|
Post by phileetin on Mar 27, 2024 14:56:36 GMT
sorry , i was crediting you with intelligence you obviously haven't got .
your solution is to basically eradicate tory funding but let unions continue funding labour ?
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Mar 27, 2024 15:07:34 GMT
I posted this on the Tory thread, but it should be here: Labour has announced it would regulate to prevent bonuses being paid to polluting water company bosses. Another dividing line between Labour and Tories. A good announcement by Starmer. Once again where the Lib Dem’s lead with good policy, the others slowly catch up and follow. Shouldn't he be going much further than that and be introducing massive fines for water company polluters and be prepared to introduce legislation to prevent shareholder dividends being paid, until they've cleaned up their mess up?
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Mar 27, 2024 15:27:26 GMT
sorry , i was crediting you with intelligence you obviously haven't got .
your solution is to basically eradicate tory funding but let unions continue funding labour ?
Politicians should be allowed to accept funding. But as the late great Robin Williams said they should be forced to wear the logos of their paymasters like a NASCAR driver. I'm not sure a load of workers paying monthly subs in a union with shared values of the party that represents them is comparable to someone prominent member of the Gambling Industry for example who will want something for their money. And that's not just the Tories as this Labour Party is just as guilty........
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Mar 27, 2024 16:44:50 GMT
sorry , i was crediting you with intelligence you obviously haven't got . your solution is to basically eradicate tory funding but let unions continue funding labour ?
I was replying to you because you clearly have none. The Labour Party was set up by the Trade Union Movement to be it's voice in Parliament. Is that too difficult for you to understand mate?
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Mar 27, 2024 16:46:49 GMT
I posted this on the Tory thread, but it should be here: Labour has announced it would regulate to prevent bonuses being paid to polluting water company bosses. Another dividing line between Labour and Tories. A good announcement by Starmer. Once again where the Lib Dem’s lead with good policy, the others slowly catch up and follow. Shouldn't he be going much further than that and be introducing massive fines for water company polluters and be prepared to introduce legislation to prevent shareholder dividends being paid, until they've cleaned up their mess up? I have no idea why Labour don't announce full return of public ownership. Right now it's a cast iron vote winner.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Mar 27, 2024 20:56:10 GMT
I posted this on the Tory thread, but it should be here: Labour has announced it would regulate to prevent bonuses being paid to polluting water company bosses. Another dividing line between Labour and Tories. A good announcement by Starmer. Once again where the Lib Dem’s lead with good policy, the others slowly catch up and follow. Shouldn't he be going much further than that and be introducing massive fines for water company polluters and be prepared to introduce legislation to prevent shareholder dividends being paid, until they've cleaned up their mess up? Yes he should, like the Lib Dem’s have.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Mar 27, 2024 20:57:20 GMT
Shouldn't he be going much further than that and be introducing massive fines for water company polluters and be prepared to introduce legislation to prevent shareholder dividends being paid, until they've cleaned up their mess up? I have no idea why Labour don't announce full return of public ownership. Right now it's a cast iron vote winner. It isn’t. Why should tax payers pay for the neglect and negligence of water companies? Make them pay to clear up the mess and then take public ownership of it
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Mar 28, 2024 6:27:27 GMT
I have no idea why Labour don't announce full return of public ownership. Right now it's a cast iron vote winner. It isn’t. Why should tax payers pay for the neglect and negligence of water companies? Make them pay to clear up the mess and then take public ownership of it Sorry I wasn't clear...absolutely agree with this.
|
|
|
Post by iancransonsknees on Mar 28, 2024 6:40:56 GMT
Shouldn't he be going much further than that and be introducing massive fines for water company polluters and be prepared to introduce legislation to prevent shareholder dividends being paid, until they've cleaned up their mess up? I have no idea why Labour don't announce full return of public ownership. Right now it's a cast iron vote winner. Because they're as in thrall to the big businesses, conglomerates and shareholders that own these utilities as any other established politicians are. They've got their priorities and they certainly aren't about improving things for the general public.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Mar 28, 2024 7:58:47 GMT
I have no idea why Labour don't announce full return of public ownership. Right now it's a cast iron vote winner. Because they're as in thrall to the big businesses, conglomerates and shareholders that own these utilities as any other established politicians are. They've got their priorities and they certainly aren't about improving things for the general public. I really want to say you are wrong. But I can’t for sure. I really hope you are wrong.
|
|
|
Post by adri2008 on Mar 28, 2024 9:30:08 GMT
Shouldn't he be going much further than that and be introducing massive fines for water company polluters and be prepared to introduce legislation to prevent shareholder dividends being paid, until they've cleaned up their mess up? I have no idea why Labour don't announce full return of public ownership. Right now it's a cast iron vote winner. I don't really understand this either. I'm not completely anti-privatisation as I feel it has it's place where genuine competition exists but water is literally a monopoly, if I don't like the provider I can't do a thing about it so it should be in public ownership.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Mar 28, 2024 10:10:41 GMT
I have no idea why Labour don't announce full return of public ownership. Right now it's a cast iron vote winner. Because they're as in thrall to the big businesses, conglomerates and shareholders that own these utilities as any other established politicians are. They've got their priorities and they certainly aren't about improving things for the general public. I totally agree many of the Utility Companies should be in Public Ownership and should never have been privatised but we are where we are. The 2017 Labour Manifesto estimated it would cost £90Bn to Nationalise the Warer Companies This is a huge cost and on top of that would be many billions more to repair/replace the infrastructure The alternative to simply take over the Water Companies like a Russia without compensation would have massive implications on UK reputationally and knock on effect in the Markets When the Water Companies were Nationalised they were debt free and since then they have built up a mountain of debt mainly to pay enormous Dividends to its Foreign Owners Water Companies are essentially a self regulating industry as since Cameron's austerity policy the numbers in Ofwat have been cut by 90% As an interim step appoint leadership in Ofwat committed to cleaning up the mess, pun intended. Ramp up the number of inspectors and a dedicated team analysing water quality on a continuous daily basis. Impose massive fines for non compliance to the standards they are supposed to meet with daily add ons until resolved. Pass legislation that makes Corporate Officers of Water Companies personally responsible for non compliance with severe fines and if unpaid bankruptcy Segregate the money raised from fines to be used to repair/replace infrastructure if necessary In other words "Squeeze them until the Pips Squeak" The Water Companies would have 2 options, comply with the charter they signed up to or walk away It would be a massively popular policy. They have taken the piss and in return have given back shit.
|
|
|
Post by iancransonsknees on Mar 28, 2024 12:43:38 GMT
Because they're as in thrall to the big businesses, conglomerates and shareholders that own these utilities as any other established politicians are. They've got their priorities and they certainly aren't about improving things for the general public. I totally agree many of the Utility Companies should be in Public Ownership and should never have been privatised but we are where we are. The 2017 Labour Manifesto estimated it would cost £90Bn to Nationalise the Warer Companies This is a huge cost and on top of that would be many billions more to repair/replace the infrastructure The alternative to simply take over the Water Companies like a Russia without compensation would have massive implications on UK reputationally and knock on effect in the Markets When the Water Companies were Nationalised they were debt free and since then they have built up a mountain of debt mainly to pay enormous Dividends to its Foreign Owners Water Companies are essentially a self regulating industry as since Cameron's austerity policy the numbers in Ofwat have been cut by 90% As an interim step appoint leadership in Ofwat committed to cleaning up the mess, pun intended. Ramp up the number of inspectors and a dedicated team analysing water quality on a continuous daily basis. Impose massive fines for non compliance to the standards they are supposed to meet with daily add ons until resolved. Pass legislation that makes Corporate Officers of Water Companies personally responsible for non compliance with severe fines and if unpaid bankruptcy Segregate the money raised from fines to be used to repair/replace infrastructure if necessary In other words "Squeeze them until the Pips Squeak" The Water Companies would have 2 options, comply with the charter they signed up to or walk away It would be a massively popular policy. They have taken the piss and in return have given back shit. No, you've got to pay more. www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68682198
|
|
|
Post by andystokey on Mar 28, 2024 13:15:39 GMT
Because they're as in thrall to the big businesses, conglomerates and shareholders that own these utilities as any other established politicians are. They've got their priorities and they certainly aren't about improving things for the general public. I totally agree many of the Utility Companies should be in Public Ownership and should never have been privatised but we are where we are. The 2017 Labour Manifesto estimated it would cost £90Bn to Nationalise the Warer Companies This is a huge cost and on top of that would be many billions more to repair/replace the infrastructure The alternative to simply take over the Water Companies like a Russia without compensation would have massive implications on UK reputationally and knock on effect in the Markets When the Water Companies were Nationalised they were debt free and since then they have built up a mountain of debt mainly to pay enormous Dividends to its Foreign Owners Water Companies are essentially a self regulating industry as since Cameron's austerity policy the numbers in Ofwat have been cut by 90% As an interim step appoint leadership in Ofwat committed to cleaning up the mess, pun intended. Ramp up the number of inspectors and a dedicated team analysing water quality on a continuous daily basis. Impose massive fines for non compliance to the standards they are supposed to meet with daily add ons until resolved. Pass legislation that makes Corporate Officers of Water Companies personally responsible for non compliance with severe fines and if unpaid bankruptcy Segregate the money raised from fines to be used to repair/replace infrastructure if necessary In other words "Squeeze them until the Pips Squeak" The Water Companies would have 2 options, comply with the charter they signed up to or walk away It would be a massively popular policy. They have taken the piss and in return have given back shit. Water, nuclear, rail, energy and others should just be considered "highly regulated" industries. If the shareholders cannot meet the regulatory standards (which should get stronger year on year) they should lose their status, resulting in a complete loss of shareholding.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Mar 28, 2024 13:47:18 GMT
I totally agree many of the Utility Companies should be in Public Ownership and should never have been privatised but we are where we are. The 2017 Labour Manifesto estimated it would cost £90Bn to Nationalise the Warer Companies This is a huge cost and on top of that would be many billions more to repair/replace the infrastructure The alternative to simply take over the Water Companies like a Russia without compensation would have massive implications on UK reputationally and knock on effect in the Markets When the Water Companies were Nationalised they were debt free and since then they have built up a mountain of debt mainly to pay enormous Dividends to its Foreign Owners Water Companies are essentially a self regulating industry as since Cameron's austerity policy the numbers in Ofwat have been cut by 90% As an interim step appoint leadership in Ofwat committed to cleaning up the mess, pun intended. Ramp up the number of inspectors and a dedicated team analysing water quality on a continuous daily basis. Impose massive fines for non compliance to the standards they are supposed to meet with daily add ons until resolved. Pass legislation that makes Corporate Officers of Water Companies personally responsible for non compliance with severe fines and if unpaid bankruptcy Segregate the money raised from fines to be used to repair/replace infrastructure if necessary In other words "Squeeze them until the Pips Squeak" The Water Companies would have 2 options, comply with the charter they signed up to or walk away It would be a massively popular policy. They have taken the piss and in return have given back shit. Water, nuclear, rail, energy and others should just be considered "highly regulated" industries. If the shareholders cannot meet the regulatory standards (which should get stronger year on year) they should lose their status, resulting in a complete loss of shareholding. To be fair I can't recall that it was that unpopular at the time especially Rail. The promise/myth was that Services would be better managed in Private Ownership There are plenty of examples where Public Ownership gives cheaper and better service Scottish Water was never privatised and is the most trusted utility in UK delivering cleaner rivers, lower bills and more investment per head. In Ireland Mail, rail, buses and water are all publicly owned in the republic of Ireland. The railways in Switzerland are publicly owned and it’s been named the best train company in Europe. Denmark has the highest proportion of wind power in the world. It is publicly owned and most wind farms are cooperatively or community owned. Netherlands water, electricity and gas networks are all publicly owned - and it's ILLEGAL to privatise any of them! Slovakia’s publicly owned railway provides free rail transport for children, students and pensioners. In Germany 88% of all trips on local public transport (bus, tram and local trains) are provided by publicly-owned operators. in France the post office (La Poste) is publicly owned. Its services include banking, insurance, driving tests, fresh food delivery and home visits for older people. Also in France Water is publicly owned in hundreds of French cities including Paris, where L’Eau de Paris (the publicly owned company) has cut bills and introduced still and sparkling water fountains throughout the city By selecting the wrong priorities successive Governments have sucked out the oxygen to implement policies that would actually make a positive difference to people's lives.
|
|
|
Post by Miles Offside on Mar 28, 2024 15:19:02 GMT
Because they're as in thrall to the big businesses, conglomerates and shareholders that own these utilities as any other established politicians are. They've got their priorities and they certainly aren't about improving things for the general public. I totally agree many of the Utility Companies should be in Public Ownership and should never have been privatised but we are where we are. The 2017 Labour Manifesto estimated it would cost £90Bn to Nationalise the Warer Companies This is a huge cost and on top of that would be many billions more to repair/replace the infrastructure The alternative to simply take over the Water Companies like a Russia without compensation would have massive implications on UK reputationally and knock on effect in the Markets When the Water Companies were Nationalised they were debt free and since then they have built up a mountain of debt mainly to pay enormous Dividends to its Foreign Owners Water Companies are essentially a self regulating industry as since Cameron's austerity policy the numbers in Ofwat have been cut by 90% As an interim step appoint leadership in Ofwat committed to cleaning up the mess, pun intended. Ramp up the number of inspectors and a dedicated team analysing water quality on a continuous daily basis. Impose massive fines for non compliance to the standards they are supposed to meet with daily add ons until resolved. Pass legislation that makes Corporate Officers of Water Companies personally responsible for non compliance with severe fines and if unpaid bankruptcy Segregate the money raised from fines to be used to repair/replace infrastructure if necessary In other words "Squeeze them until the Pips Squeak" The Water Companies would have 2 options, comply with the charter they signed up to or walk away It would be a massively popular policy. They have taken the piss and in return have given back shit. That's a good post. All of our national infrastructure should be in public ownership and, like it is with the police and military, it should be illegal for the workforce to strike. The huge cost of taking it all back under public control could be hived off as a separate debt (as was the debt of WW1) and paid off over a century or so.
|
|
|
Post by phileetin on Mar 28, 2024 15:43:42 GMT
I totally agree many of the Utility Companies should be in Public Ownership and should never have been privatised but we are where we are. The 2017 Labour Manifesto estimated it would cost £90Bn to Nationalise the Warer Companies This is a huge cost and on top of that would be many billions more to repair/replace the infrastructure The alternative to simply take over the Water Companies like a Russia without compensation would have massive implications on UK reputationally and knock on effect in the Markets When the Water Companies were Nationalised they were debt free and since then they have built up a mountain of debt mainly to pay enormous Dividends to its Foreign Owners Water Companies are essentially a self regulating industry as since Cameron's austerity policy the numbers in Ofwat have been cut by 90% As an interim step appoint leadership in Ofwat committed to cleaning up the mess, pun intended. Ramp up the number of inspectors and a dedicated team analysing water quality on a continuous daily basis. Impose massive fines for non compliance to the standards they are supposed to meet with daily add ons until resolved. Pass legislation that makes Corporate Officers of Water Companies personally responsible for non compliance with severe fines and if unpaid bankruptcy Segregate the money raised from fines to be used to repair/replace infrastructure if necessary In other words "Squeeze them until the Pips Squeak" The Water Companies would have 2 options, comply with the charter they signed up to or walk away It would be a massively popular policy. They have taken the piss and in return have given back shit. That's a good post. All of our national infrastructure should be in public ownership and, like it is with the police and military, it should be illegal for the workforce to strike. The huge cost of taking it all back under public control could be hived off as a separate debt (as was the debt of WW1) and paid off over a century or so. couldn't we take it back at a huge/massive discount due to the dilapidation in the infrastructure and the potential litigation claims arising from pollution etc ?
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Mar 28, 2024 15:46:27 GMT
That's a good post. All of our national infrastructure should be in public ownership and, like it is with the police and military, it should be illegal for the workforce to strike. The huge cost of taking it all back under public control could be hived off as a separate debt (as was the debt of WW1) and paid off over a century or so. couldn't we take it back at a huge/massive discount due to the dilapidation in the infrastructure and the potential litigation claims arising from pollution etc ? That would be good 👍 doubt it unfortunately though..
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Mar 28, 2024 16:51:28 GMT
Fair play to Starmer, the message is clearly resonating.....
|
|
|
Post by superjw on Mar 28, 2024 20:23:53 GMT
Appears Labour aren’t committing to the new 30 hours childcare plan if they get into power.
The scheme does need properly looking at, but not committing to anything and offering no credible alternative is just going to make families think they will drop it entirely (perhaps they will?). Possibly not good for votes in that regard.
|
|
|
Post by desman2 on Mar 28, 2024 20:33:28 GMT
Water, nuclear, rail, energy and others should just be considered "highly regulated" industries. If the shareholders cannot meet the regulatory standards (which should get stronger year on year) they should lose their status, resulting in a complete loss of shareholding. To be fair I can't recall that it was that unpopular at the time especially Rail. The promise/myth was that Services would be better managed in Private Ownership There are plenty of examples where Public Ownership gives cheaper and better service Scottish Water was never privatised and is the most trusted utility in UK delivering cleaner rivers, lower bills and more investment per head. In Ireland Mail, rail, buses and water are all publicly owned in the republic of Ireland. The railways in Switzerland are publicly owned and it’s been named the best train company in Europe. Denmark has the highest proportion of wind power in the world. It is publicly owned and most wind farms are cooperatively or community owned. Netherlands water, electricity and gas networks are all publicly owned - and it's ILLEGAL to privatise any of them! Slovakia’s publicly owned railway provides free rail transport for children, students and pensioners. In Germany 88% of all trips on local public transport (bus, tram and local trains) are provided by publicly-owned operators. in France the post office (La Poste) is publicly owned. Its services include banking, insurance, driving tests, fresh food delivery and home visits for older people. Also in France Water is publicly owned in hundreds of French cities including Paris, where L’Eau de Paris (the publicly owned company) has cut bills and introduced still and sparkling water fountains throughout the city By selecting the wrong priorities successive Governments have sucked out the oxygen to implement policies that would actually make a positive difference to people's lives. In say a time of war, your utilities can be seriously at risk if you don't actually control them yourself.
|
|
|
Post by dutchstokie on Mar 28, 2024 21:25:21 GMT
Water, nuclear, rail, energy and others should just be considered "highly regulated" industries. If the shareholders cannot meet the regulatory standards (which should get stronger year on year) they should lose their status, resulting in a complete loss of shareholding. To be fair I can't recall that it was that unpopular at the time especially Rail. The promise/myth was that Services would be better managed in Private Ownership There are plenty of examples where Public Ownership gives cheaper and better service Scottish Water was never privatised and is the most trusted utility in UK delivering cleaner rivers, lower bills and more investment per head. In Ireland Mail, rail, buses and water are all publicly owned in the republic of Ireland. The railways in Switzerland are publicly owned and it’s been named the best train company in Europe. Denmark has the highest proportion of wind power in the world. It is publicly owned and most wind farms are cooperatively or community owned. Netherlands water, electricity and gas networks are all publicly owned - and it's ILLEGAL to privatise any of them! Slovakia’s publicly owned railway provides free rail transport for children, students and pensioners. In Germany 88% of all trips on local public transport (bus, tram and local trains) are provided by publicly-owned operators. in France the post office (La Poste) is publicly owned. Its services include banking, insurance, driving tests, fresh food delivery and home visits for older people. Also in France Water is publicly owned in hundreds of French cities including Paris, where L’Eau de Paris (the publicly owned company) has cut bills and introduced still and sparkling water fountains throughout the city By selecting the wrong priorities successive Governments have sucked out the oxygen to implement policies that would actually make a positive difference to people's lives. For Holland, Rijkswaterstaat ( for the water) and Gasunie ( for the gas network) deliver very good services for both investments in updating infrastructure, fixing leaks and developing further capacity in their respective networks. The downside to Rijkswaterstaat in particular, is the time it takes them to come to a decision…. The company I work for Are installing a new meteo-mast just off IJmuiden which monitors marine life, seabed movement, bird migration, wind speed, barometric measurements for lightning warnings for the windparks etc….. and it took them 12 months to decide whether to have it 2km OR 2.1km offshore…. Mad !
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Mar 28, 2024 22:07:04 GMT
Appears Labour aren’t committing to the new 30 hours childcare plan if they get into power. The scheme does need properly looking at, but not committing to anything and offering no credible alternative is just going to make families think they will drop it entirely (perhaps they will?). Possibly not good for votes in that regard. It should be ditched. It is a terrible plan that gets you noway near 30 free hours of childcare. Childcare needs a total revamp.
|
|
|
Post by superjw on Mar 28, 2024 22:35:12 GMT
Appears Labour aren’t committing to the new 30 hours childcare plan if they get into power. The scheme does need properly looking at, but not committing to anything and offering no credible alternative is just going to make families think they will drop it entirely (perhaps they will?). Possibly not good for votes in that regard. It should be ditched. It is a terrible plan that gets you noway near 30 free hours of childcare. Childcare needs a total revamp. It does need revamping, but labour just saying it does without having a credible alternative isn’t enough, this is the epitome of them - no actual concrete plans or alternatives. Luckily my kids are older so these hours don’t apply anymore, but the prospect of the next government potentially getting rid of a lifeline for families would be a dealbreaker for me. They were a massive help a few years ago and helped us to financially cope with the early pre school days.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Mar 28, 2024 23:27:37 GMT
It should be ditched. It is a terrible plan that gets you noway near 30 free hours of childcare. Childcare needs a total revamp. It does need revamping, but labour just saying it does without having a credible alternative isn’t enough, this is the epitome of them - no actual concrete plans or alternatives. Luckily my kids are older so these hours don’t apply anymore, but the prospect of the next government potentially getting rid of a lifeline for families would be a dealbreaker for me. They were a massive help a few years ago and helped us to financially cope with the early pre school days. Everything they commit to gets stolen by the tories so I can’t blame them for waiting until the the manifesto, particularly with the tories likely to ruin public finances further in the Autumn statement to make things as difficult as possible for Labour when they get into power.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Mar 29, 2024 0:43:44 GMT
To be fair I can't recall that it was that unpopular at the time especially Rail. The promise/myth was that Services would be better managed in Private Ownership There are plenty of examples where Public Ownership gives cheaper and better service Scottish Water was never privatised and is the most trusted utility in UK delivering cleaner rivers, lower bills and more investment per head. In Ireland Mail, rail, buses and water are all publicly owned in the republic of Ireland. The railways in Switzerland are publicly owned and it’s been named the best train company in Europe. Denmark has the highest proportion of wind power in the world. It is publicly owned and most wind farms are cooperatively or community owned. Netherlands water, electricity and gas networks are all publicly owned - and it's ILLEGAL to privatise any of them! Slovakia’s publicly owned railway provides free rail transport for children, students and pensioners. In Germany 88% of all trips on local public transport (bus, tram and local trains) are provided by publicly-owned operators. in France the post office (La Poste) is publicly owned. Its services include banking, insurance, driving tests, fresh food delivery and home visits for older people. Also in France Water is publicly owned in hundreds of French cities including Paris, where L’Eau de Paris (the publicly owned company) has cut bills and introduced still and sparkling water fountains throughout the city By selecting the wrong priorities successive Governments have sucked out the oxygen to implement policies that would actually make a positive difference to people's lives. In say a time of war, your utilities can be seriously at risk if you don't actually control them yourself.
Or even at times of not at war, it would seem ...
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Mar 29, 2024 11:03:43 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Mar 30, 2024 8:48:46 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Mar 30, 2024 9:00:40 GMT
How sad to be ashamed of our union flag 🇬🇧 This is what years of anti British journalism has produced. And now they have the cheek to report what they themselves have helped to produce. Rag of a paper.
|
|
|
Post by adri2008 on Mar 30, 2024 9:50:31 GMT
I dont understand this at all. It's the flag of the United Kingdom who he hopes to be Prime Minster of. Nothing wrong with being proud of your country either - obviously there is much room for improvement but on the whole it is a good place to live in.
|
|