages, but he was a great fan.

      Reply
  25. Bloke
    December 16, 2025

    Fighting is crazy, but at some point it is the only way to defend oneself and nation.

    Reply
  26. Barrie Emmett
    December 16, 2025

    Excellent summary thank you. To prosper as a nation we need to curb the warmongering of MI6. Their continued involvement in all scenarios is ridiculous and dangerous. I can’t see any nation with the wherewithal to sustain armed conflict.

    Reply
  27. CdB
    December 16, 2025

    If another country wishes to force a war on us by attacking us (vs dragging us in on their side) are we really strong enough to resist? I have my doubts. This should be our first priority. Then comes, via allowing them to buy from us and learn from us, in exchange for that being a 2 way street, helping our friends to do the same

    Reply
  28. Keith from Leeds
    December 16, 2025

    Something odd is going on today, Sir John. I have twice tried to post and it just disappears?

    Reply
  29. Ian B
    December 16, 2025

    From the Media….
    Donald Trump has suspended a landmark tech agreement with the UK in a blow to Sir Keir Starmer’s hopes of forging closer ties with the US. The “tech prosperity deal” covers artificial intelligence (AI), nuclear energy and quantum computing, and was announced as part of Mr Trump’s state visit to Britain in September. It came alongside £31bn in investments from some of the biggest companies in Silicon Valley.

    What choice did they have? the UK Parliament is anti UK and definitely anti the USA our single biggest trading country partner. It reminds them(the UK Parliament) to much of what freedom and democracy is.

    2TK double standards once more, them and us, includes killing the Country to forge a land in his own image.

    Reply
    1. Lynn Atkinson
      December 16, 2025

      Trump thinks the U.K. will become a hostile nation. It is already hostile to capitalism and democracy. It aligns itself with the Axis Powers. It actively suppresses free speech and other normal western freedoms.
      We are on very, very thin ice.

      Reply
  30. Ian B
    December 16, 2025

    From the ONS, unemployment when Labour took office in 2024 was 4.1%, today it stands at 5.1%

    Pat McFadden, the Work and Pensions Secretary, “There are over 350,000 more people in work”

    Then again labour maths would only see an increase of 1%, so spinning an increase of 350,000 is maybe within scope for a Socialist Government, unless it is the true figure of the criminal invaders. In real terms in real maths there are now 24% more out of work than when Labour took office.

    Then consider the State’s own employment rate has increased with an additional 88,000 being employed, bring the total working for the state paid for by the taxpayer to 6.2million. Those working for the State saw their pay rise by 7.6% over the last year. Also an outgoing or is it an outpouring, (excluding pensions) there are now 11 million on benefits.

    Reply
    1. Ian B
      December 16, 2025

      What there hasn’t been is the slightest interest shown in the UK Parliament to pay for all their prolific spending

      Reply
      1. Lynn Atkinson
        December 16, 2025

        The can’t judge how much spending they will need to under take because they don’t know how many they can ferry over the channel or into military airports.
        Annoyingly the OBR did not factor these necessary spending commitments into their forecast.

        Reply
  31. a-tracy
    December 16, 2025

    We have lots of under-25-year-old neets. Conscript those that aren’t physically disabled, even people with other issues can be productive, telephone, admin support, IT, care for injured veterans, after three-six months of claiming and they’ll find jobs for themselves or fill the gaps.

    Reply
  32. iain gill
    December 16, 2025

    So the national highway agency, and its speed cameras, have been fining people for speeding that have not been speeding. And they have finally admitted it.
    How many people lost their licence and jobs since this started happening in 2021?
    As ever the British state show how absolutely useless they are.

    Reply
  33. iain gill
    December 16, 2025

    the stats for SORN cars are out. Diesel cars are the only category where SORN figures are massively negative. Lots of electric and hybrid cars are being taken off the road, and put into storage. But every single possible diesel car that can be brought out of storage, repaired, and put back on the road is coming out. The public are prepared to pay well over the odds for a family diesel car, which is driving a massive market in finding and refurbishing diesel cars. its hilarious, actual customer demand is completely different to what the ruling classes are trying to get us to drive.

    Reply

Leave a Reply to Roy Grainger Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.