Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
Labour party renationalisation 11:21 - Oct 14 with 564 viewsGaryCooper

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/oct/14/labour-plans-for-utilities-woul

The policy is already costing jobs with the electricity DNO's budgets for maintenance being slashed to the bone, contractors are being laid off.

It is all such a waste as labour are as far removed from power as they ever have been.
0

Labour party renationalisation on 11:27 - Oct 14 with 552 viewsStokieBlue

It's a nonsense paper by the CBI though because of this sentence:

"It said the plans to take control of the rail network, water and energy companies and the Royal Mail would cost £196bn if investors were paid a premium to sell their assets to the state."

In any other takeover they would be paid a premium on the value of the asset but McDonnell has already said that the utilities will be bought at a price determined by the government (ie. significantly below market value) and using more illiquid government bonds rather than cash. I am not a fan of this purchasing method at all and believe it would have significant consequences for the longer term but have no issues with nationalisation as a concept or a policy.

Why would they be laying people off based on a possible policy from a party not in power? It's not like it's going to happen immediately.

SB

“You may not feel outstandingly robust, but if you are an average-sized adult you will contain within your modest frame no less than 7 X 10^18 joules of potential energy—enough to explode with the force of thirty very large hydrogen bombs, assuming you knew how to liberate it and really wished to make a point."

4
Labour party renationalisation on 11:50 - Oct 14 with 516 viewsGaryCooper

Labour party renationalisation on 11:27 - Oct 14 by StokieBlue

It's a nonsense paper by the CBI though because of this sentence:

"It said the plans to take control of the rail network, water and energy companies and the Royal Mail would cost £196bn if investors were paid a premium to sell their assets to the state."

In any other takeover they would be paid a premium on the value of the asset but McDonnell has already said that the utilities will be bought at a price determined by the government (ie. significantly below market value) and using more illiquid government bonds rather than cash. I am not a fan of this purchasing method at all and believe it would have significant consequences for the longer term but have no issues with nationalisation as a concept or a policy.

Why would they be laying people off based on a possible policy from a party not in power? It's not like it's going to happen immediately.

SB


I can assure you that the maintenance budgets from the DNO's have been slashed, the reason is fear of renationalisation, why spend money on maintenance if the long term benefits are not going to support your investment?

Are the CBI only to be believed when it suits?
0
Labour party renationalisation on 11:53 - Oct 14 with 505 viewsStokieBlue

Labour party renationalisation on 11:50 - Oct 14 by GaryCooper

I can assure you that the maintenance budgets from the DNO's have been slashed, the reason is fear of renationalisation, why spend money on maintenance if the long term benefits are not going to support your investment?

Are the CBI only to be believed when it suits?


Doesn't your first paragraph highlight exactly why they should probably be nationalised?

The CBI are to be believed when they accurately depict the situation. In this case they haven't and it's basically scaremongering or fake news. It's not a hard concept to understand - take each item on it's own merit and evidence.

SB
[Post edited 14 Oct 2019 11:53]

“You may not feel outstandingly robust, but if you are an average-sized adult you will contain within your modest frame no less than 7 X 10^18 joules of potential energy—enough to explode with the force of thirty very large hydrogen bombs, assuming you knew how to liberate it and really wished to make a point."

0
Labour party renationalisation on 12:00 - Oct 14 with 470 viewsGaryCooper

Labour party renationalisation on 11:53 - Oct 14 by StokieBlue

Doesn't your first paragraph highlight exactly why they should probably be nationalised?

The CBI are to be believed when they accurately depict the situation. In this case they haven't and it's basically scaremongering or fake news. It's not a hard concept to understand - take each item on it's own merit and evidence.

SB
[Post edited 14 Oct 2019 11:53]


Of course not, maintenance takes years to show a return if any, why invest in the infrastructure if it does not benefit the long term investment, the fear of renationalisation is the reason for the substantial cut in investment.
0
Labour party renationalisation on 12:04 - Oct 14 with 446 viewsStokieBlue

Labour party renationalisation on 12:00 - Oct 14 by GaryCooper

Of course not, maintenance takes years to show a return if any, why invest in the infrastructure if it does not benefit the long term investment, the fear of renationalisation is the reason for the substantial cut in investment.


If the CBI are correct and the assets will be purchased at a premium from the market rate then that maintenance and investment in infrastructure would be reflected in the market rate of the asset so why would they be worried?

Unless perhaps the article isn't accurate?

I can certainly see why the companies might reign back their investment but it seems premature.

SB

“You may not feel outstandingly robust, but if you are an average-sized adult you will contain within your modest frame no less than 7 X 10^18 joules of potential energy—enough to explode with the force of thirty very large hydrogen bombs, assuming you knew how to liberate it and really wished to make a point."

0
Labour party renationalisation on 13:20 - Oct 14 with 355 viewsNthQldITFC

Labour party renationalisation on 12:00 - Oct 14 by GaryCooper

Of course not, maintenance takes years to show a return if any, why invest in the infrastructure if it does not benefit the long term investment, the fear of renationalisation is the reason for the substantial cut in investment.


Because the prime purpose of infrastructure is not 'to show a return' and its maintenance is a necessity, not a vehicle for profit.

The only thing I know is that I might be wrong about everything else.
Poll: Are binary opinions good or bad?

2

Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© TWTD 1995-2020