Labour Party/government Watch

[johnhemming2]

That, of course, is your right. However, you should not believe that those who disagree with you are inherently a conspiracy involving powerful forces. It could be simply that they disagree.

[3rdRock]

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ..... and I'm back.

[UndercoverElephant]

That, of course, is your right. However, you should not believe that those who disagree with you are inherently a conspiracy involving powerful forces. It could be simply that they disagree.

But it isn't. Next you'll be trying to tell me there isn't a right-wing media "conspiracy", and that the Murdoch press and Sky TV are unbiased.

Those in power fear Corbyn precisely because they are worried that if he is given a fair chance to explain his policies, people will realise they aren't "loony" at all. What is actually "loony" is the extent towards what is considered "normal" in this country has drifted to the right.

Take nationalisation of the railways, for example. The right is wailing that Corbyn wants "nationalise great swathes of private enterprise." They want people to just swallow the claim that this is "loony left" without bothering to think about it. The truth is that the railways should never have been privatised in the first place. That privatisation was driven by pig-headed ideology in place of common sense, and it has been an unmitigated disaster. Rail travel just gets ever more expensive, as the government is forced to subsidise this privatised industry, while shareholders cream off profits. It has been in nobody's interest except those shareholders. Even 50% of tory voters now realise this. The railways should be a national asset, and run by the government as a transport system for the benefit of the people and the economy. If this debate is had openly, rationally and free from right-wing propaganda designed to stop people thinking, then the argument for renationalisation will win. This presents a huge threat to the right, because it would rightly be seen as the tide turning against them for the first time since the mid 70s. If the railways are renationalised, what will follow? What are the implications for those people who want to privatise the national health service?

Take another example: removing the charitable status of private schools. Are private schools charities? No they f***ing aren't. They are instruments for perpetuating inequality. A "loony left" policy would be to ban private schools altogether. Removing their charitable status, on the other hand, is entirely defensible. Again, if Corbyn is given a chance to make the case for this policy, I think he'll win the argument.

Take another example: "quantitative easing for the people". In other words, printing money and giving it to people instead of banks. Why the hell not? The only reason this wasn't done before is because it would actually help people get out of debt, and we couldn't have that, could we? Again, this is not a "loony" policy. It's common sense, but hasn't even been seriously discussed because the right wing post-Thatcherite consensus doesn't want people to even think about such things.

Pretty much the same sort of case can be made for nearly all of Corbyn's policies. They are not loony left. They are defensible and are likely to be extremely popular. And that is why the establishment and political right fear him. Not because he's wrong and loony, but because he's right, and likely to win the argument.

[emordnilap]

From what I've read of Corbyn's aspirations, it's centrist. It's the frame of reference, what people are told to believe, that's shifted.

[emordnilap]

This will be considered outrageous by those on the right, who will accuse the BBC of being a mouthpiece of the radical left. But what are they going to do about it? Attacking or trying to dismember the BBC would just drive even more people towards Corbyn.

Yesterday Chris Bryant MP, shadow minister for culture, challenged Chancellor George Osborne over an alleged secret meeting with Rupert Murdoch in the days before the Treasury imposed a £650m budget cut on the BBC.

Source

[johnhemming2]

Rail travel just gets ever more expensive

My daughter got a train ticket to London yesterday for £4. I don't think that is that expensive.

[UndercoverElephant]

Rail travel just gets ever more expensive

My daughter got a train ticket to London yesterday for £4. I don't think that is that expensive.

Are you trying to out-Biff Biff Vernon for disingenuity?

Do you think the privatisation of British Rail was a good idea, and has been a success?

Do you think it is "loony left" to propose renationalising the railways?

[johnhemming2]

Do you think the privatisation of British Rail was a good idea, and has been a success?

I like trains and travelling by train.

If you use the test of passenger numbers, quality of service and access to cost effective transport particularly off-peak then yes it has been a success.

I see no good reason to revert to a nationalised service which would likely be more expensive and worse quality.

I am less happy about the details of Bus deregulation and would wish to have sector tendering (as works in London). I have put some interesting (if old) photos on my blog about bus competition.

http://johnhemming.blogspot.co.uk/2015/ ... hotos.html

[UndercoverElephant]

You're in the wrong party, John.

[johnhemming2]

The Lib Dems don't support the nationalisation of the railways. When Labour were last in power they did not nationalise the railways.

[UndercoverElephant]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33780754

Andy Burnham pledges to renationalise railway network

He wants to pick up Corbyn supporter's 2nd choices.

[johnhemming2]

I support more regulation of buses outside London (to have the same system as London - Sector tendering).

However, how would nationalising the railways be any improvement for the passengers?

(the post I did previously at 6.23pm was on a train).

I accept that this may be Burnham's tactic to get corbyn second preferences although I expect Corbyn to be in the final run off (win or lose).

Burnham has the mid staffs millstone around his neck which really should keep him out. Covering up the problems in the NHS was totally wrong.

[UndercoverElephant]

However, how would nationalising the railways be any improvement for the passengers?

One single organisation instead of chaos.

The main benefit would be to the taxpayer, due to the elimination of parasitical shareholders.

[johnhemming2]

That argument applies to any sector of the economy.

I am a regular rail user. I don't see chaos. What is true is that as a rule a private sector organisation provides a service at lower cost than a public sector organisation even though the shareholders get a dividend.

That is because politicians are not that good at running things.

Now you may think politicians in general are better managers than managers under pressure from shareholders. I don't. The politicians, in any event, don't have much time for the detail.

There is a role for different types of organisation including producer mutuals, consumer mutuals and private sector organisations.

Certain services must be provided by the state (police, judiciary). Others are better as public trusts, but I don't think nationalising the railways (again) will help.

[UndercoverElephant]

And I say again, you're in the wrong party. I cannot distinguish between your views on most subjects, and those I expect from a tory.

Perhaps that's why you lost your seat.