On Tuesday, Chancellor of the Exchequer CDocwra announced the intention of the Government to partially nationalise British Steel by purchasing ‘a large but not majority share’ in the failing company.
British Steel is owned by the private investment company Greybull Capital, having purchased Britain’s second-largest steelworks for a token sum of £1 in 2016. It is thought the company employs up to 5,000 people.
On Sunday, Chinese firm Jingye Group announced it was withdrawing from negotations and a deal reputably worth £1.2 billion, citing a ‘diplomatic pressure campaign against China’ by the British government.
When approached by the Telegraph, a Government spokesperson explained the Government intended to purchase ‘40% or so’ of the company, at a cost of ‘around £2 billion’. It is not clear how this figure was calculated.
There has been a mixed response from the opposition, with Conservative Party Chief Whip CheckMyBrain11 ‘[commending] the work of the Chancellor’ and prominant Libertarian zhuk236 accusing the Government of ‘selling steel workers a falsehood.’ Speaking anonymously, a Conservative Member of Parliament dismissed the nationalisation, saying ‘we should not prop up failing industries.’
state-aid rules are to be followed completely
It is also unclear wether such a nationalisation would violate European Union state-aid rules, which regulate subsidy provided by member states and seeks to prevent the ‘distortion’ of competition. Speaking to the Telegraph, a spokesperson for the European Commission made clear ‘state-aid rules are to be followed completely’ and ‘the matter at hand, should the Commission find to be in violation of said rules, will be raised directly with the government.’
Thomas Cook, also the United Kingdom’s 7th largest airline, has been undergoing severe financial instability with the Financial Times reporting the travel group may be forced into compulsory liquidation within days.
A Government spokesperson estimated “as many as 150,000 [citizens] who are currently abroad may be affected by any collapse”, going further to say the Government “will be ready to conduct the biggest repatriation ever in peacetime” should the travel group cease trading. In a contingency plan named “Operation Matterhorn”, a “significant number of aircraft” would be chartered to bring nationals stranded abroad home.
will be ready to conduct the biggest repatriation ever in peacetime
The priority of The Government will be, however, to prevent a collapse. Speaking to members of the press, the spokesperson said the Government is “ready to facilitate talks with the airline in order to find a way to secure the airline’s long-term future”.
A government source also said of the collapse, work was being conducted by “the Departments for Transport, Business and Work and Welfare” on “the potential ramifications for jobs, local economies, customers with bookings, and flight prices.”
Planning also includes a “letter from the Business Secretary to insurance companies asking that they fast track and approve any claims relating to the liquidation”; a “taskforce to be set up by the Business Secretary to monitor and examine the impacts of the closure on local areas, flight prices, and the industry as a whole; and, a “statement from the Work and Welfare Secretary.”
The source was confident “this plan should reassure the public that the government knows exactly what is needed to ensure that Thomas Cook’s closure will be mitigated as far as possible.”
The Secretary of State for Defence, the veteran Labour politician Padanub, announced the deployment of “350 paratroopers” of the 2nd Battalion The Parachute Regiment will be deployed to the Afghan capital in “late September” for a tour of six months.
The Secretary of State described their mission as “to provide a protection service” to NATO advisors “working in government ministries”, including “UK Mentors based at the Afghan National Army Officers Academy”.
Mr Padanub revealed the choice of 2 PARA as being motivated by their ability to operate “on foot and vehicle”, with “Foxhound patrol vehicles and Civilian Armoured Vehicles” to be used in navigating “the busy streets of Kabul”.
2 PARA had been training in Norfolk in Exercise Kabul Convoy, practising scenarios including “convoy movements and recovering a broken-down vehicle”.
Training Officer Captain Tom Shaw described the role of the brigade as providing “force protection” to “advisors helping the development of the Afghan Army and Government”. Speaking of preparing for deployment, Captain Shaw described “working with the Foxhound” for “several months”, going further to say “our paratroopers have shown the flexibility to adapt to a different way of operating quite easily”.
The contents of this article is canon and may be treated as such.
It was to “settle the issue”, in the words of a Prime Minister. A cross-party, independent commission to navigate the murky waters of devolution. It was to answer two thrusting questions. Firstly, the “correct arrangement” for calling a referendum on a reserved matter. And perhaps most significantly; which powers are best administered by devolved government in the place of Westminster, and which are not.
The Royal Commission for Devolution was announced on the 28th April, seen largely as a response to politicians in Scotland demanding new powers and a larger role in Scottish decision-making. Attributing to a feeling of being ignored, leading to the controversial Referendum on Scottish Welfare Devolution, the commission was well received.
The leader of the Irish Parliamentary Party, also a member of the commission, promised “a solution to the devolution question, once and for all”. The leader of the Social Democratic Party spoke of the commission as “only a positive thing for our country”.
[The Royal Commission] aims to put to bed the issue of devolution long-term: not just to Scotland but to all areas of Britain.
With a membership of ten, the commission was to draw on a broad range of expertise and political opinion; representing no less than seven political parties and groupings.
Yet the warrant issued by the sovereign, on the advice of the government of the day, made clear the expectation of the commission to publish its findings “by the end of July”. At the time of publishing this article, the 17th August, no such report has been published.
Speaking anonymously to The Model Telegraph, a source close to the work of the commission described it as a “ghost town”. Another, who shall also remain anonymous, spoke of “[twenty] pages of comments and findings” that “have not been formally compiled into one document”; also warning not to expect a report “anytime soon”.
Explaining the delay as the fault of “people who were meant to provide expertise ended up not doing their part, in particular those who now are set to occupy the highest offices of Sunrise”. Despite this, they were “confident a report will be produced”.
…people who were meant to provide expertise ended up not doing their part, in particular those who now are set to occupy the highest offices of Sunrise.
The expected contents of this report remain unclear, with such a broad range of views held by members of the commission, a compromise appeared to be inevitable. Yet the Model Telegraph was told “welfare [devolution] does not have a mandate”, with “many” members of the commission viewing “the matter of changing the constitutional settlement as not being worth it”. Going further, the source argued the “issue has been settled in favour of the status quo” with “those who are meant to support… change have decided to no longer fight for it”.
The European Chief Negotiator, Michel Barnier, spoke exclusively with The Model Telegraph on Wednesday; reacting to the results of the General Election, the future relationship between the United Kingdom and European Union and the policy of a government yet to be decided.
Throwing cold water on the ‘immigration proposal’ of the prospective Conservative-led coalition, in which the government would ‘seek reciprocal free movement’ with ‘most rich EU nations’, Mr Barnier said he was “overjoyed that the Conservatives have come around to the consensus on Freedom of Movement, if only because their governing coalition demands it…” Going further to say of the proposal, “there is an issue with only allowing certain countries free movement and not others… as far as I’m aware there is no way to simply allow the wealthy countries in and not the rest. Nor would we want that.”
…as far as I’m aware there is no way to simply allow the wealthy countries in and not the rest. Nor would we want that.
This comes as the Prime Minister responded to scepticism that the European Union would approve of a pick and mix style Freedom of Movement, in a question asked by DF44 of The Guardian. Mr 99 responded by saying “these agreements will be negotiated on a bilateral basis with the member states…”
It is unclear where this leaves the ‘immigration proposal’ and will no doubt prove a blow to the Prime Minister, whose concessions on immigration were intended to win over the Classical Liberals and Liberal Democrats. The Conservative Party has been approached for comment.
Speaking to The Model Telegraph, a Classical Liberal Spokesperson responded to the words of Mr Barnier by saying “non-EU immigration is a member state competency, so seeking bilateral mobility deals with individual EU nations is not a matter of EU commission competence.” Going further to argue “the commission has no say on that matter.”
When asked to comment on the intention of this government to ‘pursue a trade deal with the European Union’, with ‘association agreements with Europol, the EMCD, the EMA’, Mr Barnier said European negotiators “would prefer the widest ranging and deepest relationship as possible”, saying of this relationship “membership in the European-wide bodies is something we are willing to agree when we begin trade deal discussions, as well as discussing possible financial contributions that may be involved.”
…membership in the European-wide bodies is something we are willing to agree when we begin trade deal discussions, as well as discussing possible financial contributions that may be involved.
The Frenchman’s attention was then directed towards what is widely considered the alternative government, led by the Labour Party. Reacting to the policy of maintaining free movement of people, yet leaving the Single Market, Mr Barnier made clear the “the stance of the European Union that the four freedoms are indivisible. Freedom of movement cannot work without the other three, nor can the other three work without it”.
…the four freedoms are indivisible.
Reacting to comments made by a ‘European big-whig’ that “Sunrise+ is the preferred option of the European Union”, as reported in The Daily Mail, he described the conduct of the unnamed official as inappropriate. He expanded by saying “each politician in the European Union has their own opinions on which government they would prefer… I will not comment on mine.”
A document obtained by The Model Telegraph reveals the Executive Coalition’s agreed ‘immigration proposal’. Tearing up the White Paper of last term, An immigration system after the European Union, the prospective government would ‘seek reciprocal free [movement]’ with ‘CANZUK and most rich EU nations.’ Also included is a commitment to ‘operate in full compliance with EFTA rules on internal immigration’.
This news comes in stark contrast to historic Conservative Policy of opposing Freedom of Movement. The climax of which occured during the Referendum of the Single Market.
The Conservative Party has confirmed the agreement has the support of leadership, also saying “the Conservative Party won’t be conducting a party vote.”
The Conservatives would take two Great Offices of State: The Office of Prime Minister and the Foreign Office. The Classical Liberals would claim the Treasury and the Liberal Democrats, the Home Office.
Altogether, the cabinet would contain 16 Conservatives, 10 Classical Liberals and 9 Liberal Democrats. This would mark a sharp decline in the influence of the Conservative Party, who boasted 22 cabinet ministers last term.
On Monday the Conservative Party announced “negotiations to form a Conservative led government”, the so-called Executive Coalition joined by the Classical Liberals and Liberal Democrats, were underway. Named after the governing coalition in Northern Ireland, such a government would be short of a majority with 50 seats in the House of Commons, likely the motivation of achieving a “confidence and supply from the Irish Parliamentary Party”, with such negotiations also confirmed to be taking place.
This news comes as the Labour Party makes a bid to lead the 22nd government in concert with the Liberal Alliance and Social Democrats: The Sunrise+ Coalition.
A Classical Liberal spokesman confirmed “teams from the Conservative and Unionist Party, Classical Liberals and Liberal Democrats have met to discuss a possible coalition”, describing these negotiations as “productive”.
When approached for comment, the Labour Leader said, “I believe it would be wrong from me to comment on other parties’ matters”; before going on to say he “[remains] confident that Labour is fully able to form a centre-left government”.
An anonymous source close to negotiations told The Model Telegraph “we are extremely close to a deal”. Going further to say the agreement is “enjoying widespread support from [leadership]” and “it is clear the Conservatives are willing to move away from the politics of Blurple”.
Friedmanite19, the Leader of the Libertarian Party, reacted to this story by saying “it is of deep regret that the [Libertarians] will not form part of the next government and have been abandoned by the Conservatives…”. Describing the Liberal Alliance as “nearly [bringing] this country to the brink”, he went on to say of the coalition “I will reserve judgement for when I see the policies but I fear the Conservatives may have made too many concessions and have betrayed centre-right voters.”
I will reserve judgement for when I see the policies but I fear the Conservatives may have made too many concessions and have betrayed centre-right voters.
The Liberal Alliance will enjoy the leverage of kingmakers, able to choose between the Conservatives and Labour. The Model Telegraph understands the Liberal Alliance membership will vote between the two prospective agreements if negotiations are successful.
The Model Telegraph has been provided the incomplete coalition agreement between the Labour Party, Classical Liberals, Liberal Democrats and Social Democratic Party: The so-called Sunrise+ coalition.
The government would see Saunders16 of the Social Democratic Party take the position of Chancellor of the Exchequer with the party also occupying the Department for Energy and Climate Change.
The Labour Party would unsurprisingly take senior positions, including the office of Prime Minister and Secretary of State for the Home Department.
The Classical Liberals claim the Foreign Office and the Ministry for Exiting the European Union with the Liberal Democrats appearing to draw the short stick, securing the office of First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Defence.
The provisional cabinet includes an incomplete ‘Policy Agenda’ including an ‘Iran Strategy’ of ‘No swap for swap of the tankers’. Also included was a commitment not to cancel the State Visit of President Donald Trump, ‘retain Free Movement of People with Europe’ and ‘expand… to NATO and Commonwealth nations with 3/4ths of UK GNI’.
Also revealing is a unagreed ‘commitment to NATO and Trident as a clear matter of Cabinet Collective Responsbility’ perhaps in reference to the Labour Leader’s historic opposition to nuclear weapons.
When approached for comment, the Leader of the Labour Party, Secretary_Salami refused to comment saying: “We deny to comment until after the results of the election have been announced”.
The Prime Minister responded to a request to comment by saying of the negotiations, “It’s a little premature isn’t it? Don’t count your chickens before they’re hatched”.
Despite suffering losses, a projection commissioned by The Model Telegraph predicts the Conservative Party will remain the largest contingent of the House of Commons, the Labour Party in a close second with the Libertarian Party, Classical Liberals and Social Democratic Party also with much to celebrate.
The Liberal Democrats and the Green Party are expected to have a difficult night, with the latter contesting electoral oblivion. In our projection, we expect the Greens to go home empty handed.
If on Sunday this projection is proven to be correct, the Government of the Conservatives and Libertarians would fall to 48 seats. The so-called Sunrise+ coalition comprising of the Labour Party, Classical Liberals, Liberal Democrats and SDP could rely on 49 seats and mount an effective challenge for Downing Street. In this theoretical House of Commons, “other” including Plaid Cymru, The People’s Movement and The Democratic Reformist Front may become influential in deciding the success of any government.
The north of Scotland played host to a strong challenge from the Social Democratic Party and a relatively weak defence from a Conservative incumbent. Expect a large swing towards the challenger; although wether this will prove enough to dislodge a confortable lead in unclear.
Another Conservative incumbent in trouble, with a challenge lead by the Classcal Liberals; with endorsement from Labour and the Liberal Democrats. A strong campaign by both candidates could see a photo finish.
Birmingham, Solihull, and Coventry
With the absence of New Britain, and a Conservative no-show, the Liberal Democrats and Liberatarian Party will battle for this seat. Poor polling before the election and a weak national campaign could well see the Liberal Democrats unseated. Consider this seat a weather vane for a party hoping to stave off losses. Lose, and they should expect a poor night.
A straight fight between the controversial Banana_Republic_ and a former Prime Minister. Expect a close result as Labour target this seat with a strong campaign. The Conservatives may hold with a equally strong defence and an endorsement from the Libertarian Party.
Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire
Another Conservative no-show puts what would be considered a safe seat well into contention, with in insurgent Liberal Democrat campaign, the Conservatives will be hoping their lead is enough in the face of a weak Liberal national campaign.
Another Conservative held seat, another challenge from the opposition. This time, a sam-irl Labour campaign with momentum. The Conservatives will mount a strong defence, but ultimately we expect vote splitting with the Libertarians and Classical Liberals to hand Labour the seat.
Glamorgan and Gwent
The Welsh Liberal Alliance should be worried in the face of strong campaigning from Labour, the Conservatives and Plaid Cymru. A four horse race. In a seat where anyone can win, the Conservatives and Labour seem the most likely to gain from a weakened Welsh Liberal Alliance.