Election Year or Fear!

[Geoff Parkstone]

So, Roger, the perennial underfunding of British Rail so it didn't perform well and, therefore, got targeted by HMG as a prime target for privatisation had absolutely nothing to do with the poor performances?

Not sure I understand the question... underfunding was a significant part of the problem: underfunding by HMG as you say when nationalised, and continued underfunding once past the initial privatised funding that was doubtless part of the privatisation "deals" . Which comes back to my point about "can we afford to renationalise" as we will simply get back into that same underfunding spiral when back in full state ownership.

In principle Im not opposed to state ownership of services including water and railways, but its a huge financial commitment - not necessarily just to liberate the companies from private ownership but more relevantly to invest enough in the infrastructures that have been underfunded for probably 50 years. It will add pressure to an already creaking budget and PSBR which inevitably will lead to significant inflation with all the joys that brings in terms of pay disputes, poverty for those on fixed incomes, pensions and benefits etc etc. One might say a typical outcome of a labour government of old (although credit to Brown - not George - where it didnt happen under his stewardship of Treasury)

[MadAmster]

Not sure I understand the question... underfunding was a significant part of the problem: underfunding by HMG as you say when nationalised, and continued underfunding once past the initial privatised funding that was doubtless part of the privatisation "deals" . Which comes back to my point about "can we afford to renationalise" as we will simply get back into that same underfunding spiral when back in full state ownership.

In principle Im not opposed to state ownership of services including water and railways, but its a huge financial commitment - not necessarily just to liberate the companies from private ownership but more relevantly to invest enough in the infrastructures that have been underfunded for probably 50 years. It will add pressure to an already creaking budget and PSBR which inevitably will lead to significant inflation with all the joys that brings in terms of pay disputes, poverty for those on fixed incomes, pensions and benefits etc etc. One might say a typical outcome of a labour government of old (although credit to Brown - not George - where it didnt happen under his stewardship of Treasury)

Water. Take Thames Water (please, someone, anyone FFS take them...). Not sure of the precise figures but they are something like 15 Bn in debt with a similar "post" in the cost of the repair and maintenance of their "network" of water pipes, pumping stations, water towers etc. in order to get things back up to standard. On top of that they've thrown something like 12 BN at Shareholder's in dividends. The company is a dead man walking. Have they had HMG subsidies? Yes, they have. They also got a 3Bn emergency loan earlier this year. So, the taxpayer is subsidising a company that makes huge losses, can't afford repairs and maintenance but can afford to pay healthy dividends? Most sensible folk would look at that and go something to the effect of "chuffin ridiculous". The company is a dead man walking and when the corpse does eventually keel over, it will cost the taxpayer and customers even more money. Are they merely keeping their comatose company breathing until HMG is forced to buy it out so that they can pay more to the shareholders or will they eventually admit defeat, do the decent thing and walk away, leaving the country to pick up the tab?

Privatised rail only worked because they still got large HMG subsidies. They also, thanks to those subsidies, managed to pay shareholder dividends to the likes of the Dutch and other EU countries who happened to have shares in those companies. Another ridiculous state of affairs.

If HMG (read the taxpayer) is keeping these failing companies alive, we might as well transfer ownership to HMG and have done with it.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Did you really have 2000 in your office, GP? Must have been one hell of an office. Would have hated to be in the queue for the coffee machine.

Coffee machines? There were many many "coffee ladies" who would bring a trolley round several times a day with hot beverages and those little packets of 2 biscuits, which always seemed to be nasty Lincoln biscuits

[ramAnag]

The organisation was 2000 split across three locations in London. remember these days were in the infancy of IT! There were for example about 60 "messengers" in the internal postroom

Ah, right. So not exactly ‘my office’ then. Sorry, I was confused, my own office was always overcrowded with anything more than six people in it. Different realities I suppose. Thought you might have slipped an extra 0, or two, on by mistake.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Water. Take Thames Water (please, someone, anyone FFS take them...). Not sure of the precise figures but they are something like 15 Bn in debt with a similar "post" in the cost of the repair and maintenance of their "network" of water pipes, pumping stations, water towers etc. in order to get things back up to standard. On top of that they've thrown something like 12 BN at Shareholder's in dividends. The company is a dead man walking. Have they had HMG subsidies? Yes, they have. They also got a 3Bn emergency loan earlier this year. So, the taxpayer is subsidising a company that makes huge losses, can't afford repairs and maintenance but can afford to pay healthy dividends? Most sensible folk would look at that and go something to the effect of "chuffin ridiculous". The company is a dead man walking and when the corpse does eventually keel over, it will cost the taxpayer and customers even more money. Are they merely keeping their comatose company breathing until HMG is forced to buy it out so that they can pay more to the shareholders or will they eventually admit defeat, do the decent thing and walk away, leaving the country to pick up the tab?

Privatised rail only worked because they still got large HMG subsidies. They also, thanks to those subsidies, managed to pay shareholder dividends to the likes of the Dutch and other EU countries who happened to have shares in those companies. Another ridiculous state of affairs.

If HMG (read the taxpayer) is keeping these failing companies alive, we might as well transfer ownership to HMG and have done with it.

But thers no point pnationalising it without a solid commitment to invest those billions in infrastructure projects, otherwise you are simply moving the deck chairs around the Titanic. That's where the cost is - in remedying decades of under investment, not in simply removing the carcass of a sick company

[Andy_Faber]

Royal Parks and RSPCA have rejected Farages claims about swan eating.

https://news.sky.com/story/royal-par...he-uk-13437205

Andy, as you are looking closely at peoples posts I'll leave it for you to decide if accusing another poster of gas lighting is appropriate.

Who I'm supposed to be gas lighting i have no idea.

I?ve checked ?gaslighting? before and it doesn?t break any boundaries in this context. We?ve had worse

[SithHappens]

I?ve checked ?gaslighting? before and it doesn?t break any boundaries in this context. We?ve had worse

Yeah to be expected really, as you say we've had worse. If accusing someone of being anti-semitic with no justification is ok then it's not really a surprise.

[ramAnag]

Royal Parks and RSPCA have rejected Farages claims about swan eating.

https://news.sky.com/story/royal-par...he-uk-13437205

Andy, as you are looking closely at peoples posts I'll leave it for you to decide if accusing another poster of gas lighting is appropriate.

Who I'm supposed to be gas lighting i have no idea.

Tbf again to Tricky - what twice in one day (!) - I think he’s suggesting you’re the victim rather than the perpetrator of ‘gas lighting’, Sith.

You’re neither of course, although the idea that Eastern European immigrants have been catching and eating carp and swans from our parks goes back at least thirty years and there is, or at least was, some small degree of truth in it.

Mind you, where I live, people shoot pheasants for fun. I couldn’t care less if someone shoots the occasional one or two for food, or even supplies the local butcher with Christmas ‘game’, but one bloke shot over a hundred in one afternoon just for ‘sport’. Course virtually all such shooters are wealthy, British and white…so we can’t compare it.

[Andy_Faber]

Royal Parks and RSPCA have rejected Farages claims about swan eating.

There’s some pretty compelling evidence on social media, of capture if not consumption, swans and (from my observation) Bewick geese. Happy to take your view whether to confirm or contradict.

[SithHappens]

There’s some pretty compelling evidence on social media, of capture if not consumption, swans and (from my observation) Bewick geese. Happy to take your view whether to confirm or contradict.

The video posted dates back to 2010

Odd though that Farage seems offended by it even if true considering his support for fox hunting which results in the killing of animals for just fun