BBC BLOGS - Newsnight: From the web team
« Previous | Main | Next »

Monday 18 October 2010

Sarah McDermott | 10:25 UK time, Monday, 18 October 2010

Here's what is coming up on tonight's programme with Jeremy Paxman:

The government today outlined the threats facing the country in its National Security Strategy.

The most serious include acts of international terrorism, cyberspace attacks, a major accident or natural hazard such as a flu pandemic, or an international military crisis between states that draws in the UK and its allies.

Our Diplomatic editor Mark Urban will give us his assessment of the strategy and we hope to discuss the issues raised with a member of the National Security Council.

Our Political and Economics editors will be looking ahead to Wednesday's publication of the government's Spending Review, and bringing us the latest on what they're hearing on where we should expect the cuts to fall.

Then Jeremy will be joined by civil rights activist Rev Jesse Jackson and Brian Paddick - who was once responsible for 20,000 police officers across London's 32 boroughs - to debate whether the police are targeting ethnic minorities when they stop and search.

Rev Jackson asserts that Britain's moral authority is being damaged by the government's failure to stop the police discriminating against ethnic minorities. But Paddick maintains that officers should be free to stop and question anyone, regardless of their ethnicity.

And we have a film about Project Prevention - the US charity which has come to the UK offering to pay drug users who agree to be sterilised or have vasectomies. We'll be debating the morality of the initiative with Project Prevention's founder Barbara Harris and a former addict turned drug advice worker, Mandy Ogunmokun.


  • Comment number 1.


    Oh joyful media! 'Vasectomies for drug addicts'. Let's all shut our eyes and describe a small bit of the elephant in the room. Media Awards all round.

    You are such a disgrace. TV has proven power to rot minds - hence culture - BUT IT ALSO IS A CANNULA INSERTED INTO EVERY PSYCHE. The BBC has a wonderful opportunity for enhancing lives. HANG YOUR HEADS.

    This rant is backed by experience, relevant enquiry and a viable, structured approach. Ignore me - of course; but don't dismiss me.

  • Comment number 2.


    you are dismissed, singie

  • Comment number 3.

    Cyber warfare recently paralysed the Iranian nuclear power plant.... which means, it is possible to paralyse or compromise British nuclear power plants too, so of course it's on an equal footing!
    As for giving drug addicts £200 for getting sterilised - it is a reversible process :p and it still fails to stop the spread of HIV/Aids/Hepatitis C etc.......

  • Comment number 4.


    It took a woman (hoorah for the 'deadly' female) to chuck a necessary spanner in the works-that-don't-work.
    Let us hope a jemmy follows, and the whole fatuous charade is demolished.

    SMALL IS BEAUTIFUL. Yes - its a slogan - a sound bite, and not always true, but that OVERLARGE IS UNSUSTAINABLE is beyond doubt.

    You can't cyber-attack an allotment.

    Britain, as a viable entity, is dying before our eyes and under the nose of our Globopoly-playing leaders. We have one or two deadly females on here - perceptive, incisive and fearless; may more follow. The fake females in Parliament are not worth a row of collapsed souffles. Rise up, Women of Britain, the men are all, now, too 'caring' to care. Follow the Merkel banner and:


  • Comment number 5.

    "And we have a film about Project Prevention - the US charity offering to pay drug users in London, Glasgow, Bristol, Leicester and parts of Wales who agree to be sterilised or have vasectomies.

    The first person in the UK to accept the cash is a drug addict from Leicester who says he "should never be a father".

    We'll be debating with Project Prevention and a former addict turned drug worker"

    If it caught on (which I suspect it won't, as most people with these problems don't think that they are the ones with problems, they tend to think that other people have the problems), it would massively cut down crime as well as the prevalence of mental disorder in society. Sadly, I suspect it won't catch on for the reason given. Still, it's an interesting issue to cover. Well done, at least it opens up the whole subject for rational discussion

  • Comment number 6.


    Sometimes small is beautiful and sometimes not. Sometimes large is beautiful and sometimes not. I am small but not that beautiful. My mum was beautiful though also as short as me. But, I hope that some people do find certain aspects of me and things I do/create as sometimes beautiful.

    Plus, I don't at all think that the Westminster ladies fit your description, thanks nevertheless for considering me as fearless. Do you really think that?


  • Comment number 7.


    "it would massively cut down crime"

    Drug addicts, we are told, commit crime to feed their habit. How is a vasectomised drug addict any less 'hungry', and criminal thereby? I know the Ear-hole is connected to the toe-bone (from the old song) but had no idea that the snip made an addict 'clean'. Not a lot of narco-receptors in the scrotum. It's almost biblical!

  • Comment number 8.


    Giving praise to Newsnight from a tomb, DeadZeb? Plus, have you trained as a psychiatrist or a psychologist?

  • Comment number 9.

    Perhaps you (Newsnight) might ask event politician who appears on your show if they (and the parents) use the internet themselves? (i.e. not through a servant/data butler!)

    Start with Theresa May. (I don't know if she does or not).

  • Comment number 10.

    barriesingleton (7)


    Probably. The Home Office/Ministry of Justice knows from the PPO project and other research who high risk people are. Having their tubes tied means less of them will be born in the future.

    Policy advisors tend think long term - they tend to be quite bright in that way. There's not much to be done in the short-term alas, but many grow out of crime with age, or just die early. Sad, but true.

  • Comment number 11.

    #7. barriesingleton wrote: précis: Hang em all!

    Remember before you repeat another of your more intemperate outbursts that justice sometimes gets it wrong first time and posthumous acquittal will not help you much when you have suffered the punishment you seem so keen on inflicting on others.

    Now, if you really want to reduce crime why not bring back the stocks and the pillory. 'Yobs in Stocks' sound's good doesn't it!!!!

    OK A bill of attainder for all the city's bankers would also assuage many people's justified hatred of bankers too. [ By the way wasn't one suggested for Fred the Shred in 2008!]

  • Comment number 12.

    A MIXED BAG (#10 and #11)

    # 10 So (now) you seem to be advocating tube-tying for 'poor strains' of humanity, as identified by the Home Office/M of J. That would not be confined to drug addicts - presumably? Is this a PURELY genetic approach?

    #11 Grief JfH! I had no idea I was THAT obscure. I wonder if you missed the quotation marks enclosing my opener? (See Dead Zeb @#5 - final paragraph.)

    As for intemperate outbursts . . .

  • Comment number 13.

    Magnanimous Philanthropy?

    The spouse of the second richest man in the world ....

    Does not charity begin at home? Gary, Indiana perhaps a starting point.


    If, for some as yet unexplained reason, another continent is to be the main beneficiary....

    Why not spend the bulk of the money on condoms!

    Does the ‘foundation accepted’ concept of ....

    ‘ I’ve got two children that will make it to adulthood, so I won’t have anymore’

    .... really hold water when the woman has no say in what ‘night-time’ activities she may sic be required sic to participate sic in?

    And .... Oh yes!

    “Three strikes and you’re out” read the headline.

    How much more likely is that to happen than ....

    .... exogenous criminals being deported?

    And .... Oh yes!

    Germany has publicly stated that ‘multiculturalism’ has failed.

    This declaration is only a bit more as interesting as the fact that the BBC actually reports the story?

    Migration allows third world problems to continue to worsen, draining the skilled, the educated, the talented and the wealthy. Emigrated religious and cultural diktats coupled with, often, poor education and refusal to integrate creates an ongoing regeneration of the failure to implement balanced and viable policies. Maybe, just maybe, Germany has admitted the problem before it is too late?

    And the UK? .... More important thing to think about one must assume?

    And .... Oh yes!

    Are we yet fully overwhelmed (? blinded) by the mass of bluster we are getting from the Big Cons and the Lib Dims ahead of the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) and which is all too often is being insufficiently questioned and - yet still - willingly reported.

    “Puppets.” is a description often applied to Politicians.

    Are they glove, stringed or animatronic? Whom controls whom?

    Cannot the same two questions be asked of the Great British Public?


    Assuming ( I would suggest, hope, pray sic ) correctly that Nn staff are a little bit more ‘enlightened’ than some in the Corporation one believes that this next “And .... Oh yes!” just might get through!


    And .... Oh yes!

    In the name of sanity would someone please offer an intelligent explanation as to why a corporation presenter would immediately - Well not ‘immediately’, it took a second or two to recover her composure! - offer to the perceived audience an apology for a contributor on the programme using the terms “oral sex” and “mutual masturbation”?

    Is it any wonder - Any wonder at all! - that the UK has the highest single mothers cohort (Should that be ‘consort’?) in Europe if we cannot even be open enough to use the correct terminology during what was ‘marketed’ as an intelligent discussion?

    But then judging by some of the input from other guests on the programme ....

    ... maybe ....

    .... there really is no hope!

    And .... Oh yes!

    How many of the 30 ish signatories still need a knighthood?

    And .... Oh yes!

    Is not the operation being done on the wrong gender? Is it not the case that by being undertaken on the male of the species all that is guaranteed sic is that there is a 99 per cent possibility that the man will never have to pay child maintenance!

    And .... Oh yes!

    A simple thing .....

    What would the ‘posters’ on this site want to see from the CSR if they were the legitimately sic elected sic representatives sic of the GBP?

    Here, and now, could be your chance to contribute to the ‘big society’!

    Bear in mind that no-one might ‘listen’ ....

    .... but give it a go anyway!

  • Comment number 14.

    The US sees the main threat to National Security as the financial crisis-

    The fact that the British government has not even mentioned this is more than just disturbing it means they are turning a blind eye to the reality we all face. Of course soldiers, bombs and bullets are no use in dealing with that threat, we need forensic accountants and fraud investigators to find and remove the cancer at the heart of our financial system, without that the cancer will kill Britain's economy, remember over 90% of all economic transactions involve the banking system, when the system collapses so does everything else, papering over the insolvency of the banks with money printed by the Bank of England will not work, it will only delay the inevitable.

  • Comment number 15.

    If the U.K. is seen internationally as building what are widely perceived and reported as 'supercarriers', but- as will be the result of current plans- the UK's undergoing construction supercarriers turn out to be grievously dumbed-down, vulnerable, incapable and neutered due to both vessels not being fitted-out appropriately with weapons, communications and sensor systems AND not even able to embark fixed-wing aircraft*- the very rason de etra of aircraft carriers- it will make the country, its technological expertise/capabilities and its military a standing joke....

    * the nutty 'mega-helicopter carrier' proposal...

    Aircraft carriers and warships generally are all about projection of national presence...

    If the UK produces laughing stalk aircraft carriers, what would this do to the country's ability to continue projecting national presence world-wide?

    Due to its history, the UK more than any other nation on earth (other than, perhaps, the U.S.) comes into the warship build game with high 'positive' expectations and pre-formed positively-biased assumptions among the world's peoples every time it designs and builds a new class of surface and subsurface vessel...

    The UK is 'expected' to be able to build world beating warships that other countries would want for their navy's...

    If, as a result of the incredibly botched-by-the-previous-Labour-govt aircraft carrier project, the UK is viewed internationally to have designed and built obvious duds with each vessel having highly risky limitations and weaknesses.... and when this occurred, France is able to get away with marketing their largely-based-upon-UK-design-data 'PA2' aircraft carrier**- with its aircraft-launch catapults, ship self-defence systems, high-tech AESA radars, etc- to countries worldwide, the damages to the UK's international standing and defence-industries profiles would be immeasurably severe and long-reaching...

    Roderick V. Louis ,
    Vancouver, BC, Canada

  • Comment number 16.

    The UK won't remain a military power of first rank' unless current plans change and the promoted as 'world beating' new Type-45 Destroyers are fitted out as originally intended by their designers with:

    1) the equipment required so that Type-45s can be armed with and fire torpedoes as well as other ASW from-ship

    2) a first-rate rather than tenth-rate sonar & 'soft-kill' ASW systems;

    3) an appropriately versatile, capable missile/weapons-launcher such as the Lockheed Martin Mk 41 Strike or the 'SYLVER A70' instead of the grievously limited-in-versatility 'sylver A50';

    4) the equipment required to enable capability of being armed with Land attack missiles, such as the US 'Tomahawk' cruse missile;

    5) the equipment required to enable capability of being armed with anti-ship missiles;

    6) the sensors, communications, computer and other equipment required for 'Cooperative Engagement Capability' (CEC);

    Due to their not being fitted with aircraft launch catapults, the RN's (planned) new aircraft carriers will be restricted to Harrier type (short/vertical take off & land (STOVL)) fixed-wing aircraft & helicopters- ... types of aircraft that can not duplicate even remotely the function of modern, fixed-wing Conventional Take-off and Land (CTOL) Airborne early Warning And Control (AWACS) aircraft... :

    "... In 1982 the Falklands conflict provided a stark reminder of the vulnerability of surface forces operating in a hostile air environment without (AWACS) AEW support...

    "... The absence of such a capability in the face of sustained air attack gave the UK Royal Navy (RN) insufficient warning to counter threats at long range, & directly contributed to the loss of several ships...."

    Without CEC, and without the ability to deploy CEC-equipped AWACS aircraft (since the carriers won't have aircraft-launch catapults, which are required by fixed-wing AWACS aircraft) the UK's planned big deck aircraft carriers- AND ANY OTHER VESSELS ESCORTING THEM, SUCH AS Type-45s- are, individually, going to be restricted to operating within line of sight naval battle theatres, IE: the distance from the respective carrier to the horizon- about 20 miles... and consequently these vessels will be rendered hugely vulnerable to this century's most widely proliferated- AND LIKELY TO BE ENCOUNTERED- naval threat: sea skimming Anti-ship Cruise Missiles (ASCMs)*****

    Type-45s and ALL other RN surface vessels' radars can not 'see over the horizon' targets/threats that are at sea level and/or incoming at up to about 50 or 60 feet in altitude (depending on sea state)... meaning- WITHOUT CEC- Type-45s, the planned aircraft carriers and all other RN surface vessels are unable to react to ASCMs***** until ASCM's are less than 40 seconds from potential impact and about 18 miles out...

    E-2D Hawkeye: The (U.S.) Navy's New AWACS-

    7) sufficient weapon/missile launcher cells/modules* to raise Type-45s' AAW missile armament capacity to a reasonable mission-requirement level from the dangerously deficient '48' maximum missile-armament that they are constrained to...

    This, due to their being fitted with a CHEAP, inappropriately short, DANGEROUSLY LIMITED IN VERSTILITY weapons/missile launcher: the 'sylver A50'...

    Unless their weapons/missile launchers are swapped out for better quality models**** and unless more individual weapons/missile launcher cells/modules are fitted- Type-45 Destroyers' maximum AAW missile armament capacity is 1/3 to 1/10th that of other countries' warships of similar class & size, IE: US Burkes, Japan's Kongos and Atagos; S Korea's KDX IIIs; Germany's F-124s and F-125s; Holland's De Zeven Provinciens; etc


    8) the landing and communications related equipment required to embark the EH-101 Helo rather than the substantially inferior 'Lynx'; AND

    9) the equipment required to deploy Helos at night....

    10) a modern deck gun capable of firing 'Extended Range, Guided Munitions' (ERGM)/Long-range Land Attack Projectiles and other types of enhanced-accuracy munitions

    and providing 'legitimate' Naval Surface Fire Support (NSFS) instead of the stone-age short-range, inaccurate pea shooter fitted to/currently planned to be fitted to Type-45 Destroyers...


    Roderick V. Louis,
    Vancouver, BC, Canada

  • Comment number 17.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 18.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 19.




    Does the below proposal say the UK is going to continue to be a 'driver' of its own destiny- or become a 'passenger' in France's car??:

    1) "UK & France in talks on Trident maintenance", 07_10-2010: :

    "An agreement being negotiated by the UK & France would see British nuclear warheads serviced by French scientists & break with half a century in which neither country has collaborated on its independent deterrent...

    "Ahead of a summit in three weeks, the governments are close to agreeing that Britain would use a French laboratory to help maintain & service its 160 nuclear warheads, officials in both countries say..."

    2) "High hopes for Anglo-French nuclear accord", 07_10-2010: :

    "For more than a decade, Britain & France have talked about pressing ahead with co-operation on defence – without a great deal to show for it.

    "But as David Cameron, the prime minister & Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president, prepare for their first bilateral summit in a little over three weeks, there is an energy on this issue which suggests that Downing Street & the Elysée are looking for serious achievement.

    "The very fact that British & French officials are trying to reach a joint accord* on the servicing of nuclear warheads indicates the scale of the deal that both sides desire.."

    France's fully and/or partly state-owned companies own & run the UK's nuclear power plants; arm UK Destroyers & other Royal Navy vessels; monopolize UK rail services with France-made high-speed trains & track systems; own a significant amount of the UK's gas delivery & telephone systems AND (soon??) consequently can arbitrarily IE: without UK moderating- call the shots in the EU...

    What's next- NATO, UN? the UK becomes a 'province' or 'department' of France??

    While cooperating and working with France ought to be high on the priorty list of any UK politician and bureaucrat/their staffers- a dispassionate, objective evaluation of the broad, long-term consequences ought to be applied to processes wherein potential UK/France cooperation in defence related projects, programmes or issues is deliberated... and coupled with this: open-minded discretion...

    Roderick V. Louis
    Vancouver, BC, Canada

    * how would France's populace and media react if the UK were to become the sole-source for servicing- and by effect: controlling- their nuclear warheads???????

  • Comment number 20.

    barriesingleton (12)

    "Is this a PURELY genetic approach?"

    As opposed to what? That's what reproduction and its control is all about isn't it? Going back some time, what do you think Child Benefit was all about after the war?

    barriesingleton (12)

    "As for intemperate outbursts . . .

    Allegedly, this very common in our culture. It has something to do with the originator apparently confusing their own behaviour with that of others. Think about this, you are reading this on your computer screen or phone, but who is saying the words as you read? I understand that what happens is that some people misread/perceive what they encounter, get very annoyed with themselves, and then lash out. It can be most disconcerting to be on the receiving end of such behaviour as one is not responsible for any of it and so can't readily make sense of it.

    It is truly a most odd feature of our most bizarre culture.

  • Comment number 21.


    All the talented (creative) accountants work OUTSIDE the tax system, helping the obscenely rich 'go first and multiply'. Forensics doesn't earn a fraction of their pay.

    Another illustration of global unsustainability and absence of taboo.

  • Comment number 22.


    "(U.S. Navy) Harry S. Truman Carrier Strike Group Completes First Half of Deployment" 26_09-2010: :

    "Shortly after deploying May 21, the (U.S. Navy) Truman Carrier Strike Group participated in evolutions marking the 100th anniversary of French naval aviation.

    "The joint interoperability exercises with French aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle culminated with French aircraft trapping (landing) aboard Truman and (U.S.) F/A-18s (fighter/bombers) and E-2-C (fixed-wing AWACS radar planes) assigned to CVW 3 touching down (landing) on Charles de Gaulle.

    "Additionally, Truman's hanger bay was the site of a French Rafale F3 aircraft jet-engine maintenance removal and replacement evolution.

    "'This was the first time that an engine swap-out with a foreign navy was done on a U.S. carrier,' said Cmdr. Tim Hill.

    "'This was a big step in working toward the ability to operate a French squadron on a U.S. carrier.'" :

    "(France's naval aviation officer) observed that the French C-2 Hawkeye (aircraft) model is the same as the U.S., that they perform the same missions, and that the doctrines and qualification standards are the same in both services...

    "'During (OEF), it was a common practice for French and U.S. flight crews to swap out,' said (the officer). 'I flew with U.S. Hawkeye crews several times, and U.S. crews flew with us. We both benefit when we train together....'"


    The above types of exercises won't be possible for the UK's Royal Navy in the future if the planned big deck aircraft carriers are built/commissioned into the RN as currently designed:

    This as the only types of fixed-wing aircraft that can be deployed on the planned, ultra-economized- bereft of missile-based anti-airborne threat defences & armour aircraft carriers are 'short/vertical take off and land' (STOVL) types...

    STOVL fixed-wing aircraft are not compatible with U.S. Navy carriers which- like France's aircraft carriers- embark/deploy 'conventional take off and land' (CTOL) fixed-wing aircraft...

    And, thanks to the previous Labour govt's highly dangerous over-economizing- since the planned aircraft carriers are being built without aircraft-launch catapults- they won't be able to embark, service, land or launch the same types of fixed-wing aircraft as are deployed on USN and France's navy's aircraft carriers...

    The wrong decisions in the eventually completed Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) and its report- will guarantee the bust up of the UK...

    Despite times being tough- and balancing the country's annual budget deserving high importance- it could only benefit the United Kingdom's future political, economic and strategic interests if, as a result of the current Strategic Defence Review, that an unequivocally articulated, BOLDLY PRONOUNCED 'National statement' was made by the U.K. regarding what the U.K.'s intended future world roles & duties are and what the country's military & crisis intervention capabilities can be counted on- by the broader world community- during the coming 3-4 decades...

    Have many UK citizens/residents/British subjects thought out how catastrophic- and irreversible- the consequences would be for the UK to not maintain its leadership and 'top table' roles/positions on almost ALL of the world's political, economic, financial, security, military, legal, human rights and other multi-national bodies??

    By not retaining- and where possible- expanding- its decades-long pervasive, constructive and widely respected world-wide presence through its 'global capability military and its ubiquitously accessible Internet, Radio and TV-delivered news, information and entertainment media- the UK will be rendering itself an unnoticeable, irrelevant'third rank' country, equivalent to a Hungary, Lithuania or Romania... but with much higher wages and costs-of-doing business... "Romania with a large moat"

    A UK with a drastically diminished military- and no govt-articulated long-term road map setting out specifically delineated and time-lined capabilities improvements objectives for the parts of its armed forces that most 'project UK presence' world-wide, IE the Royal Navy and Marines- would be inviting its removal from the world's most important and influential political, economic, financial, security, military, legal, human rights and other multi-national bodies...

    The way the UK Defence acquisition game should change is by govt setting in place a 2 to 3 decade, AMBITIOUS, explicitly delineated in legislation, BOLD vessel + related equipment build/acquisition programme for the Royal Navy...

    This, rather than allowing the previous Labour govt's 12-years of Defence-planning and acquisition programme incompetence and gross negligence to, by inertia, vaporize the bulk of the UK's military and consequently destroy the country's ability to project power, technological expertise and constructive presence world-wide....

    Roderick V. Louis,
    Vancouver, BC, Canada

  • Comment number 23.


    "Making his first appearance before the panel as President Obama's top intelligence adviser, Blair said . . . "

    Someone tell me it isn't true. Any day now we shall see Archer as his PA.

    Oh - it's all way beyond humour.

  • Comment number 24.


    PART 1:

    The French pull out of the 2006-2008 UK/France aircraft carrier project*, IE 'stiffed the UK', and promptly began attempting to sell the UK-aircraft carrier model design (the 'PA2') that they had acquired as a result of participation in the project- - a project largely paid for by the UK- to other countries: (pgs 16-20) - pg 04

    While the UK is attempting to complete their over-economized by-the-previous-Labour-govt (IE without aircraft-launch catapults, ship self-defence systems and high-tech AESA radars), conventional fossil-fuel powered carriers, France studies whether its PA2 carrier can be built- 2011 or 2012- as a NUCLEAR POWERED aircraft carrier:

    [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
    [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]

    "After analysis, the decision on the construction of a second aircraft carrier (PA2) is postponed for the following main reasons:

    "... the economic conditions have changed since the decision in 2003 to use conventional propulsion for the new aircraft carriers... Additional studies are now needed to assess the comparative advantages presented by both conventional propulsion and NUCLEAR PROPULSION (my emphasis- rvl) options..."

    In projects of international stature and profile, France will always attempt to surreptitiously outdo the British, regardless of what is said up front...

    It happened in the failed NGCF Frigate project of the late 1980's, the failed 'Horizon Frigate/Destroyer' project of the 1990's and with the aircraft carrier project of only a couple of years ago....

    Any future UK/France defence projects ought to be proceeded with by the UK with the utmost diligence and caution...

    Roderick V. Louis
    Vancouver, BC, Canada

    * "UK and France sign carrier deal", 06_03-2006:

    "PA2 deferment scuppers CVF savings", 08_07-2008:

    "Porte-Avions 2 (PA2) Future Aircraft Carrier, France":

  • Comment number 25.


    PART 2:

    During 2002, in a tacit nod to support EU member nations' cohesion the UK agreed to purchase France's DCNS-produced, new-to-the-market 'sylver A50' missile/weapons launchers DESPITE THEIR HUGE & VERY SERIOUS LIMITATIONS IN VERSATILITY* for the UK's then undergoing design & development Type-45 Destroyers...

    This despite the US's Lockheed Martin- in a partnership with the UK's BAE Systems***- producing & marketing a cheaper, widely proven, HIGHLY VERSATILE** missile/weapons launcher- the MK 41 VLS- that was both cheaper & more compatible with the Type-45s' architecture than the sylver A50...

    * can only launch anti airborne-threat warfare (AAW) missiles & only one type of AAW missile, the 'built-in-France', 12-15 mile range Aster-15 & its bigger brother, the 45-50 mile range also 'built-in-France' Aster-30.

    ** :

    "The MK 41 VLS is a modular, below deck missile launching system (&) is a multi-missile, multi-mission launcher, capable of launching SM-2, SM-3, SM-6, ESSM, Tomahawk, & Vertical Launch ASROC missiles..."

    The sylver A50's glaring lack of capabilities to be armed with missiles/weapons other than Asters are compounded by its inability to have its individual missile cells/silos 'quad-packed', IE loaded with 4 missiles/weapons in a single cell/silo, Thanks to BAE the Lockheed MK 41 VLS does have quad-packing capabilities***

    *** :

    "...As the U.S. Navy's VLS Mk 41 missile canister design agent, BAE Systems has developed the Mk 25 Quad-Pack canister, which can vastly increase a ship's self-defense capability. The Mk 25 Quad-Pack allows the system to store & fire four (15-18 mile range) Evolved SeaSparrow Missiles (ESSMs) in a canister space that normally contains a single weapon."

    ->>> The ESSM is roughly comparable to the Aster 15 in terms of speed, range, warhead size, seeker technology & lethality.

    ->>> The lower end versions of the SM-2 are roughly comparable to the Aster 30 in terms of speed, range, warhead size, seeker technology & lethality...

    But, unlike Aster 15s & Aster 30s, ESSMs & SM-2s can be used against recently identified littoral threats such as high-speed suicide boats, surface craft & other non-airborne targets...

    What does the UK get back for buying the highly-inferior sylver A50 missile/weapons launcher for its new Type-45 Destroyers: defective missiles!!!!


    - "UK probes Sea Viper missile test failures", 04_01-2010:

    [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]

    ""... it seems that (the UK's) test failure was caused by a minor defect in the manufacturing process of the missile..."

    - :

    "... an investigation into the (failed) firing off the south coast of France found that it was a DESIGN FLAW (my emphasis- rvl) with the Aster missile..."

    - :

    "the cause of a series of Aster-30 missile test failures: 'production weaknesses' in recent batches of Aster missiles"

    1) 'why aren't the UK's Sea Viper/Aster missiles being manufactured- or at least assembled- at plants in the UK??' (considering that the Sea Viper (aka 'Aster 15 & Aster 30) missile manufacturer is MBDA- & that the UK's BAE is a major shareholder in MBDA): :

    "... MBDA is jointly owned by BAE SYSTEMS (37.5%), EADS (37.5%) & FINMECCANICA (25%).."

    2) 'why have France's tests of their missiles (apparently) not suffered the problems of the UK's'?

    3) 'why have other countries- such as:

    a) Saudi Arabia (Al Riyadh class Frigates ); &

    b) Singapore (Formidable class Frigate, )

    ... not suffered the same or similar problems with their Aster missiles as the Aster missiles provided to the UK??

    Considering that the UK's BAE is part-owner of MBDA, the Aster missile manufacturer, why aren't the Aster-15 & Aster-30 AAW missiles that the UK's Type-45 Destroyers are stuck with being armed with**** being manufactured or at least assembled in the UK??

    Answer: France's bureaucrats' & politicians' & their staffers too often exhibiting hypocritical, self-serving nationalist agendas!!

    Roderick V. Louis
    Vancouver, BC, Canada

    **** due to lack of versatility of these vessels' 'sylver A50' missile/weapons' launchers...

    Additional reference links regarding the UK buying France's missile launchers and missiles produced by a part-France-owned company for the UK's Type-45 Destroyers:

    [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
    (** :
    [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
    VIDEO: :

    "... SM-2 Block IIIA missiles have greater capability at even lower altitudes than previous SM-2 versions, a more powerful fragmentation warhead, and can use Interrupted Continuous Wave Illumination (ICWI) to improve performance against supersonic maneuvering anti-ship missiles..."

    Roderick V. Louis,
    Vancouver, BC, Canada

  • Comment number 26.

    @21, perhaps we need a "National Service" of accountants.

  • Comment number 27.



    The French have- in projects with international profiles, roles & prestige- historically made plain that they'll always attempt to outdo the British ...

    The UK is at great risk of producing a couple of dud- international joke- aircraft carriers, while France (deliberately?) waits on the sidelines...

    In the UK/France aircraft carrier project of 2004-2008***, the UK termed its planned new aircraft carriers 'Future Aircraft Carriers' or CVFs, whereas France labled their planned aircraft carrier 'Deuxième porte-avions français' or PA2)

    *** The project was formalized in 2006, but had been informally proceeding since at least 2004:
    "UK and France sign carrier deal", 06_03-2006:

    After several years of cooperative design work on the Anglo/French aircraft carrier project- mostly funded by the UK****- with 2 ships planned for the UK and 1 for France, France reverted to type and began insisting on leading the whole programme as well as taking on the bulk of the (lucrative) construction work- with the UK's taxpayers, in effect, expected to pay France to build 'their country's' CVFs...

    **** which had been funding its CVF design project since before 2002...

    Eventually, in June-2008 France 'put on hold' paying for the construction of their CVF-derived-design PA2, with France's govt committing to a decision regarding funds for PA2 construction to be made by 2011....

    Subsequent to this, the UK's then Labour govt approved (highly inadequate) funding for and ham-fistedly went ahead with the CVF project, albeit a project that was plainly poorly thought out from a deliverables perspective, and one driven mainly by objectives to procure votes and support for the political party then-in-power in the lead-up to and during the, then imminent, national election (via thousands of new jobs & 100s of millions of pounds in govt-distributed domestic-funding resulting from the CVF project), than a project driven mainly by objectives to build appropriately functional, capable warships...

    - "Porte-Avions 2 (PA2) Future Aircraft Carrier, France": :

    "It was initially planned to develop the PA2 based on the design of UK Royal Navy future aircraft carriers (CVF)... The memorandum of understanding on the Anglo-French future aircraft carrier was signed on 6 March 2006. However, in June 2008, French President Nicolas Sarkozy suspended cooperation with Britain in this regard.

    "... The decision to equip the French Navy with new aircraft carriers will be taken between 2011 and 2012..."

    - "PA2 deferment scuppers CVF savings", 08_07-2008:
    -[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]

    Although based upon years-long, mainly UK-funded design work, French plans in early-2008 called for France's new PA2 ('big deck' aircraft carrier):

    1) to be bigger- by over 12,000 tonnes
    - than each of the UK's 2 new 'big deck' carriers;

    2) to have catapults (in June-2008 the UK's CVFs were- and still are- planned to NOT have catapults...)

    see links above, and): :
    (pages 16-20) ;

    3) to have spaces for and ability to deploy nuclear weapons (the UK's CVFs are designed to NOT have this capability);

    4) to be faster than the UK's new carriers (by 4-7 knots):

    "Porte-Avions 2 (PA2) Future Aircraft Carrier, France": :

    "Initially, it was announced that the PA2 would be powered by a conventional propulsion system. The conventional electric propulsion system was based on two Rolls-Royce MT30 gas turbines and pods.

    "In September 2006, the French Navy decided to choose different machinery and propulsion system to increase the PA2's speed from 26kt to the originally required 29kt.... (France's) Aker Yards, DCN Propulsion and Alstom in association with General Electric have developed a new design, in which the propulsion is based on four LM2500+G4 gas turbines...";

    5) to be fitted with the high-technology, Active Electronically Steered Array (AESA)/active phased array (APAR) radars required by missile-based anti-airborne threat warfare (AAW) systems (The UK's CVFs are NOT designed to be fitted with AESA/APAR weapons guidance radars)...

    APAR PDF 'fact sheet': (opens in new window...)

    Defense Industry Daily, The US's Dual Band Radar programmes: :

    "... This class of radar will track the incoming missiles, provide midcourse guidance for outbound SAMs, and terminal illumination to SAM impact..."

    6) to be fitted with missile-based anti airborne threat warfare (AAW) weapons (The UK's CVFs are NOT designed to be fitted with missile-based AAW weapons):
    see links above, and :
    (pages 16-20)

    "... The (PA2) self-defence system will include two vertical missile launcher modules, each holding eight Aster 15 anti-air missiles... ";

    7) (if fossil fuel engine powered) to have 20 % more fossil fuel capacity than each of the UK's new carriers; and...

    8) to be nuclear powered, 'if feasible': when the French pulled out of the UK/France aircraft carrier project in 2008, they released a Defence White Paper which contained unequivocal language regarding France's intention to explore the potential of their (based upon UK-design data) new aircraft carrier(s) being nuclear powered instead of conventional fossil fuel powered:

    [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator] (pages 116-118)

    [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]

    [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator] :

    English version via Internet translation service:

    "After analysis, the decision on the construction of a second aircraft carrier is postponed for the following main reasons:

    "... the economic conditions have changed since the decision in 2003 to use conventional propulsion for the new aircraft carriers;

    "Additional studies are now needed to assess the comparative advantages presented by both conventional propulsion and nuclear propulsion options..."

    ... The UK builds a couple of dud- international joke- aircraft carriers; doesn't build a Vanguard successor/Trident replacement class of submarines; doesn't fix the six dangerously under-equipped/under-armed Type-45 Destroyers that are presently built/completing construction; doesn't build more Type-45s; and guts the rest of its armed forces...

    .... and 3 or 4 years later, France comes out with 'its new 'national power projecting instrument' (nuclear powered PA2); continues to have 4 (almost new) nuclear ballistic missile armed SSBNs; and continues the total renewal of its navy's surface and sub-surface forces via the 'Barracuda' SSN programme and the 'FREMM' & Horizon Frigate programmes :

    which country- the UK or France- looks the most competent, industrially capable and technologically proficient???

    Which country would be best placed to 'win' in a contest to justify its retention of membership of the UN Security council's 5 permanent member seats??

    Roderick V. Louis
    Vancouver, BC, Canada

  • Comment number 28.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 29.

    Now I've heard everything!

    Apparently Portsmouth City Council refuses to repair potholes in a cemetary road because they slow down traffic.


  • Comment number 30.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 31.

    I note with interest that Jesse Jackson is spouting forth about an internal UK matter. Firstly what on earth has it to do with someone from another country and secondly, seeing as he doesnt live in London, what does he know about this problem real or perceived?...But the biggest question is why are Newsnight even interviewing this clown....yes and thats what he has been for years. A total waste of taxpayers money...again

  • Comment number 32.

    Roderick V. Louis (15, 16... etc)

    You keep posting but not grasping.

    The SCO has land based missiles (e.g DF-21s)

    which can take out entire fleets (including submarines) with several hundred KT nuclear warheads, guided by GPS, and turning up at Mach 10.

    Bobbing around on ships isn't the way that wars are going to be fought anymore, at least not between major powers.

  • Comment number 33.

    Panorama tonight: Chilean miner - end of programme - evidently not too happy about having being stuck down the poor safety record mine. Still, what does he know, he was rescued wasn't he? Perhaps he thinks some people may have been missing his point a bit?

  • Comment number 34.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 35.

  • Comment number 36.

  • Comment number 37.

  • Comment number 38.

    #10 DeadZeb wrote:

    "Having their tubes tied"


    That phrase was used during the film piece on NN tonight.

    A strange coincidence!

  • Comment number 39.

    I was wrong [post #18]. I thought the debate would be entertaining as a debate usually contains at least 2 points of view. How stupid I was to think I would find this on Newsnight.

    You live and learn.

    Jeremy, many police officers may be racist, but an officer is not an 'institution' - in the literal sense of the word.

  • Comment number 40.

    #31 HHhhmm this is the man they should have had on

    One of the most sensible and down to earth Archbishops I've ever heard.

  • Comment number 41.

    We all discriminate every single day, whether its the Gap between the speeding cars or the streets we choose to walk down. Maybe the police 'profile' black young men because they are more involved in crime.
    No need for a calculator to do the maths: Considering Blacks are a minority in this country, they do make up a rather large chunk of the prison what does that tell you? Go look at the stats. And what in Gods name was Jesse Jackson complaining about. All he's ever done is bang-on about the oppressed African American; he's still a black activist. Jesse forgets that you can be black and successful, the problem is that not all blacks have got it in them to be hard working and successful. Jesse still blames the problems of the black man firmly at the feet of the white man..he still has water hoses, dogs and batons running through his mind..them days have long gone - but not for Jessie. What we are left with is the black man (and woman, lets not discriminate between the sexes here, don't won't to leave out the sisters) is still struggling, and that is why they have a larger entrance level into crime compared to their white counterparts...and hence, thats why the police discriminate.. I mean what should the police do? pull over catholic nuns.

    Tonight whilst watching the BBC 10 oclock news, I heard this:
    "the terrorist attacks on the tube"..
    I did not hear these words though: Islamic and/or Muslim..
    The BBC is not autie beeb no more, its not 1973 so stop doing that Blue peter thing, its not smart and your fooling no one anymore.

  • Comment number 42.



    I don't know whether I'm adding a pinch of salt to the wound, but not only do I keep bits of the elephant in the room, but I also keep taking snapshots of elephants here and there and everywhere, as well as having rather nice tasting elephant shaped sweets. I even took a photo this morning with one of those placed on my MET full of bright pink hearts bike 'hats'.

  • Comment number 43.

    Excellent debate by Jeremy tonight on stop and searching ethnic minorities more than non-ethnic minorities. Paddick 1 - Jackson 0. The government want to make cuts, so they'll end up cutting the defence budget :o( As pointed out by Paul, even with all the estimated cuts, it still won't be enough.......
    Ogunmokun gave the best solution to drug addicted mothers. Long term contraception. Simples :p

  • Comment number 44.

    :o) Thanks for the article Ecolizzy! Totally agree.

  • Comment number 45.


    Perhaps DeadZeb turned himself into a mouse and was running round the studio earlier eavesdropping on the team preparing the programme, debty.

  • Comment number 46.


    He is right, Ecolizzy, in encouraging young black people not to blame racism. In fact, I keep meeting lots of black young men and women who seem to be well adjusted human beings who are quite happy working and doing interesting things.


  • Comment number 47.


    You are right that Police officers are not an 'institution' but they do nevertheless represent one, and should act and behave according to the institution's rules & guidelines which the vast majority of them seem to be doing though there may be a few bad apples here and there rather than everywhere.

  • Comment number 48.

    #47 addendum

    Are you nervous or angry, or what, 'strugglingtostaycalm'?

    Anyway, why did you expect the discussion to be entertaining while Paxo was discussing rather serious issues with his studio guests? Does 'joking' help you stay calm, strugglingtostaycalm?

  • Comment number 49.


    I was waiting to hear a direct comparison of the ratio of black to white crime, with the the ratio of random stop and search. Much more edgy to have Main Man Jesse rappin' with the 'Big Stuff'.

    Hey - we're all gettin down innit.

  • Comment number 50.


    On my way back to the attic, I saw a couple of Policemen talking to a short white man who they must have pulled for some reason or another. I was also 'pulled' twice by Police Officers for cycling in areas where I shouldn't have been cycling. The first time it was done with a smirk on the Police face while the second time, the Policeman seemed to feel sorry for me but said he had no choice but to fine me, in fact, which under the circumstances was fair enough. Otherwise, whenever I've had contact with the Police, they did seem either helpful or simply respectful.

  • Comment number 51.


    It was a good programme, Mistress76uk, but I wish the solution to still able to give birth addicts was as simple as you describe.

  • Comment number 52.

    modusman (31)

    "I note with interest that Jesse Jackson is spouting forth about an internal UK matter. Firstly what on earth has it to do with someone from another country and secondly, seeing as he doesnt live in London, what does he know about this problem real or perceived?...But the biggest question is why are Newsnight even interviewing this clown....yes and thats what he has been for years. A total waste of taxpayers money...again"

    The Civil Rights movement, like female liberation, was used as one of several political tools to reinforce the libertarian movement in the USA. This, it was thought, would be good for some people's economy.

    Clearly some thought also thought it would be good to do the same thing here.

    Differential crime statistics are well known, and that hold all over the world, not just in the USA and UK. It isn't disproportionate profiling or institutional racism and Newsnight should have had someone on to balance Jackson who didn't just say he didn't know! Offending is just more far common amongst young black men and is actually less common amongst Muslim young men than it is amongst young White men. Making out that Muslims are terrorists serves another political purpose of course - Islam, like Catholicism proscribes usury, which makes it bad for predatory lending and some people's economics. They clearly need to give up all that 'nonsense' if they are to become acceptable citizens (consumers) here...

  • Comment number 53.

    #43 M76 wrote

    "Ogunmokun gave the best solution to drug addicted mothers. Long term contraception. Simples :p"

    Unfortunately there was no time or inclination on the part of NN/Paxman to push that bland statement.

    Of course it is a 'good' solution. But in what guise and how is it delivered. By her own admission Ms Ogunmokun stated that '"addicts are not able to take decisions"

    So they will be unreliable in using condoms, taking pills or attending clinic appointments for other treatment options. It was empty words however well meant. Like it or not Ms Harris is DOING something.

  • Comment number 54.

    #41 Kevseywevsey wrote...
    "I mean what should the police do? pull over catholic nuns."

    Not sure if meant to make quite so stunning a faux pas KW by your choice of comparator. Since they (the police and other authorities) have failed dismally to deal with looking term ongoing crime perpetrated by white middle aged men - sic Catholic Priests. Largely because it is a crime of shame conducted under cover of darkness, behind closed doors in closed institutions and behind a cloak of respectability.

  • Comment number 55.

    54. At 08:36am on 19 Oct 2010, LC2 wrote:

    "Largely because it is a crime of shame conducted under cover of darkness, behind closed doors in closed institutions and behind a cloak of respectability"

    More likely it's because it's actually very low frequency, even lower in the Catholic Church than elsewhere. See Jenkins' report

    The politics of this very quickly becomes rather tortured/tiresome - especially when it involves high profile lawyers with an agenda to defend the indefensible:

    of course, most of us are far too clever and down to earth to ever be taken in by 'conspiracy theorists'

  • Comment number 56.


    Unless one is one, or two is two. Have you decided to swap tables, 'vip'?

  • Comment number 57.

    @ LC2 #53 - I'd define long term contraception as the ocntraceptive implant which lasts 3 years and can be removed (surgically) and fertility almost immediately restored. Besides which, how many of those former drug addicts who (in a drug induced state) deceided to take the money and get sterilised, but later, when they were free from addiction chose to start a family with a partner? What happens then? Will it end up pushing them back to drug addiction because they realise they sold their fertility? Worse still, suicide?

  • Comment number 58.

    #56 addendum

    No conspiracies? How about WikiLeaks?

  • Comment number 59.


    "I came into politics to bring about: a better deal for children/women/minorities/world peace/small furry animals" etc. How often we hear such from our cipher rosette-stands. Never: "I came into politics with a sense of inadequacy that I hoped a position of power (if ignored the rosette-vote) might give me", is never heard.

    But what do the police say? "I have the right to remain silent" perhaps?
    Do we know what motivates individual police? If we investigated - would we have a police-force left? Social workers? Military? Doctors? Nurses? 'Care workers'? ALL who directly impact on other humans, and their lives, from a position of power/influence?

    So much of life we do not let into full consciousness. Those of us who have been put through the mangle of one of the 'controlling' institutions above (or in combination) have some idea of the unsuitability of many practitioners, and the distressing (minimum)consequences. (The voice of the falsely imprisoned, is another not heard.)

    If we set up an all-black force, in a major town, what might the 'interaction' statistics look like?

    We have the tools but we dare not finish the job. Only when politicians lose sleep over such issues might a change come. But, for that, we need a new breed of politician.


  • Comment number 60.


    Are you, singie & co, into some sort of control yourselves? Are you simply doing it to provoke the politicians and 'fun'?

    Besides, you're not probably finishing 'the job' because you are scared of the grave consequences and utter shame in front of your children in particular if you do.

  • Comment number 61.

    Something for Rev Jackson to think about?

    A famous Civil Rights pioneer, and one whom Lenin regarded as subject to a type of politics known as Infantile Disorder

    See Left communists (anarchists) and libertarians - you may be surprised.

  • Comment number 62.


    Aren't you a little mixed up, table, having Lenin and moustache wearing Muslims for authority? Aren't you 'projecting' i'n the psychiatric sense?


BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.