|
Post by bayernoatcake on Oct 10, 2023 7:47:16 GMT
Not sure how anyone could be against this?
|
|
|
Post by Veritas on Oct 10, 2023 8:00:21 GMT
Conference votes are not binding on party policy. No they aren't. They're advisory. The leadership have already said they'll ignore it. Having shit pumped into the sea and executives receiving huge bonuses while services stagnate is clearly in the public interest. Deciding re-nationalisation isn't the priority does not equate to an acceptance of the current appalling situation. Public ownership would be my preferred end state but we simply don't have the money for that to be a day 1 option.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Oct 10, 2023 8:07:11 GMT
Fair enough. You're wrong mind. I actually think you're both wrong. The past has proved nationalisation doesn't work. And the present proves the private sector are too interested in pandering to share holders and profits and let standards drop. What we really need is a cross party consensus to rip up the rules and create an independently monitored system run by the private sector where there is constant monitoring and scrutiny and whereby they have to operate within certain criteria. Yes it'll make it a less attractive investment proposition. But it will be a more stable one that pension funds would invest in for the stability element it could provide to a portfolio. I mean everyone will always need water and energy right? Critical items like this are too important to be used as political footballs and its already been proven that the either or of private or national simply doesn't work. Same goes for education and the NHS if you ask me. Changing direction at every election cycle means we never actually give anything the time required to actually make it work. My opinion anyway. We need more regulation is what you are saying. I couldn’t agree more. Regulate the hell out of basic utilities to make it different for private owners to rape tax payers as they have been. At the same time set up the nationalised green energy company Labour are proposing. Then the decision about nationalising can be made when the cost will be far less to the tax payer. This is to a large degree the Labour policy where there will be regulations restricting payouts to execs in water companies until they have fixed the shit leaks. Contrast to the tory policy which is to let the tax payer pay higher bills to cover costs of repairs to our water network. The labour conference has been adding meat to the bone and so you have to not be listening or hearing what labour are saying to now accuse them of being the same as the tories. I like the VAT on school fees to better fund state system, i like a shift in nhs culture to preventative care rather than just treating people at the last possible minute, i like the sound of devolution to increase local powers for local communities and reduce the local decisions made in Westminster. Reeves sounds like an actual economist in charge of the economy. I want them to include wealth tax in their manifesto and the big one would be voting reform.
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Oct 10, 2023 8:20:00 GMT
I actually think you're both wrong. The past has proved nationalisation doesn't work. And the present proves the private sector are too interested in pandering to share holders and profits and let standards drop. What we really need is a cross party consensus to rip up the rules and create an independently monitored system run by the private sector where there is constant monitoring and scrutiny and whereby they have to operate within certain criteria. Yes it'll make it a less attractive investment proposition. But it will be a more stable one that pension funds would invest in for the stability element it could provide to a portfolio. I mean everyone will always need water and energy right? Critical items like this are too important to be used as political footballs and its already been proven that the either or of private or national simply doesn't work. Same goes for education and the NHS if you ask me. Changing direction at every election cycle means we never actually give anything the time required to actually make it work. My opinion anyway. We need more regulation is what you are saying. I couldn’t agree more. Regulate the hell out of basic utilities to make it different for private owners to rape tax payers as they have been. At the same time set up the nationalised green energy company Labour are proposing. Then the decision about nationalising can be made when the cost will be far less to the tax payer. This is to a large degree the Labour policy where there will be regulations restricting payouts to execs in water companies until they have fixed the shit leaks. Contrast to the tory policy which is to let the tax payer pay higher bills to cover costs of repairs to our water network. The labour conference has been adding meat to the bone and so you have to not be listening or hearing what labour are saying to now accuse them of being the same as the tories. I like the VAT on school fees to better fund state system, i like a shift in nhs culture to preventative care rather than just treating people at the last possible minute, i like the sound of devolution to increase local powers for local communities and reduce the local decisions made in Westminster. Reeves sounds like an actual economist in charge of the economy. I want them to include wealth tax in their manifesto and the big one would be voting reform. Until Kier starts back tracking that is. We'll see. But in my humble opinion we don't have a Conservative govt and Labour aren't Labour anymore since they abandoned the working class. Both parties are unrecognisable from the past and both look useless to me.
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Oct 10, 2023 8:24:52 GMT
I actually think you're both wrong. The past has proved nationalisation doesn't work. And the present proves the private sector are too interested in pandering to share holders and profits and let standards drop. What we really need is a cross party consensus to rip up the rules and create an independently monitored system run by the private sector where there is constant monitoring and scrutiny and whereby they have to operate within certain criteria. Yes it'll make it a less attractive investment proposition. But it will be a more stable one that pension funds would invest in for the stability element it could provide to a portfolio. I mean everyone will always need water and energy right? Critical items like this are too important to be used as political footballs and its already been proven that the either or of private or national simply doesn't work. Same goes for education and the NHS if you ask me. Changing direction at every election cycle means we never actually give anything the time required to actually make it work. My opinion anyway. We need more regulation is what you are saying. I couldn’t agree more. Regulate the hell out of basic utilities to make it different for private owners to rape tax payers as they have been. At the same time set up the nationalised green energy company Labour are proposing. Then the decision about nationalising can be made when the cost will be far less to the tax payer. This is to a large degree the Labour policy where there will be regulations restricting payouts to execs in water companies until they have fixed the shit leaks. Contrast to the tory policy which is to let the tax payer pay higher bills to cover costs of repairs to our water network. The labour conference has been adding meat to the bone and so you have to not be listening or hearing what labour are saying to now accuse them of being the same as the tories. I like the VAT on school fees to better fund state system, i like a shift in nhs culture to preventative care rather than just treating people at the last possible minute, i like the sound of devolution to increase local powers for local communities and reduce the local decisions made in Westminster. Reeves sounds like an actual economist in charge of the economy. I want them to include wealth tax in their manifesto and the big one would be voting reform. And no, what I'm saying is certain items need to be dealt with cross party. They are too important to the welfare of a nation to be used as political footballs. All this changing during political cycles does nobody any good. Its all just rhetoric to get voted back in. We deserve better no matter what your allegiances. That's all I'm saying.
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Oct 10, 2023 8:25:34 GMT
No they aren't. They're advisory. The leadership have already said they'll ignore it. Having shit pumped into the sea and executives receiving huge bonuses while services stagnate is clearly in the public interest. Deciding re-nationalisation isn't the priority does not equate to an acceptance of the current appalling situation. Public ownership would be my preferred end state but we simply don't have the money for that to be a day 1 option. If Labour got a second term do you think it's something they'll move towards?
|
|
|
Post by Veritas on Oct 10, 2023 8:40:30 GMT
Deciding re-nationalisation isn't the priority does not equate to an acceptance of the current appalling situation. Public ownership would be my preferred end state but we simply don't have the money for that to be a day 1 option. If Labour got a second term do you think it's something they'll move towards? I suppose it all depends on how the first term had gone, make real progress and win another good majority then I think it would be on the cards. But then again if much stronger regulation had achieved the environmental objectives and reined in the excesses of the current robber baron management then other things may be more pressing.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Oct 10, 2023 8:53:03 GMT
I remember British Rail: Electricity Boards and Water Boards. So no I don’t support Nationalisation Fair enough. You're wrong mind. He's not Huddy. I also remember the Gas Board and streets dug up for weeks on end. British Railways was a disaster. Why do you think goods traffic moved off the rail to roads? Why do you think the postal service stopped using the railways? I worked for the steel industry. I've seen nationalisation in action. Thatcher was right to sell them off and end taxes being poured into them. She was wrong not to set up regulatory controls to ensure they were run in the interests of customers and the public and not just share holders. The end result is we now again have tax payers supporting them again with major projects such as Tideway where costs are spiralling. Some foreign utility companies are government owned, so: www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64674131EDF's debts have spiralled to €64.5bn.
|
|
|
Post by phileetin on Oct 10, 2023 8:59:43 GMT
Not sure how anyone could be against this? depends if it costs 8 billion to recover it ?
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Oct 10, 2023 9:07:40 GMT
Fair enough. You're wrong mind. He's not Huddy. I also remember the Gas Board and streets dug up for weeks on end. British Railways was a disaster. Why do you think goods traffic moved off the rail to roads? Why do you think the postal service stopped using the railways? I worked for the steel industry. I've seen nationalisation in action. Thatcher was right to sell them off and end taxes being poured into them. She was wrong not to set up regulatory controls to ensure they were run in the interests of customers and the public and not just share holders. The end result is we now again have tax payers supporting them again with major projects such as Tideway where costs are spiralling. Some foreign utility companies are government owned, so: www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64674131EDF's debts have spiralled to €64.5bn. He is...and so are you.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Oct 10, 2023 9:08:04 GMT
Not sure how anyone could be against this? depends if it costs 8 billion to recover it ? Then it'll be half a billion spent deterring future lying corrupt charlatans from doing it next time the public are daft enough to vote them in, money well spent.
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Oct 10, 2023 9:13:23 GMT
Not sure how anyone could be against this? As long as it goes with jail time if needs be.
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Oct 10, 2023 9:22:22 GMT
Not sure how anyone could be against this? As long as it goes with jail time if needs be. It absolutely should Dave.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Oct 10, 2023 10:05:05 GMT
We need more regulation is what you are saying. I couldn’t agree more. Regulate the hell out of basic utilities to make it different for private owners to rape tax payers as they have been. At the same time set up the nationalised green energy company Labour are proposing. Then the decision about nationalising can be made when the cost will be far less to the tax payer. This is to a large degree the Labour policy where there will be regulations restricting payouts to execs in water companies until they have fixed the shit leaks. Contrast to the tory policy which is to let the tax payer pay higher bills to cover costs of repairs to our water network. The labour conference has been adding meat to the bone and so you have to not be listening or hearing what labour are saying to now accuse them of being the same as the tories. I like the VAT on school fees to better fund state system, i like a shift in nhs culture to preventative care rather than just treating people at the last possible minute, i like the sound of devolution to increase local powers for local communities and reduce the local decisions made in Westminster. Reeves sounds like an actual economist in charge of the economy. I want them to include wealth tax in their manifesto and the big one would be voting reform. Until Kier starts back tracking that is. We'll see. But in my humble opinion we don't have a Conservative govt and Labour aren't Labour anymore since they abandoned the working class. Both parties are unrecognisable from the past and both look useless to me. You may be right. But we know the tories are rubbish. We don’t know that this labour lot are yet. And without voting reform, there is no other choice of having a different governing party.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Oct 10, 2023 10:07:17 GMT
We need more regulation is what you are saying. I couldn’t agree more. Regulate the hell out of basic utilities to make it different for private owners to rape tax payers as they have been. At the same time set up the nationalised green energy company Labour are proposing. Then the decision about nationalising can be made when the cost will be far less to the tax payer. This is to a large degree the Labour policy where there will be regulations restricting payouts to execs in water companies until they have fixed the shit leaks. Contrast to the tory policy which is to let the tax payer pay higher bills to cover costs of repairs to our water network. The labour conference has been adding meat to the bone and so you have to not be listening or hearing what labour are saying to now accuse them of being the same as the tories. I like the VAT on school fees to better fund state system, i like a shift in nhs culture to preventative care rather than just treating people at the last possible minute, i like the sound of devolution to increase local powers for local communities and reduce the local decisions made in Westminster. Reeves sounds like an actual economist in charge of the economy. I want them to include wealth tax in their manifesto and the big one would be voting reform. And no, what I'm saying is certain items need to be dealt with cross party. They are too important to the welfare of a nation to be used as political footballs. All this changing during political cycles does nobody any good. Its all just rhetoric to get voted back in. We deserve better no matter what your allegiances. That's all I'm saying. I doubt anyone (sane) would disagree with you. But it will never happen with first past the post as they will simply focus on the 25% of the electorate they need for a majority and ignore the rest. Whereas with voting reform, we may get more cross party consensus as there may be more coalitions representing far more than just 25% of the electorate.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Oct 10, 2023 10:10:35 GMT
Fair enough. You're wrong mind. He's not Huddy. I also remember the Gas Board and streets dug up for weeks on end. British Railways was a disaster. Why do you think goods traffic moved off the rail to roads? Why do you think the postal service stopped using the railways? I worked for the steel industry. I've seen nationalisation in action. Thatcher was right to sell them off and end taxes being poured into them. She was wrong not to set up regulatory controls to ensure they were run in the interests of customers and the public and not just share holders. The end result is we now again have tax payers supporting them again with major projects such as Tideway where costs are spiralling. Some foreign utility companies are government owned, so: www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64674131EDF's debts have spiralled to €64.5bn. You want more regulation? I agree. And where has the most regulation on businesses and publicly owned assets than anywhere else…..the EU. Shame we left really. Oh well. The French government must laugh at us owning our energy and rail companies. So must the Chinese. We have a partially nationalised system but we only allow foreign governments to own our assets! Absolute madness. Take back control of our country’s assets!
|
|
|
Post by cvillestokie on Oct 10, 2023 10:12:46 GMT
Not sure how anyone could be against this? depends if it costs 8 billion to recover it ? That’s an interesting one. By and large, fraud is a crime. If your house was broken into, would you be okay with the police saying that they will not investigate as the cost of the stolen items will be less than the cost of their wages and the court’s time?
|
|
|
Post by knype on Oct 10, 2023 11:27:01 GMT
He's not Huddy. I also remember the Gas Board and streets dug up for weeks on end. British Railways was a disaster. Why do you think goods traffic moved off the rail to roads? Why do you think the postal service stopped using the railways? I worked for the steel industry. I've seen nationalisation in action. Thatcher was right to sell them off and end taxes being poured into them. She was wrong not to set up regulatory controls to ensure they were run in the interests of customers and the public and not just share holders. The end result is we now again have tax payers supporting them again with major projects such as Tideway where costs are spiralling. Some foreign utility companies are government owned, so: www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64674131EDF's debts have spiralled to €64.5bn. He is...and so are you. They're correct, you're wrong
|
|
|
Post by knype on Oct 10, 2023 11:27:49 GMT
depends if it costs 8 billion to recover it ? That’s an interesting one. By and large, fraud is a crime. If your house was broken into, would you be okay with the police saying that they will not investigate as the cost of the stolen items will be less than the cost of their wages and the court’s time? Aren't they already doing that with thefts from shops? Is all fraud, fraud?
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Oct 10, 2023 11:28:08 GMT
He's not Huddy. I also remember the Gas Board and streets dug up for weeks on end. British Railways was a disaster. Why do you think goods traffic moved off the rail to roads? Why do you think the postal service stopped using the railways? I worked for the steel industry. I've seen nationalisation in action. Thatcher was right to sell them off and end taxes being poured into them. She was wrong not to set up regulatory controls to ensure they were run in the interests of customers and the public and not just share holders. The end result is we now again have tax payers supporting them again with major projects such as Tideway where costs are spiralling. Some foreign utility companies are government owned, so: www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64674131EDF's debts have spiralled to €64.5bn. You want more regulation? I agree. And where has the most regulation on businesses and publicly owned assets than anywhere else…..the EU. Shame we left really. Oh well. The French government must laugh at us owning our energy and rail companies. So must the Chinese. We have a partially nationalised system but we only allow foreign governments to own our assets! Absolute madness. Take back control of our country’s assets! These companies were raping us when we were in the EU
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Oct 10, 2023 11:43:51 GMT
You want more regulation? I agree. And where has the most regulation on businesses and publicly owned assets than anywhere else…..the EU. Shame we left really. Oh well. The French government must laugh at us owning our energy and rail companies. So must the Chinese. We have a partially nationalised system but we only allow foreign governments to own our assets! Absolute madness. Take back control of our country’s assets! These companies were raping us when we were in the EU Just another thing we didn't need to leave the EU to do and chose not to But it's easier to blame someone else than admit your own incompetence
|
|
|
Post by phileetin on Oct 10, 2023 11:46:20 GMT
That’s an interesting one. By and large, fraud is a crime. If your house was broken into, would you be okay with the police saying that they will not investigate as the cost of the stolen items will be less than the cost of their wages and the court’s time? Aren't they already doing that with thefts from shops? Is all fraud, fraud? like the tories except this will be a labour supporting/donating quango that will get the contract.
|
|
|
Post by desman2 on Oct 10, 2023 11:56:33 GMT
People who are a little older and have lived their lives bouncing between these two parties already know, what is coming, regardless of which of those two win. They will do what they want because even if they lose the next time, they know that the public are as thick as a sack of nut shells and will give it them back again. People need to look at a ballot paper and look at candidates, rather than which colour rosette they wear. We know exactly what they will say at these conferences, you could almost compile the speeches, but it's just words and nothing more. Thats the frightening thing. People vote on what someone says and not on what they do.
|
|
|
Post by flea79 on Oct 10, 2023 12:11:08 GMT
Not sure how anyone could be against this? well certainly its a good idea, until it costs 8 billion and all the people investigating are friends of labour ministers! its just how it is, corruption and greed at every level and not exclusive to the Conservatives alone.... we need real change in this country and i dont think i shall ever see it in my lifetime
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Oct 10, 2023 12:19:50 GMT
Not sure how anyone could be against this? well certainly its a good idea, until it costs 8 billion and all the people investigating are friends of labour ministers! its just how it is, corruption and greed at every level and not exclusive to the Conservatives alone.... we need real change in this country and i dont think i shall ever see it in my lifetime Except there has never been an opportunity like the one the current government and their own 'friends' have just 'enjoyed' as far as I can remember anyway. If Labour ministers do anything similar when they're in power they should be hunted down too. A proper investigation is long overdue, we're in danger of turning into Venezuela if we let that sort of shit continue.
|
|
|
Post by desman2 on Oct 10, 2023 12:32:56 GMT
Not sure how anyone could be against this? well certainly its a good idea, until it costs 8 billion and all the people investigating are friends of labour ministers! its just how it is, corruption and greed at every level and not exclusive to the Conservatives alone.... we need real change in this country and i dont think i shall ever see it in my lifetime Bang on. Once you start something like this , it is permanent. Those who get jobs in this project will simply string it along to protect their incomes, just throwing the odd bit of bread on the water to make it look like something is being done. Then , as you say, the cost outstrips the recovery
|
|
|
Post by dutchstokie on Oct 10, 2023 12:38:38 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Oct 10, 2023 12:46:13 GMT
They're correct, you're wrong All surveys recently carried out show 66% in favour of renationalisation. So it seems like you're spectacularly wrong....yet again mate.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Oct 10, 2023 12:54:20 GMT
|
|
|
Post by knype on Oct 10, 2023 12:57:00 GMT
They're correct, you're wrong All surveys recently carried out show 66% in favour of renationalisation. So it seems like you're spectacularly wrong....yet again mate. So surveys now, not actual details of how crap it was at the time?
|
|