Questiontime from Sheffield

Think this about sums it up.

 

Fair do's. Whilst not absolutely insurmountable legally (see Orsen's post re Article 1) my point is that the legal ramifications make the Labour policy of renationalisation on the scale they are talking about and alleged costings totally unrealistic whilst we remain in the EU (and probably post EU if that happens). As per my previous post it would drag on for years in the courts and cost millions of taxpayers money over and above the compensation/bond issues. I think the biggest problem would be proving the case for 'in the national interest'. Fine where, for example a franchise on the railways has failed but what about relatively successful private ownership. Crumbling / inadequate infrastructure and demands for clean energy particulaly where we are rushing towards EVs /carbon neutral can not be solely funded by Public. Private companies will have to be involved but the threat of Nationalisations will completely scupper any chance of bringing them on board. Therfe are too many conflicting messages in the manifesto.
As Orsen says though it would require a fundament shift in shareholder rights and the capitalist system as it exists now, something that would need to be 'Worldwide' and, frankly I dont see happening in my lifetime.

 

Because they were always that way...the problem is as Vince Cable said is that EU permission is needed to nationalise....that shouldn't be a problem if they are companies where no EU players are involved but there will be a problem in those that are owned by France, Germany, Spain etc.
Having said that I'm in favour of renationalisation per se, certainly Royal Mail and the Post Office would come back straight away...even in the USA, the home of capitalism ,The US Postal service is run on a non profit making basis...as utilities, banks and rail franchises fail I would bring them back into public ownership....but it is going to be more limited than it was in the past.

 

Two entirely different points. I already knew the answer to that particular posters question. but the' research' required was doing the work for them and I could not be ars*d.

Do keep up!

 

I think you're right about the choices on the paper, but my view is that there's no deal, however good a deal is negotiated, that's as good as remaining. That said, and with Jeremy Corbyn's standards on workers rights (which surely everyone agrees need protecting) I think the deal that Labour will come back with will be seen as 'remain in name only'. There has got to be close alignment with the EU, got to be free movement, got to be open borders etc etc etc. All without a vote in the chamber. I don't think Labour can push through their radical plans whilst still in the EU because I think they contravene EU regs. So leave in name only would be perfect for Labour, keep benefits, protect workers rights, push forward with radical manifesto.
As a life long socialist and Labour member, this is my quandary, I've only got Labour to vote for really (A Lib Dem vote appears to be pointless) but as a remainer, do I trust my party. Not a nice place to be.

 

I altready pointed that out (they were always nationalised) but I agree that, and it was widely stated at the time, railways, Nationalising the railways in the UK, especially the way it was done, was a 'Bridge too far' but it was Thatcher ideology and she was on a roll

 

Well no. You said something was illegal and then when someone came back with an example of it not being illegal you said you hadn’t fully researched the topic in question.

Lecturing people about not doing thorough research into something and then doing that exact same thing isn’t a good look but it is something that appears to be common. What I like to suggest to people is if you don’t 100% know the full facts about a certain topic don’t go round throwing stones in glass houses.

Left right goodnight.

 

Wouldn’t know, don’t really read any news paper.
I make my mind up on everything in lifebased on what I see, hear and feel.
I saw and heard him when announced as the Labour leader and wasn’t convinced by him(I have said previously on this board I was more impressed with Tom Watson)every time I see him I’m not convinced by him either.
Although I am happy to admit that is based not so much on what he says but on body language etc

 

I think that you’ve read somewhere on an anti EU website that the ECHR would stop nationalisation and you’ve run with it, to the point of getting shouty.

I think it’d take the courts a short time to decide that it’s a misuse of human rights legislation. As has happened in the past when ridiculous claims of breaches of Human Rights have been brought.

The ECHR gets a bad press because barrack room lawyers like to stretch a point to breaking point. Even our former prime minister when Home Secretary lied to the HoC about it.

 

A lot of the problem we have here is the radical policies that Labour are planning on introducing, but, as I have said before these are the most radical of times. Anyone who wants 5 more years of this Johnson guy is clearly thinking I'm alright so.....

 

Have you ever looked at press from the forties as they tried to establish an NHS? Or the nineties as Blair threatened a minimum wage? It's exactly what you're arguing now.

 

I wonder what the Tory press were saying about Attlee’s plans. Pretty much the same intensity of misinformation, albeit different in specific terms, but similarly aimed at protecting privileged interests.

 

As a boy I was taught to stand up to bullies no matter what, my dad once yelled at me on seeing me let a teenage lad give me a scutch, I was 8. I wasn't allowed back in the house until my dad had seen me hit the lad back. I did, and he gave me a right hiding but never came near me again. My mum taught me that when folk resort to name calling it’s because they’ve lost, they can’t add anything worthy to an argument so become insulting, best to let it go and view it as a victory. Never forgotten either lesson.

 

No, cos the tragedy is RH I think labour would get in if corbyn and his ilk werent running the show.

 

Pity they didn’t learn you to engage brain before talking/writing

 

Oh, and yet you fight the corner of the most bullying political ideology there is, Have you posters of Boris on your bedroom wall.

 

Maybe they taught me to speak my mind, follow my convictions and not to just follow the herd.

 

Where, pray tell have I fought the corner of boris and/or the tories ?????

 

as I said in an earlier post Corbyn was impressive last night.
But there is a problem re the renegotiation of the deal because he is a remainer and he'll be negotiating for a Leave deal - strange situation to be in.

Your posts would have more credibility if you focused on the positive things a Labour government would do without having to endlessly
refer to the Tories.
And why always refer to those who may have a different viewpoint to yourself as 'idiots.' Can you not make a cogent argument without resorting to insults?

 

I rest my case m’lord. Oh, the things and mileage that I could do with this post alone.