npub1q6jrdj302ssg204ul8z0jym64g3rtvrawz5gmpl49rp04vt6dluqscuec6 (npub1q6j…uec6)
I did, but I thought it so unlikely I didn't include it.... not only would it mean taking on the exposure to future liabilities, it would also involve (as you rightly note) the removal of the risk cushion.... other PMs might, but Starmer? seems almost impossible.... but hey, I've been wrong before