Blog

It is a time of year for reflection. With, inevitably, a Christian component.

As ever, our lives should be about doing good, being kind, being humble. But with an intellectual, scientific, edge.

Some short observations are as follows (I will expand on them during 2026):

I am sad for America. Many American people are great people, kind, generous, good values. Committed to the democratic process. Presidents that you may not agree with, but you would respect. At this moment I just wish George Clooney and Bruce Springsteen ‘job shared’ the role of President.

Instead we have President Trump, failing intellectually, trashing the reputation of the United States, narcissistic beyond belief, a joke. Sooner or later the ‘grown ups in the room’ – the senior military commanders – will have to tell him to step aside.

His latest ego trip are the new ‘battleships’, to be named after him. They are old technology, old strategy. Somebody, somewhere, must be developing ‘stealth’ hypersonic missiles. They will be literally dead in the water.

It is time for us all to step up and properly support Ukraine. Face down the bully Putin. If we do nothing, he will gradually extend through Eastern Europe. Our failure to fully support Ukraine – troops on the ground, air cover, naval support- is as shameful as our failure to support the Republicans in the Spanish Civil War.

We come across as gutless. The average Ukraine has more guts than the whole political class in the UK. Maybe we are gutless – how many would even fight for the UK if necessary?

In the meantime Israel is not respecting the borders agreed after the second world war – as in settlements on the West Bank. As such they forfeit any moral claim that their own borders should be respected.

Looking more broadly at society, it is now evident that much type 2 diabetes is self inflicted. It would make economic sense to therefore to say that NHS treatment should not be free of charge. Plane tickets should be based on a ‘charge per kilo’. Maybe larger people should have to pay for two seats.

To be positive we need to do things about education and economic growth. I have said elsewhere that the Open University should be free of charge. Likewise there should be free access to all college based trade courses. The message should be that we encourage ‘self improvement’.

And why not make the first five years of any new business free of tax. It would be concrete evidence of enthusiasm for economic growth, linked to individual opportunity. And new businesses are good for the economy, creating jobs, funding a supply chain and so on. Creating demand for buildings, vehicles, professional support…..

Where does Christianity fit in? We are a secular society, but recognising Christianity as our primary faith. Anybody who wants to live here needs to happily accept that that is the case.

I would bring back ‘school assembly’, a bible reading and hymn. Compulsory for all students. But with a number of tough conditions:

The bible needs re-writing, to bring it up to date. The world has changed in 2000 years, God appears not to have anticiptated the changes, and much of what it says is very wrong. It cannot be taken literally.

Clearly ‘the Creation’, ‘Noah’s Ark’, the ‘Virgin Birth’ and ‘the Resurrection’ were stories of their time, but never valid. There is no evidence to support these stories. They go against science. It suits male Preachers to stick with these stories, but the world has moved on.

An Italian Arch Bishop has just observed that women should ‘obey’ and are happy to do so. The Churches approach to women is ‘institutionally sexist’. It appals me.

The English and Welsh churches have just appointed female Archbishops. Which is a good thing. But they profess to be guided by the Bible: if they have read Timothy’s observations on the role of women, they must be in some sort of intellectual turmoil, weak minded or hypocrits? Clearly the Bible needs updating.

Each Church should accept that there is no ‘one true faith’. It may be your faith, but you should not generalise. How arrogant would you have to be to claim that your subdivision of Christianity is the only valid faith. And clearly there is no ‘united’ christian ‘true faith’. You won’t find even the big divisions – Catholic, Protestant, Evangelic, the American Christian Churches geting into bed together. Some of the smaller ‘brands’, Mormon, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Plymough Brethren, won’t even condone socialising or marriage outside of their narrow faith.

Likewise, I do not think you should ‘brainwash’ children into your faith. They should wait until they are adults to make a decision. In the same way ‘missionery’ activities, based on your faith being a superior or the only true faith is wrong.

In a rewritten Bible I would keep the Commandments(simplified and updated) and the Parables. If we all based our lives properly on the parable of the ‘Good Samaritan’ the world would be a better place.

Any church that does not accept the above should lose any charitable status and tax breaks.

What else? Well, the Bible is against sodomy. This includes bestiality (obvious), probably Oral Sex (not so clear cut) and sex that does not facilitate procreation. Arguably anal sex is not natural and should be banned. The argument about procreation is more complex – I think contraception and vasecomies are OK. Likewise a sexlife for a woman who no longer ovulates. This slightly links to abortion – no one would say it is desirable, but peronally I would leave that decision to the woman. And no men should try to tell women what to do in this situation.

I think sexism is still almost all-pervading. Sex is not about the man’s pleasure – in any relationship the woman should orgasm at least as often as the male…..

Bigotry is interesting. The ‘trans lobby’ now begin to look like bigots. My starting point would be that people with penises cannot be women, so they cannot be ‘trans women’. They should not participate in women’s sport or changing facilities. We need a new name for them – they used to be called ‘cross dressers’ or ‘transvestites’ – a modern term would be like ‘ladyboys’.

Finally, many of us feel pessimistic about the future. We had thirty bad years of the Cold War, then thirty years from 1990 of relatve stability and prosperity. Now we face upheaval – huge technological change, climate change, and political and religious instability. Who would bet on ‘West vs East’ political war, or Christianity versus Islam religious war.

It is not helped by changes in our culture. Tolerance apppears to be giving way to ‘cancel culture’ – I do not agree with what you say, so I will try to get the mob to destroy you. It makes me wary about expressing what I actually think on many topics. The ‘adults in the room’ appear outnumbered by the social media ‘keyboard warriors’. It’s a bit like in many elections there has been a Conservative majority, but quietly so, being ‘out voiced’ by the virtue signalling left…..

We now have a serious problem, as poor standards of living have disillusioned many people with the centralist political parties. So we seem to have huge growth in Right wing and Left wing parties. A growth in extremism and mutual antipathy. Just when we need to be strong as a nation and a democracy.

It’s as if we don’t need enemies, just leave us alone and we will tear ourselves apart. Hating each other more (a bit like Reds and Blues in football) than thinking about enemy action abroad (Russia threatening our underseas cables and pipelines for example).

The moderate politicians need to fight back, convince people that deep down we are one united nation, willing to fight for a good future for our children, and for our democracy.

I repeat, we need to do good, be kind, be humble.

So, time to wish you the best possible New Year, Haydn

I’m British. I now live in Spain.

A colleague was surprised when I said I would fight for Spain if need be.

Having been born in the UK, as far as I’m concerned, of course I’d fight for Britain.

Recent surveys suggest only about one third of people think like that. Many caveat it with a ‘well it would depend if I thought it was a just war’.

Logically therefore, most would not fight.

So Putin could invade without much resistance. Or Trump.

Whilst Spain might seem unlikely to be invaded (would another Civil War be more likely?), imagine Islamists in Morocco decided to reclaim their land from the fourteenth century. Would most Spaniards just surrender?

If you want to live in another country, I think they can reasonably ask you to repay that gift with loyalty. How can this be best achieved? Probably the same principles apply to existing citizens.

I think we should explain the following to all immigrants:

We offer a society with equal rights for men and women. Women must be treated equally, in the house and outside.

We expect everyone to integrate, to understand the national culture, and speak the language.

Political extremes are not welcome: there must be an understanding and acceptance of our democratic values

We are a primarily Christian country, linked to a secular society. Religion is not compulsory. Immigrants should understnad and accpet the ‘home religion’, but may keep theri own faith. Provided it includes tolerance of other faiths.

Childen will be educated, boys and girls alike, based on our culture and traditions.

Both countries have a legal system – alternatives such as Sharia law will not be allowed. If you commit crimes you will not be welcome.

We expect high standards of behaviour, traditional good manners, consideration for others.

Much of the above should be applied to existing citizens.

In return we hope to offer a place in a civilised country, good values, a ‘social contract’ with all residents. That starts with opportunity, improvement through hard work: access to healthcare, a ‘safety net’ if you fall on hard times.

Hopefully it is an attractive package.

However it also includes an obligation to fight for this country if necessary.

People should have to sign contract stating that they understand the obligation, and will volonteer to fight if need be.

Men could be in the front line: if this is not thought appropriate for women, they can run logistics, drive military vehicles, act as drone pilots and so on.

A bit like potential conscription, we should likewise make it clear to people born here that they have the same obligation.

Would I really ‘walk the talk’? Yes.

I am aiming to do a ‘tough mudder’ (Spartan) next year, but I may be deemed too old for front line duty.

My background is healthcare management, so I’d offer to run a field hospital. Actually I’d offer to act as a stretcher bearer or ambulance driver.

Heaven forbid it comes to this, but the omens globally at the moment, specifically in Eastern Europe, do not look good, And we may need to stand up to be counted in a substantial way, and honour a duty to our allies.

I am a strong advocate for education, and was thinking about the Open University. It also overlapped with some thoughts about our growing welfare bill.

I think that in general we should regard welfare as a temporary support to help people who have had employment misfortunes to get back on their feet.

All welfare payments should be reviewed every three months. They should be accompanied, from day one, with a training and education package to help them find work.

Where possible we should narrow the welfare definitions – for example we cannot afford ‘stress and anxiety’ to be grounds for long term ‘non working’. People are entitled to try to find ‘appropriate work’ matching skills and experience – but after three months they should have to accept any job, or have benefits stopped. Clearly people with disabilities need extra support to find suitable work, and appropriate training. A small number can be relieved of the work responsibility, most terminallyill people forexample.

The issue links to education and training. I would make the Open University free of charge, and remove requirements for ‘preliminary qualifications’. We should encourage peope to get started, whilst recognising that some will need a kind of foundation year to get them up to speed.

I’d also make all of the college element of apprentice and other vocational training ‘open access’ and free of charge.

At the least, everyone should be able to read, write and do basic maths. I think almost everyone can handle social media on a phone: so the education pathway could commence with basic skills taught online….

Howeve, I would link this to a requirement that all of those claiming benefits but not in work or education have to access education courses for 40 hours a week. This should help create a more skilled workforce.

Equally it maintains the discipline of regular ‘work’ and working hours. A life of benefits should not be a long term empty life, short on stimulation, and with no future…..

Some might decide that if the alternative is study, a local job might be easier and more congenial. Payment of benefits would be tied to the course engagement.

Andrew – his options in life

He has some options about how he goes about his future life, from continuing denial to ‘making a clean breast of things’.  In practical terms his options look relatively limited.

Only he knows what further skeletons might be in the closet.  And he might not disclose them to anybody from whom he seeks advice. 

The first option is continual denial or say nothing (neither confirm not deny).  The trouble is that the Guiffre settlement looks dreadful – so saying nothing is not really an option – and denial (of everything) just does not ring true.

He could try going for the ‘I really can’t remember anything’ (not only does he not sweat, he also has memory problems….).  An oft used public relations strategy (it avoids perjury).  But nobody will believe he can’t remember private jets flight sharing with young women.

He could try offering to assist the police (Feds) in a public minded fashion.  This probably involves an admission regarding Guiffre – at the very least that he did in fact meet her.  But he’d have to admit to the flights and so on – presumably claiming that he thought all the girls were student girlfriends of Epstein’s daughter or whoever…… But he’s have to name some at least of the other men involved. If this was nothing but the truth, it might help rehabilitate him.

But clearly if one more significant thing emerged – a photo of him with a partially dressed girl for example, this option would explode in his face.  But if he doesn’t go for this option, it implies he is hiding something.

Full disclosure could conceivably be the way forward.  So to speak, get it all out on the table, before it becomes public anyway, with emails, pictures, videos and so on.  It is often said ‘follow the money’ – has Andrew paid for other massages, paid girls in a manner on the record, gifts, or whatever. 

The problem is that in America ‘underage’ sex is a significant offence (I think this could include ‘conspiring’ to traffic girls across State lines (Federal offence)).  And if he does not fully confess, he can be had for perjury too….. And presumably any argument about ‘Royal’ immunity has gone, even if anything happened while he was a  ‘Royal’?

He could flee to Abu Dhabi – but with no social circle/influence – and still face posible extradition.

He could follow the example of Gary Glitter, enjoy the company of young women in Vietnam – but far from his family, and no doubt followed everywhere by journalists…..

If he could manage a Welsh accent, maybe sheep farming in Patagonia could be a good solution (at least from Charles and William’s viewpoint. Only ‘purgatory’ would be further away….

He could opt for plastic surgery, a fitness course, and join the French  Foreign Legion, with a french name and passport in due course….. (unless rumbled by his arrogant attitude and so on…)

You could wonder about his mental health – what will he do.  His status has collapsed, no doubt he will blame others not himself.  But it wouldn’t surprise if his future role was mainly that of a depressed man, possibly with a degree of suicidal ideation…

And it should be noted, his settlement with Guiffre committed him to making some social amends.  Had he done that, volunteered, albeit difficult if the beneficial  causes would bring him in to contact with potentially vulnerable women – but he could have volunteered in a central London late night soup kitchen or homeless shelter.  Done with  humility, it could have improved his standing.

He could have offered his many spare rooms to the homeless, or people from Ukraine. 

If he took in Ukrainian families (with a chaperone or two!), he could have been seen helping get the kids to school, organising birthday  parties for the kids.  He could have helped fund getting the families together, as and when their fighting husbands got R&R breaks.

Maybe helped raise money for Ukraine’s fight – donated some of his own wealth – finessing his own military record. Funding, say, top of the range personal protection equipment, bullet proof jackets, the best helmets and boots.  Be seen supporting them on the ground.

Maybe even being seen to facilitate a ‘Xmas record’ – quietly in the background but visible – maybe thereby funding portable gas heaters and gas bottles to help Ukrainian families cope with their bitter winters.

 And Fergie could have been seen giving a hand, supporting the families, and thereby doing something positive for her reputation.

I t would have been a long haul, no ‘quick fix’.  But it might also have helped fill his life with something worthwhile.

But all of that is too late now, a  missed opportunity.  Presumably because of his sense of entitlement (and stupidity).

but are they on the inside or the outside……

I list below some recent stupidities in UK governance. It’s almost like we have a fifth column of foreigners bent on destroying us (or possibly a bit like Trump appearing to be in Putin’s pocket?). A Trojan Horse of destroyers invited through the gate……

Sadly, however, it appears that these problems are self-inflicted, courtesy of poor quality – low calibre – leaders.

This blog seems to almost write itself. The nonsenses are so in our face.

I list five below. The first comes from our Housing Minister, who was previously an Environment Minister.

When viewing a new ‘green’ house, he was shown a hot water cylinder in a cupboard. Incredibly he thought it was a heat pump. This really is scandalous. Where to start! Air source heat pumps are now more common – ‘obviously’ they process air to extract heat – this needs air flow, something not possible in a cupboard. They tend to look like big white shoeboxes (on edge), they look nothing like a hot water cylinder, so presumably he is in charge of encouraging people to use heat pumps, but has never seen one. He should have known that their location is an issue – not too close to neighbours, difficult to locate if you live in a flat, and so on. Nobody has ever suggested putting them in a cupboard to solve the location issue!

The second example is the Ajax armoured vehicle. The senior army officer (client) expressed concerned seven years ago about noise and vibration. He spent limited time in one, but sustained 20% hearing loss. It is apt to say he wasn’t listened too, There has been an almighty cover up. Everyone wanted to turn a blind eye to the problems.

It is now seven years late, a billion over budget, and one option now being considered is to scrap them.

It appears that the main problem might be the use of metal rather than rubber tracks. Rubber was felt not the best option. If addressed at the time, it may be that a third way would be possible, maybe a metal/rubber hybrid

My third example is the procurement of two aircraft carriers, without funding a full complement of aircraft, and destroyers/frigate to escort them. Can it really just be called stupid?

The other two examples come in the ‘green’ category. How on earth can you procure wind and solar without energy storage. Or pricing in the cost of storage or substituies? I live ‘off grid’ in terms of electricity. I bought solar panels, the ‘controller’ and batteries. The batteries are clearly crucial and non-optional. On a dark winter’s night, no sun, and frequently no wind…….. there’s no renewable supply, so are we supposed to sit in the dark?

Yet that is what ‘Mad Ed’ has done…..as have his predecessors…… And moreover he has to pay to turn off wind power at times, partly at least because it cannot be directed into storage…..

The fifth example is just as bad. I think it fair to say that electric cars are not entirely a good idea, but their ubiquity by 2030 – five years time – has been government policy.

Everybody knows that if this happens, if will ‘fry the grid’. There is not sufficient national electric grid capacity (let alone power) to meet this demand. Obviously it has not helped that AI has come from nowhere, and it’s demand for electicity for computer processing power is huge.

The responsible civil servant appears to be living in ‘cloud cuckoo land’. His probably optimistic view is that we need twice the equivalent of what has been built (pylons etc) in the last ten years and build it in the next five years.

In other words four times the quantity each year. Given the delays with procurement, planning permission and so on, this seems like wishful thinking. No doubt he’s hoping to have moved on to another job by 2030.

In summary, I despair……

We clearly lack people of talent to be our senior politician. The recent post holders evidence this. The current field is sparse – there’s nobody in Labour or Conservative parties at the moment that you could commend. Extreme right and left have dubious, or unproven at best, leaders, with various questionable packages of potential policies.

There is an alternative way forward. The English football team, one of our key ‘patriotic’ symbols, has appointed a German manager, as the best available.

I would suggest we approach an international head hunter to recruit the best of the best, globally, as our Prime Minister.

Our country is clearly in crisis, rudderless, decling rapidly, and needs a government of national unity. Parliament needs to unite, and agree to recruit the best as a Prime Minister to lead us, say for five years. Given that it is successful, they could then stand for election for a further term.

Who might fit the bill? Donald Tusk or Justin Trudeau would have quality and experience to offer. Maybe we could pursuade Barack Obama, ideally supported by Gavin Newsom. Possibly Pedro Sanchez, the Spanish leader.

I like the idea of agreeing a merger between the UK and Ukraine. This would also show our commitment to democracy, standing up to thugs. Bring back to life some great British qualities. Join NATO as merged country. Get on war footing, put troops in to Ukraine.

This would enable the appointment of Zelensky as our leader. Given the guts he has shown, he should be able to sort our problems, and tackle our vested interests without too much difficulty. I toyed with suggesting that we then send Kier Starmer to Kiev as deputy leader – but they would need and deserve better.

A personal choice would be Bruce Springsteen – he has some liking for our nation as the site of his first concerts outside of America.

He understands patriotism, he has great values. A man with integrity. I’d try to pursuade him to do the job, jointly with Patti Scialfa (they are strong together) and supported by George Clooney.

The final, and obvious choice, would be Jurgen Klopp. He’s good at tactics, he knows how to engage with and motivate people, he’s driven. We could ask him to bring his philosophy of gegenpress to bear: to push forward relentlessly, tackle the problems early, with a winning mentality.

Clearly some would need supportng expertise, but like Ronald Reagan, the skill is not in doing everything yourself, but in recruiting good people.

Any of the above would be infinitely better than the post Kier apocalypse that we face……..

Tomorrow I am writing a blog about the need for a better Prime Minister, and the need to make positive things happen.

I reference Klopp’s ‘gegenpress’ – the idea in football that was about being very positive, be proactive, be energetic, on the front foot.

I think it is a good simily for what the UK Government needs to do.

It seems that the Government – of left and right – have just got bogged down by circumstances. To be fair, from the 2008 global financial crisis, Brexit, Covid, the Ukraine impact on food costs, it has been much of a perfect storm.

Whether politicians are by nature second rate can be debated – see tomorrow’s blog – but they have all been reactive, off the pace (I hate slang like ‘behind the curve’ but it is an apt description). They have brought hardly any positive initiatives, and failed to grip the big issues.

So what actually needs doing? Basically it is about improving the economy.

It’s tempting to mention the welfare, pensions and demographic timebomb. This also highlights another problem – you really need to take a 20 year view to address this, rather than just fend it off before the next election. We simply need to decide what we can afford – say 10% of GDP, and make the discussion about how you split it up. It’s a hard truth, but if you go for a larger perentage, GDP will fall, and leave less in the pot to allocate…..

I think my best example is that of large projects. HS2, nuclear power stations, major road developments, and so on. Ship building, weapons, you name it Other countries do it quicker, we did similar things quicker in wartime.

If the life of your child depended on it, you would do it quicker.

So, the Prime Minister should decree that all such projects can only commence or continue if within a five year ‘start to completion’ time scale. The project manager can be given ten days to produce the critical path. The top auditors should be required – maybe ‘pro bono’ in the national interest – to send in (very) small teams to validate these timecales.

You can predict that the actual construction or engineering components are likely to be quite reasonable. The issues are probably procurement and contractual issues, rules and regulations, approvals, consultation.

The ‘gegenpress’ approach is that you cue up the start on site right away, get on with it, and leave the ‘bureaucrats’ to hang onto your coattails.

You could offer 10% bonuses to the contractor for an early finish, 10% penalty if late.

The major projects should have to report weekly to a ‘Prime Minister’s Unit – staffed maybe by military officers seconded for a period – they would be accountable to the Prime Minister, and any delays reported. There would be no tolerance or excuses for delays.

Third, there is no doubt that Brexit has had an adverse effect, with few benefits identifiable. We need to re-join Europe and expand our market for goods and services.

We need growth. In the private sector, goods and services (not in the ‘nanny state’). This needs investment, but also people with enthusiasm, inspired and innnovative people. Existing in a positive environment. I’ve argued for it elsewhere, but why not make all ‘growth’ tax free for five years. That would set the tone….

Finally, we need to make typical families better off. They have seen their net incomes at best stagnate. No wonder they are disenchanted with mainstream politics – it is doing nothing for them – and provoking what might be mainly ‘protest votes’ for extremists.

If I was Prime Minister, I would explain that we are determined to help them. Tell them that we will be cutting governent spend by 5% and putting it in their pocket. Many people would say this is wrong or too difficult, but, again, if your child’s life depended on it, it would suddenly be possible,,,,

Cut overseas aid, reduce the ‘green’ spend, cancel HS2. I love opera and ballet, but I would cancel all related government spend for the time being – it’s a luxury we can’t afford. Ditto arts spend, and any ‘woke’ initiatives. We appear to be funding PhD research in bizarre ‘social’ areas. Cut the hierarchy in the Military, ditto Police. I read that there are 5,000 people working in the Cabinet Office, you could start there. Then cut ‘Royal’ subsidies.

You could then talk to the people, the ‘workers’ at all levels, and explain the aims. You could add that when the economy starts growing, there will be a limited new fund for things like Overseas Aid and ‘culture’ about which they would be consulted.

I believe in the ‘free market’ and the incentive to compete, innovate, and offer excellent customer service.

In competitive markets, maybe with at least three significant businesses, my view is that bosses that succeed can reasonably be highly rewarded.

There is though in my mind a very strong contrast with less competitive markets. You can call these monopolies or quasi-monopolies.

The obvious example is the utility businesses. In effect no competition. There is no local competition, nor overseas competitors.

The government organisations are effectively in this same boat. This includes senior civil servants and goverment agencies. Likewise the NHS, and the BBC. Universities are another example.

None of these ‘Chief Eecutives’ face much if any competition.

However, in terms of pay, they try to argue about their ‘weighty responsibilities’ and how they need ‘special people’ in these roles.

It is however obscene to be paying some of these people in the order of half a million pounds per year, when really all they have to do is go through the motions. How often is it said that performance is not good enough and action taken?

Personally I would limit the pay in these roles to that of the Prime Minister. I feel confidant that should vacancies arise, you could find first rate candiates on this sort of pay.

Given that Finance Directors and H.R. Directors are often on 80% of Chief Executive pay, it would end the nonsnese of a BBC H.R, Director being paid three hundred thousand pounds a year…..

Traditionally, if you didn’t want to admit something, but denying it brought a risk of perjury – the solution was to claim you couldn’t remember….

At the moment a number of Trump’s senior staff are in an extremely difficult position – they are being asked to do things that are illegal.

When cross examined by Congress, they can’t admit the truth, but daren’t deny it.

For example Patel was asked if any FBI staff had been dismissed because of involvement in Jan 6 or impeachment investigations.

He made a bad mistake by saying ‘not for that reason alone’ which obviously implies it was part of the reason (and probably illegal).

He was then repeatedly asked if he had dismissed them partly for that reason.  He couldn’t be honest, and say yes, nor commit perjury. 

So he went for the oblique, depersonalised, response.  Phrases like ‘the FBI follows all proper procedures’, and so on. And then going off on a diversionery rant, about Biden’s FBI or whatever.

If something wasn’t the case he could just have said so.

So by so desperately trying to avoid answering the question directly, he was actually in effect admitting it…….

Tracks and weighs 38 tons

Ths vehicle is an utter debacle – with bad noise and vibration, it puts soldiers in hospital.

This is despite two layer ear protection.  It is excessively noisy even outside the vehicle. This cannot be part of the ‘military compact’.

How has this come about – possible explanations include:

Ego of a senior person

Preference for ‘in house’ engine

Corruption

DEI, H&S, bureaucratic restrictions. Maybe it had to be designed by a 50% female engineer team etc.

Procurement, legal and contract issues – maybe had to use an ‘European’ engine

Incredibly eight years late,  and a billion spent……..

We now have the issues of ‘sunk costs’  and further delays.

However, somebody needs to ‘bite the bullet’ and make the right decision.  Rolls Royce used to make engines that were so quiet in cars that you could hear the clock tick.  You could balance a ‘threepenny’ bit on the engine, and the vibration would not topple it.

There may be other issues, I read today that it has metal tracks, and rubber might be better…..

it must be possible to create a good product – what have other manufactures done?  Incidentally heads have to roll for this – proper disciplinary action and punishment.

And someone now needs to invoke ‘the dunkirk spirit’  – like building Spitfires – or making vaccines – personally I’d camp out at the factory, get the best engineers in, 24/7, have a prototype running in within three months, prove the principles, then churn them out with a real sense of urgency.  It may be just replacing the engines, not building the rest from scratch.   If I could come out of retirement and do this –  why can’t these supposed professionals?