Big or Little Britain? IMO Starmer Must Stay

As the media frenzy begins on Starmer after the local elections and his speech, I can't help feeling people will grow more disillusioned and the country go into freefall with the leadership change circus. 

When you actually watch the entire speech, examine some reddit posts and comments on social media, the discontent with the PM seems wildly exaggerated whilst ignoring the millions that voted for Labour last Thursday. I'm certain their vote was not to see the current farcical disintegration of the party. 

Yes we live in a social media landscape full of information crisis and fake news. The trolls are our pasting the same comment on different posts. We've only barely survived the dismal failure of more than a decade of mismanagement, Brexit and the pandemic. 

Removing Starmer is not the solution and the majority voted him in. 

This particularly Reddit post made some good points: 

• "Labour's left is just playing into Reform's hand, the moment Starmer is gone everyone else will be demanding snap election as this will not have been not the government the people had voted for."
• "I just want an end to the revolving door of PMs ffs. One person finishing their term would be nice."
• "Is this country allergic to a bit of stability? It seems like a we need a constant crisis to worry about."

It's time for politicians to be grown ups and think of the country. The names mentioned as alternatives to Starmer are only going to push current labour supporters away from the party. 

Streeting is hated. Rayner isn't respected and Burnham isn't even an MP. It's embarassing. 

AI also mentioned: 

"Critics within the Labour Party argue that while Burnham is wildly popular in Manchester and the North, his brand does not translate well to critical swing seats in southern England and the Midlands, which Labour needs to retain power."

We are at a point where the divisiveness is going to make us into a very little Britain. The government did not capitalise or take credit for work being done around the country, which is trying to take us back to being Big Britain. 

Starmer has the inside scoop on what is actually going on in the world and how dangerous it is. He protected us from going to war and he's trying to protect us from more of the corrupt practices which made our country and us broke. 

There has been progress, but MMS have absolutely been bent on selling stories and Reform. 

Interestingly AI came up with this Reddit summary:

"Starmer will stay because he doesn't want to leave, it's hard to force him out, and the party is wary of replacing him right now.

It also noted:

"Here is how Reddit users view the scenario of him staying:

• No Active Intent to Leave: Starmer has stated he "will never walk away" from his mandate, and Downing Street has confirmed he is not resigning.
• Lack of Alternatives: Many users argue that replacing him would cause more instability, calling it a "revolving door" that would not necessarily yield a better leader, potentially harming the party further.
• Political Hurdles to Removal: With a large majority (150+ seats), a vote of no confidence is unlikely to succeed. Forcing a leadership challenge requires significant support from MPs, which is currently not present.
• Strategy to Stay: Some users suggest he will stay to act as a "caretaker" until closer to the 2028-2029 election, at which point a transition to a new leader might happen to "refresh" the party, rather than leaving now.
• Alternative Viewpoint: Critics argue that his position is "untenable" due to low popularity (-57 approval ratings) and that only internal pressure or terrible results in the May 2026 local elections might force his hand."

It is utterly disappointing to see politicians being politicians. The lack of honour and integrity is sickening, and the public will not be voting the self-serving ambitious back should Starmer be ousted. The feigned disingenuous attempt to regrettably replace Starmer is bollocks. 

The religious undercurrents which are driving the negative views on Starmer is shocking. And to hear a commentator say it will be bad for the country, but that is being ignored because we want more personality and passion shows we may not have learned from our awful Boris days. 

Businesses will suffer. The people will not be better off. We are shooting ourselves in the foot. 

The Prime Minister must stay but I expect sadly this will be the beginning of the end, and goodbye Starmer will be Britain's nail in the coffin as we crumble into Little Britain. 

UK May 7 Local Elections - Making Sense of the Mess

With local elections coming up in the UK this week, it's worth pointing out the impact of modern geopolitics (like Iran, Palestine and Pakistan), the economics of the perceived cost of asylum seekers and a deep frustration with the pace of cultural change, diaspora identity, and social media algorithms intersect to create incredibly rigid worldviews.

Noticeably, narratives are no longer just about sharing information. It provides a sense of community and shared identity. 

You often see people trying to convince others to bring them into their shared reality. Those who get their news from echo chambers rarely use words like "might" or "possibly." They speak in absolute certainties because that is how information is framed on TikTok, X, YouTube or in WhatsApp groups.

What is surprising is also how simplistic band-aid solutions are seen as the way forward, rather than understanding the complexities of issues, as well as the need for experience, continuity and a healthy mix of both short and long-term actions / strategies. 

Unfortunately rising council taxes, increasing rhetoric and the cost of living is pushing people to consider political parties which ultimately may not be in their best interests. Britain has been undermined by different extremist views which have fractured out ability to navigate the increasing uncertainty of a precarious world. 

People are afraid and need to feel confident in their leaders. We have seen glimmers, but the messaging has not been strong enough or appreciative of how influential technology affects consumption of information. Because of this, I believe things will get worse before they get better. I hope I'm wrong. 

Our current prime minister has kept us from going to war in a climate of ongoing international drama. He's managed under challenging circumstances and stroking the political ambitions within his party by a change of leadership is only going to see our country stagger brokenly through the remainder of their tenure, much like the spectacle of the last government. 

On May 7, when people vote in local elections, they should be mindful of the current environment of the possibility of war, continuing global and economic uncertainty, and the need for intelligent politicians who will govern us well. 

Why I object to calls for Starmer to resign over Mandelson

A quick dive into Reddit and Starmer confirms my opinion. 

I made the mistake of checking the news and seeing the latest faff about changing PMs made me go down this mini rabbit hole. 

This particular post / extract caught my eye: 

"is he actually bad? He takes the national majority position on highly polarising issues, he has played geopolitical issues expertly, he is getting us closer to europe, acted in a moral way during internal crises, done lots for workers and the poor, actually gone after the rich in several meaningful ways, all while managing a huge inherited debt and creating a surplus while also spending meaningfully in areas that matter.

He has had a level of scrutiny ive never seen before, and done a decent job during the most unprecedented times weve ever seen. "

From: https://www.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/1sbfrfy/keir_starmer_where_did_it_all_go_wrong_review_is/

The sentiment in these posts also indicate that some people aren't interested in a merry-go-round repeat of new PMs:

• https://www.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/1s8kixi/labour_mps_should_get_rid_of_starmer_before_its/

• https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/1r05xuo/has_anyone_changed_their_mind_on_whether_starmer/

Tbh even if the May elections have Labour doing badly, I still would prefer Starmer to stay. The people calling for his resignation simply seem like clowns out of touch with everyday worries about rising costs because of Iran and the unemployment casualties from AI. If they actually could start governing instead of pathetic knit-picking. 

Personally I'd like to see a call for all the opposition leaders to resign. 

I also have massively cut back on the news and recommend others to also do so. Many seem to be agreeing so if outlets are seeing drops in their numbers, they might want to read the room.  They are no longer worth my time or energy and are toxic energy drainers. 

Keep Starmer, and if the media and politicians could actually care about people, that would be a nice change.  

The UK - Starmer, Labour, Mandelson, Epstein and the Economy

 

The UK economy continues to struggle and thrive, not because of a lack of leadership, competence or desire, but because of political instability. 

The revolving door of prime ministers under the former Tory government saw the career ambitions of individuals take priority over country, party and people. I've lost count of how many PMs we had since David Cameron. 

As the Labour party implodes and the media circles against Sir Keir Starmer, I fear that it is heading down the same insane path as the Conservatives - into oblivion. 

Are we simply playing into the hands of foreign and extreme group agendas? 

Democracy is not at the heart of our system if the elected leader is dismissed prematurely and without just cause. A full term of service provides the greatest impact, rather than regular resets, and a PM should not be looking  behind them for the next backstabbing from an ambitious self-serving bunch. 

This is why confidence and trust in governments is low. It is not the leader which we abhor, it is these machinations which horrify us and which resemble Caesar's Brutus and King Henry the VIII's court. 

As the Epstein / Mandelson drama rages, as heads role and it chips away at the core team, we are shooting ourselves in the foot. Do we really want Reform in charge? 

I'm regularly pleasantly surprised with new initiatives like £800m Community Investment. I see local initiatives slowly improving lives and had hope that we were turning the page from the disastrous onslaught since austerity after the global financial crisis. 

It's frustrating that so many people fail to keep their eye on the prize. With the ever growing increase in global crisis, impending war, technological snowballing and has everyone forgotten that most of us still face the barrel of a cost of living crisis? 

I'm not surprised Sir Keir is tired. We're all tired of the school playground nonsense. We finally had a grown up in charge and we're heading back into chaos. 

Is it any wonder that an authoritarian populous style seems to be the modus operandi because it's the only way to maintain consistency. It is sad indeed. We need more people in government for the right reasons. Instead, we are inflicted with a cast of rotten eggs. 

If my disgust is unclear to all those so out of touch, let me spell it out, I do not support you and history will not judge you kindly. The people are not happy with this circus.  

The Epstein story is scandalous. Blood must be let. But must it be at the expense of the many to benefit who? 

Why Anonymity Matters - Online Safety

We are not safe even though we live in a democratic country. Our laws don't protect women and children adequately online or in real life, but we don't want to be excluded from these spaces. We want to be able to connect, interact and add our voice, but increasingly we are being silenced. 

• BBC - Men Covertly Filming Women
  

Perhaps it's because of the struggle between class and minorities, or governments feeling increasingly destabilised that they look to take away our freedoms. 

The idea we would legislate so children under 16 cannot use social media in the UK is abhorrent. 

We didn't say children can't watch television, play computer games or go on the internet. We regulated the providers. We made them safer for children and everyone. 

By introducing laws on age, we're giving more information on everyone else to social media companies and not addressing the real problem: toxicity online and a lack of accountability for bad behaviour. 

We're also not demanding social media companies and corporations behave responsibly, just as we expect for everything else that is consumer facing. 

Anonymity allows people to be included. It is not always nefarious that they don't want fame. It has opened the door for greater discussion and shows we do not support oppression. It is the democracy we love. 

The law must keep up with technology. Mental health is not just about technology, but a world where when an economic downturn hits, we all need more compassion and kindness. 

You may be interested in: 

• LSE - the UK shouldn't ban
  
• BBC - why the debate
  
• BBC - Include children's views
  

Online Shopping In 2026 - the best cure for shopping addicts

Over Xmas I learnt my lesson and step 1 in 2026 before hitting the checkout button on any online shop is to check the returns policy. 

With £57 in my basket, I was feeling guilty as I don't need to shop, but the cold spell got me browsing thermals and I succumbed to "bargain" sales. My heaving closet groaned as there are enough clothes to keep me warm this winter. 

Scanning the fine print, I realised I'd have to pay postage for any online returns and stores would only accept exchanges. 

Suddenly I no longer wanted to buy all these items. I narrowed it down to one item I'd be willing to go into a store to click and collect, since I no longer qualified for free delivery. 

I'd invested an hour browsing in this shop, reading reviews, convincing myself yes it was ok to buy one new piece. Why do you think I've walked away and convinced myself I no longer need it? 

It's not my bank balance. Nor is it my overflowing wardrobe. No fancy trick I learnt on social media either. 

Guest checkout. 

That's right. I prefer it, but lo and behold it failed. Initially I overcame the 'you can't guest check out' with an alternative address. Then the email verification didn't come through. Next, the resend email didn't work. It was becoming a hoop jumping workout. Finally I took the universe's signs to simply stop the madness. 

Imagine if it was still free returns. I'd have spent £57 that I didn't need to do. Or if it was free returns instore, I might have ended up buying even more when I inevitably went in - afterall I don't have the perfect body that looks stunning in everything. 

In the UK, we all don't have cars or live close to a shop. The customer experience, technology and returns policies can affect the bottom line of businesses. I expect I'm not the only one that's gone through this. With the cost of living crisis, I'm relieved with this fortunate turn of events, but I think about the economy and  bigger picture. Retailers are missing out on sales. They might be fully costing their products and services, but these are missed opportunities as part of their sales funnel. It's failing. 

Online shopping in 2026 isn't better for retailers but it sure is better for shopping addicts, so my top 3 tips is check the returns policy, use guest checkout and after all the faffing, you may save yourself a whole lot of time and money, because actually do you really need it and why are you shopping? 

Grok, X, AI and How Tough Should We Get?

The furore over Grok, X, AI and sexualised content highlights the urgent need to assess how much power should we allow tech companies to have, and if they can ever be trusted. 

What has become clear is that there was a lack of urgent action to deal with grievous harm, such that governments must ban services and rush legislation to enable action. 

If tech companies can faciliate activities the majority of us consider should be illegal and corporations do not have any kind of social conscious or ability to quickly manage the risk, do we need to fix the system that allows corporate bad behaviour? 

Are we becoming too dependent on technology? With the latest developments on the political struggles in Iran, we've learnt that it loses $1.56 million from its economy every single hour the internet is down. What would be the figures for the UK, US, Europe, China and Russia? We're increasingly faced with the thorny questions we can no longer ignore. 

Our governments can't be forever firefighting when there are so many other issues requiring their attention. It's not efficient, nor in the public interest. 

When corporations do not respect or listen to governments, it sends a message about whether they are willing to adhere to the social contracts and laws we have in place. 

Sexualised content also brings cultural and religious concerns into the mix, and in a global context will impact funding and ultimately profitability for companies. Money talks and that is also when companies listen. 

What has also become clear is the complete failure of tech organisations to ensure they prevent harm, that they aren't creating tools weaponised against us. What else would they be failing to do, and why should they not be accountable? Ultimately they are run by people who we should demand are responsible citizens. The future of tech, AI, X and Grok is at a major historical crisis point. 

You may also be interested in:

• BBC - X to stop Grok AI from undressing images of real people after backlash
• Sky News - Grok Controversy Explainer
• Guardian - The World Less Safe
  
• CNN - Grok blocked by Indonesia, Malaysia over sexualized images in world first
  
• Forbes - Iran Kill Switch
  

Independent Review into Rising Demand for Mental Health, ADHD, and Autism Services in England

Why is mental health getting worse? The NHS and GP services have been stretched for years,, but the biggest issue has been the attitude of politicians and people in power. 

"Over diagnosis" is a term that seems to come up, and a narrative that many people aren't actually sick. 

I write this after this article from the BBC. 

Mental health services continue to be cut and a real strategy which recognises and understands the condition has never been implemented.  

I've seen first hand the massive reduction in services and budgets in the last year. This will kill people, and we will have more unnecessary loss of lives. 

There are celebrities and famous people who talk about their mental health problems, but no one truly champions or advocates for those who are struggling. 

The challenges for ordinary people are real. If you are faced with mental health difficulties, there is  support, but accessing it is a lottery and continuous care under the NHS is completely inadequate. 

Charities try, but they remain underresourced to plug a gap that needs the full attention and compassion we've famously had historically for other diseases, in this country. 

Why is it so hard for people to see it and recognise that it is an issue? I think it's simply the case of people who are out of touch with the realities many people face. Read the comments for the YouTube video I've included at the top of this post. One of them, liked 145 times, describes the country as broken. And it is. 

Mental health is a serious condition. It's an epidemic. It's time we started making more and better inroads. We've made progress over the last few decades, since I first began blogging about it. 

However, troublingly we seem to be going backwards since the pandemic, when actually this should have ignited investment. It should have been about truly correcting the injustice of ignoring some of our most vulnerable people who need us to speak for them. 

I welcome the independent review into rising demand for mental health, ADHD, and autism services in England, but wonder whether it will result in change that will help a growing crisis around the country, and in fact, the world. 

Asking AI about the Autumn UK budget

As the Autumn budget is coming up, I wondered what AI would suggest. 

Background

For many years I felt angry and upset about how we were governed in the UK. It felt like we were being let down by those we trusted to take care of our country. 

Issues

With the change in government, we were given hope that grown ups were now taking over. Issues such as immigration, cost of living, the economy and the NHS continue to frustrate me. The government can do more and be better, but it does seem they actually are taking some steps in the right direction. 

Stability was the biggest failing of the former government, with constant changes in leadership and management. It also seemed there was a significant amount of financial irresponsibility previously. 

Is this a popular government? I'd say no. They do need to do more to win the public. They need to communicate better and more effectively, to be more in touch with the mood and problems of the people. 

The Future

I see so much potential in this country and I think we need more about what our vision for the future is too. 

First and foremost fix the urgent issues of everyday people - security, health and money. They go to the core of people's happiness. If people are happy, they are not complaining and we will thrive.

The international stage has been a huge distraction and it is a difficult balance for them to deal with both the problems at home and abroad. I'm glad we're not in a war and that we have a role in global issues. 

The budget 

The next budget needs to do more. I asked copilot, and this is what it suggested:

An ideal UK budget would balance economic growth with public trust by investing in the NHS, tackling the cost of living, reforming immigration systems, and strengthening international security — all while reinforcing Labour’s leadership on fairness and renewal.

Here’s how the next budget could achieve this:

1. Cost of Living: Relief + Growth

Raise Universal Credit thresholds and expand eligibility to support low-income households.

Freeze energy bills for vulnerable groups and invest in home insulation to reduce long-term costs.
Cut VAT on essential goods or offer targeted subsidies for food and transport.
Support small businesses with tax relief and grants to stimulate local economies.

Impact: Eases pressure on households, boosts consumer confidence, and shows Labour is responsive to everyday struggles.

2. NHS: Funding + Reform

Increase NHS funding by £29 billion annually, as outlined in the 2025 Spending Review.
Expand GP and mental health services, especially in underserved areas.
Invest in NHS workforce retention through pay rises and training programs.
Digitize health records and streamline admin to reduce wait times and improve care delivery.

Impact: Demonstrates commitment to public health and tackles one of the UK’s most urgent concerns

3. Immigration: Fairness + Control

End hotel use for asylum seekers by investing in community-based housing and faster processing.
Launch a Border Security Command to disrupt smuggling networks and improve border safety.
Create legal migration pathways tied to labour market needs, especially in care and construction.
Support integration through language training and civic service opportunities.

Impact: Balances compassion with control, addressing public concerns while upholding human rights.

4. International Security: Stability + Strategy

Increase defence spending modestly, focusing on cyber defence and NATO commitments.
Expand humanitarian aid and climate resilience funding to stabilize fragile regions.
Strengthen diplomatic ties through trade and security partnerships, especially post-Brexit.

Impact: Positions the UK as a responsible global actor and reinforces national security.

5. Economic Growth: Investment + Innovation

Boost infrastructure spending in transport, housing, and green energy.
Create a National Innovation Fund to support AI, biotech, and clean tech startups.
Reform business rates to support high streets and attract investment.
Introduce a Green Jobs Guarantee to train workers for the low-carbon economy.

Impact: Drives long-term growth, job creation, and climate leadership.

I asked about interest rates, electricity and a wealth tax, as I think these go to the heart of some of our problems. This was copilots response. 

To improve the UK economy and Labour’s popularity, the next budget should address interest rates, electricity prices, and wealth taxation with targeted, equitable reforms that ease household pressure and signal fiscal responsibility.

Here’s how each issue could be tackled:

Interest Rates: Coordination with the Bank of England

Current status: Interest rates remain at 4% due to persistent inflation (3.8%)

• • Budget strategy:

    • Avoid inflationary spending that could force further rate hikes.

    • Focus on targeted support (e.g. energy subsidies, childcare relief) rather than broad stimulus.

    • Signal fiscal discipline to reassure markets and support future rate cuts.

  Why it matters: Lower interest rates reduce mortgage and loan costs, boosting consumer confidence and spending.
  Electricity Prices: Energy Security + Affordability

  
  

  Current pressure: Energy bills remain high, especially for low-income households.
  Budget strategy:
  Expand windfall taxes on energy giants to fund household rebates.
  Invest in renewables and grid upgrades to reduce long-term costs.
  Introduce tiered pricing: lower rates for essential usage, higher for luxury consumption.

  Why it matters: Tackling energy costs directly addresses the cost-of-living crisis and supports climate goals.

  Wealth Tax: Fairness + Revenue

  Current proposals: Chancellor Rachel Reeves is expected to target asset-rich households, not earnings.
  Budget strategy:
  Introduce a mansion tax on properties above £2 million.
  Reform capital gains and inheritance tax to close loopholes and raise revenue.
  Consider a net wealth tax on assets above £10 million, with exemptions for pensions and primary residences.

  Why it matters: A well-designed wealth tax can raise billions without hurting middle-income earners — reinforcing Labour’s fairness narrative.

My final question to copilot related to wealth taxes and how they can try to get this right. It suggested on unintended consequences:

1. Capital Flight and Tax Avoidance

High-net-worth individuals may move assets offshore or relocate to avoid the tax.
Complex asset structures (trusts, offshore holdings) make enforcement difficult.

Avoidance strategy:

Introduce exit taxes for those relocating wealth abroad.
Strengthen international cooperation on asset transparency and reporting.
Phase in the tax gradually to allow compliance and planning.

2. Reduced Investment and Growth

Investors may shift capital away from UK businesses, especially startups and property.
Long-term GDP could decline by 2–5% based on modelling from Germany and the US.

Avoidance strategy:

Exempt productive assets like business equity, pensions, and farmland.
Offer investment incentives alongside the tax (e.g. R&D credits, green bonds).
Cap the tax at a modest rate (e.g. 1–2%) to avoid discouraging entrepreneurship.

3. Administrative Complexity

Valuing illiquid assets (art, private companies) is difficult and costly.
Enforcement requires significant HMRC resources.

Avoidance strategy:

Focus on high-value, easily valued assets (e.g. property, listed shares).
Use self-reporting with audit triggers for complex cases.
Pilot the tax with ultra-high-net-worth individuals before scaling.

4. Political and Media Backlash

Lobby groups may frame it as anti-business or punitive.
Media may amplify fears of middle-class impact.

 Avoidance strategy:

Frame the tax as a fairness measure, not a punishment.
Use clear thresholds (e.g. assets over £10 million) to reassure middle-income voters.
Highlight public benefits: NHS funding, energy relief, education investment.

Definitely the biggest concern is investors shifting capital away from UK businesses, especially startups and property. We need to encourage this and I was tempted to ask AI more about this. But ultimately this is the job of governments and civil servants. 

I hope the UK government do work out a good budget with the help of AI, as that sets the framework and landscape for the future, so we are all happier and healthier this time next year. 

Can AI solve the asylum housing crisis?

 

I asked AI about international solutions that could also be applied to the asylum housing problem in the UK. 

The response has been included below. I wonder if there's potential for Canada, Germany and Sweden's models to work here? 

Tensions continue to increase over concerns about the cost, the impact on communities and public safety. 

It's hard to know how much the government actually understands or is addressing these problems as we're getting little information or communication. 

Funding it needs to be done responsibly and with due consideration of what the people of this country want. 

AI Response (Co-pilot)

Several international asylum housing strategies could be adapted effectively for the UK. Here are the most promising ones, tailored to Britain's context:

🇨🇦 Canada’s Private Sponsorship Model

• How it works: Community groups, charities, or individuals sponsor asylum seekers, providing housing and support.

• Why it fits the UK:

  • Britain has a strong civil society and charitable sector.

  • Could reduce pressure on government housing and foster community integration.

• Implementation idea: Expand existing refugee sponsorship schemes to include asylum seekers, with government oversight and funding.

🇳🇱 Netherlands’ Mixed-Use Housing

• How it works: Asylum seekers live alongside students and low-income residents in shared housing developments.

• Why it fits the UK:

  • Promotes social cohesion and reduces stigma.

  • Could be piloted in university towns or urban regeneration zones.

• Implementation idea: Partner with housing associations and universities to create inclusive housing hubs.

🇩🇪 Germany’s Modular Container Housing

• How it works: Prefabricated housing units are deployed quickly in urban and suburban areas.

• Why it fits the UK:

  • Addresses urgent housing shortages.

  • Can be scaled up rapidly and relocated as needed.

• Implementation idea: Use brownfield sites or underused public land for modular housing villages.

🇸🇪 Sweden’s Municipal Quota System

• How it works: Every municipality must accept a share of asylum seekers.

• Why it fits the UK:

  • Prevents overburdening specific cities like London or Manchester.

  • Encourages national solidarity and fair distribution.

• Implementation idea: Introduce a voluntary pilot program with incentives for councils that participate.

🇫🇷 France’s Use of Vacant Public Buildings

• How it works: Repurposes unused government buildings for temporary housing.

• Why it fits the UK:

  • The UK has thousands of vacant public properties.

  • Could be paired with renovation grants and NGO partnerships.

• Implementation idea: Create a national inventory of unused buildings and fast-track conversion projects.

🇳🇿 New Zealand’s Wraparound Support in Public Housing

• How it works: Refugees receive housing plus integrated services like healthcare, education, and job training.

• Why it fits the UK:

  • Improves long-term outcomes and reduces dependency.

  • Aligns with NHS and council service networks.

• Implementation idea: Designate specific public housing units for asylum seekers with embedded support teams.

•