By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Not a single river healthy on 13:13 - Mar 27 by NthQldITFC
But isn't that a separate issue and a legacy of 'how things are/were done'?
What would you do if you were building a life-critical, basic infrastructure system like 'water, clean and dirty' from scratch? For me, unequivocally, you'd say:
1. no element of this can in any way be for profit. 2. absolute transparency is obligatory at all levels. 3. no internal, departmental competition will be fostered or tolerated. 4. all management and staff have clear, measurable and measured responsibilities. 5. no element of this can in any way be for profit.
Therefore it must be under public ownership and funded from taxation (of one form or another) and staff representation must be reasonable and free of obstructive practices. Slackers can and will be sacked if demonstrably slacking. Openness.
We need new ways of doing things from the ground up, without being limited by perceptions of what can and can't be done because of similar entities in a different technological era, or we're going down the sh!tty river as a society.
[Post edited 27 Mar 13:20]
We risk going full circle. British Rail was disastrous. No incentive to improve or compete tends to lead to stagnation. Of course, it is in part about the outlook of the administration, but our public sector values are a massive oil tanker which would take decades of investment and strong will to turn around.
-1
Not a single river healthy on 13:36 - Mar 27 with 908 views
Like many others on the board, I occasionally go fishing.Not often, as I don't have as much time as I did when I was a kid, but I still love having a summer day by The Avon or The Severn, over the last two years, perhaps three, the smell has been noticeable on the fish as they come out of the water.
There is a definite smell of sewage with them, now, not something that I have noticed since the mid 80's
Not a single river healthy on 13:27 - Mar 27 by redrickstuhaart
We risk going full circle. British Rail was disastrous. No incentive to improve or compete tends to lead to stagnation. Of course, it is in part about the outlook of the administration, but our public sector values are a massive oil tanker which would take decades of investment and strong will to turn around.
I'm not sure about your age but I don't think British Rail was a disaster, and as it is, its replacement doesn't really have competition, with perhaps some exceptions such as getting to Gatwick.
And look where competition in the energy market has got us, with energy bills increased to pay for the bailout of failed energy companies. And just take smart meters, 4 million of which don't work, as I know to my cost with a meter in my house which has never shown the gas reading, and one in my mother's house which has been doing the same for a year. Indeed, getting the meter replaced at my mother's didn't even do the trick.
The nationalised electricity company my father worked for had a public ethos, effectiveness and efficiency that, sadly, I don't think we'll ever get back. And no one ever complained about energy bills or rail fares in those days.
[Post edited 27 Mar 18:31]
1
Not a single river healthy on 14:00 - Mar 27 with 869 views
Not a single river healthy on 13:27 - Mar 27 by redrickstuhaart
We risk going full circle. British Rail was disastrous. No incentive to improve or compete tends to lead to stagnation. Of course, it is in part about the outlook of the administration, but our public sector values are a massive oil tanker which would take decades of investment and strong will to turn around.
British Rail wasn’t disastrous. Before you query this statement, I travelled on it and know in the late 70s/80s it was dirty, unreliable and shabby.
However it was changing. The railways were destroyed in WW2 through over use, staff shortages and lack of money - wartime economy. Dr Beeching then rocked up in the 60s. He represented motor transport industry and had no interest in railways whatsoever and tried to axe the lot.
Despite this, by the time the tories flogged it off, new badly needed rolling stock was coming in (e.g. InterCity 125s in the late 70s) across the network and the railways were become more efficient and demand was rising. Was it losing money? Yes. Do all railways lose money? Yes on headline figures, but the Europeans understand there is far more to it than that.
In flogging rail off, the govt starved it of money in the run up, then broke it up about as badly as it was possible to do. British Rail was not disastrous. Thatcher’s break up of it was.
There is nothing wrong with public sector values or the people who work in the public sector. I’ve seen first hand what people in the NHS for example do in recent months. I’ve also seen how badly managed people can be in the public sector in my own work experience. But I’ve also seen it in the private sector. Ever seen somebody on a Friday told to p£ss off and don’t come back? Told try sueing us for your statutory rights and you’ll face the best lawyers money can buy? I have.
People are people. There are good and bad, but most are fine. They just need managing properly and investing in, public or private sector.
2
Not a single river healthy on 14:00 - Mar 27 with 865 views
Not a single river healthy on 13:27 - Mar 27 by redrickstuhaart
We risk going full circle. British Rail was disastrous. No incentive to improve or compete tends to lead to stagnation. Of course, it is in part about the outlook of the administration, but our public sector values are a massive oil tanker which would take decades of investment and strong will to turn around.
But you can have internal incentive to improve through performance reviews. There would need to be a functional transition from these failed commercial enterprises / spent de-investment vehicles which bypassed the old model of union-crippled and internally corrupt public services, but why can't that be done?
Investment, yes - a necessary investment for the taxpayer, both the public and corporate taxpayer.. Strong will, yes - but enabling and underpinning that openness and true accountability. Not the old public sector model at all.
# WE ARE STEALING THE FUTURE FROM OUR CHILDREN --- WE MUST CHANGE COURSE #
Not a single river healthy on 13:45 - Mar 27 by DJR
I'm not sure about your age but I don't think British Rail was a disaster, and as it is, its replacement doesn't really have competition, with perhaps some exceptions such as getting to Gatwick.
And look where competition in the energy market has got us, with energy bills increased to pay for the bailout of failed energy companies. And just take smart meters, 4 million of which don't work, as I know to my cost with a meter in my house which has never shown the gas reading, and one in my mother's house which has been doing the same for a year. Indeed, getting the meter replaced at my mother's didn't even do the trick.
The nationalised electricity company my father worked for had a public ethos, effectiveness and efficiency that, sadly, I don't think we'll ever get back. And no one ever complained about energy bills or rail fares in those days.
[Post edited 27 Mar 18:31]
British rail was a laughing stock.
Public ownership with the right ethos, can be good. That ethos is not within our institutions or civil service.
Not a single river healthy on 14:00 - Mar 27 by redrickstuhaart
British rail was a laughing stock.
Public ownership with the right ethos, can be good. That ethos is not within our institutions or civil service.
So was British Leyland. Remember Red Robbo? But the real reason was no investment. You try designing a rubbish car like the Allegro, build it over five decrepit sites using out of date methods and kit and watch the company go to the wall. What’s the difference between BL and the Nissan factory at Sunderland? Investment in product, plant and people.
Yes, BR was a byword for awful. But it was changing and just at the point when the differences began to show (including refurbed stations like Bromley), Thatcher smashed it. Because of who owns the railways, we now subsidise Europeans’ travel. You might think that’s the height of efficiency. I do not.
[Post edited 28 Mar 7:47]
2
Not a single river healthy on 14:08 - Mar 27 with 851 views
Not a single river healthy on 14:07 - Mar 27 by Churchman
So was British Leyland. Remember Red Robbo? But the real reason was no investment. You try designing a rubbish car like the Allegro, build it over five decrepit sites using out of date methods and kit and watch the company go to the wall. What’s the difference between BL and the Nissan factory at Sunderland? Investment in product, plant and people.
Yes, BR was a byword for awful. But it was changing and just at the point when the differences began to show (including refurbed stations like Bromley), Thatcher smashed it. Because of who owns the railways, we now subsidise Europeans’ travel. You might think that’s the height of efficiency. I do not.
Not a single river healthy on 14:00 - Mar 27 by redrickstuhaart
British rail was a laughing stock.
Public ownership with the right ethos, can be good. That ethos is not within our institutions or civil service.
Do you work for the Civil Service? Do you know what it is or what the people actually do? Just curious. Especially when I hear general statements about ethos, institutions and the Civil Service.
0
Not a single river healthy on 14:12 - Mar 27 with 838 views
Not a single river healthy on 14:08 - Mar 27 by Keno
I had a big end go in a Princess once
Lucky her!
You were luckier than my mum’s friends husband when the engine fell out of his Wolseley 16/60 (1800 variant) when he braked. The lads on the Friday had forgotten to put the bolts in the engine mounts. Leyland fought hard not to pay out blaming him for braking too hard while the car was new.
0
Not a single river healthy on 14:13 - Mar 27 with 836 views
Not a single river healthy on 14:09 - Mar 27 by Churchman
Do you work for the Civil Service? Do you know what it is or what the people actually do? Just curious. Especially when I hear general statements about ethos, institutions and the Civil Service.
I work in the public sector. It is painful and embarrassing.
-1
Not a single river healthy on 14:17 - Mar 27 with 822 views
Not a single river healthy on 14:12 - Mar 27 by Churchman
Lucky her!
You were luckier than my mum’s friends husband when the engine fell out of his Wolseley 16/60 (1800 variant) when he braked. The lads on the Friday had forgotten to put the bolts in the engine mounts. Leyland fought hard not to pay out blaming him for braking too hard while the car was new.
I had a new tyre done on a Toledo once and half way down the A12 started to hear a knocking noise.
Stopped at a garage to find the tyre had left the wheel nuts loose
Not a single river healthy on 14:00 - Mar 27 by redrickstuhaart
British rail was a laughing stock.
Public ownership with the right ethos, can be good. That ethos is not within our institutions or civil service.
It was part of Thatcher's modus operandi to denigrate the nationalised industries, and a lot of the mud (such as British Rail was a laughing stock) stuck.
You second paragraph is a sweeping generalisation. Have you worked in every institution and every department in the Civil Service to make that judgment?
[Post edited 27 Mar 15:42]
2
Not a single river healthy on 18:08 - Mar 27 with 699 views
Not a single river healthy on 10:22 - Mar 27 by redrickstuhaart
It is absolutely disgusting. These companies should not be making profits or giving dividends until it is sorted. Their position appears to be that the public should pay for it whilst they continue being profitable.
Water is another example of an industry which should not have been privatised. It's a natural monopoly & privatising water created a huge conflict between making as much profit as possible & protecting the environment.
Not a single river healthy on 14:33 - Mar 27 by DJR
It was part of Thatcher's modus operandi to denigrate the nationalised industries, and a lot of the mud (such as British Rail was a laughing stock) stuck.
You second paragraph is a sweeping generalisation. Have you worked in every institution and every department in the Civil Service to make that judgment?
[Post edited 27 Mar 15:42]
I have worked for some time in the public sector. And not one of the parts everyone already knows is a mess, like the NHS, Local Authorities, etc.
The ethos is staggering at times. Getting an answer about simple things like "who decided this please?" is near impossible. Any issue, no matter how urgent, requires business cases, reviews, and six months of inaction. Management are ticking boxes for their superiors and running the party line no matter how obviously absurd. Speaking to people on the ground who know how things work and what problems exist, only happens AFTER plans have been set in motion. Everything costs far more than it should. Stationary has to be ordered from a particular supplier who over price everything. If they dont have it, we have to source it, tell them what it is, allow them to buy it for us and then apply a markup!
Its a mess, and that sbefore the constant cutting of staff, resources, funding, morale etc etc
0
Not a single river healthy on 18:15 - Mar 27 with 692 views
It was one of the "benefits" of leaving the EU - the freedom from red tape (or environmental legislation in this case). It was what the electorate voted for.
Not a single river healthy on 12:55 - Mar 27 by redrickstuhaart
I dont get the public ownership argument. Has anyone noticed the state of public services?
The public services that have been systematically underfunded, undermined and devalued over the past 15 years because they don't make a profit for people in government's mates?
[Post edited 28 Mar 15:59]
I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
Not a single river healthy on 18:39 - Mar 27 by BlueBadger
The public services that have been systematically underfunded, undermined and devalued over the past 15 years because they don't make a profit for people in government's mates?
[Post edited 28 Mar 15:59]
Exactly.
0
Not a single river healthy on 19:29 - Mar 27 with 604 views
Not a single river healthy on 14:07 - Mar 27 by Churchman
So was British Leyland. Remember Red Robbo? But the real reason was no investment. You try designing a rubbish car like the Allegro, build it over five decrepit sites using out of date methods and kit and watch the company go to the wall. What’s the difference between BL and the Nissan factory at Sunderland? Investment in product, plant and people.
Yes, BR was a byword for awful. But it was changing and just at the point when the differences began to show (including refurbed stations like Bromley), Thatcher smashed it. Because of who owns the railways, we now subsidise Europeans’ travel. You might think that’s the height of efficiency. I do not.
[Post edited 28 Mar 7:47]
What people forget about British Leyland was that it was failing private firm long before it was a failing nationalised industry.
When it was nationalised in 1975, it was because private sector managers had already made a pig's ear of it. It was also the most under-capitalised mass production car firm in the world (the likes of Ford, VW, Fiat, Renault were investing 5/10 times as much per worker). They gave it a whole 2 years of modest investment under the Ryder Plan, then abandoned that for hiring a hatchet man as chairman in 1977, so he could rationalise the workforce, close plants and generally fatten the company up for privatisation. Chuck in the Thatcher recession and it never stood a chance.
Yet it goes down in national mythology as having failed because Tony Benn personally designed the cars and Red Robbo lead a million strikes or other such fantasies.
Not a single river healthy on 18:13 - Mar 27 by redrickstuhaart
I have worked for some time in the public sector. And not one of the parts everyone already knows is a mess, like the NHS, Local Authorities, etc.
The ethos is staggering at times. Getting an answer about simple things like "who decided this please?" is near impossible. Any issue, no matter how urgent, requires business cases, reviews, and six months of inaction. Management are ticking boxes for their superiors and running the party line no matter how obviously absurd. Speaking to people on the ground who know how things work and what problems exist, only happens AFTER plans have been set in motion. Everything costs far more than it should. Stationary has to be ordered from a particular supplier who over price everything. If they dont have it, we have to source it, tell them what it is, allow them to buy it for us and then apply a markup!
Its a mess, and that sbefore the constant cutting of staff, resources, funding, morale etc etc
It would be interesting to know where you work because what you say sounds apocryphal by including just about every cliche that those who denigrate the public sector could think of.
Anyway, it bears no relationship to my experience of working in the public sector.
[Post edited 27 Mar 21:08]
1
Not a single river healthy on 21:15 - Mar 27 with 548 views
Not a single river healthy on 20:55 - Mar 27 by DJR
It would be interesting to know where you work because what you say sounds apocryphal by including just about every cliche that those who denigrate the public sector could think of.
Anyway, it bears no relationship to my experience of working in the public sector.
[Post edited 27 Mar 21:08]
I find that quite offensive.
You are effectively claiming I am lying.
I can assure you I am not.
There is an obsession with statistics and massaging them to satisfy the folks higher up, who have no clue and/or dont care what the end product is like so long as they can show 'improving' figures.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
