D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Yeah, I do find it baffling. You can even caveat it by saying you'll do it when economic conditions allow, if you want to look responsible - not like you have to say you'll do it on day one of government!
Do you want to discuss boring politics? (27 Viewers)
- Thread starter mrtrench
- Start date
Yeah, I do find it baffling. You can even caveat it by saying you'll do it when economic conditions allow, if you want to look responsible - not like you have to say you'll do it on day one of government!
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
how do we nationalise edf then?
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
nationalising the railways is far easier
also we aren't going to able to nationalise anything quickly so it will not help people this winter
also we aren't going to able to nationalise anything quickly so it will not help people this winter
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
So their announced plans to cover this winter - with a comprehensive nationalisation programme to follow the year after. Everyone’s a winner that way.
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
how do we nationalise companies owned by other governments?
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
Didn’t we take back control to stop this kind of thing?
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
It'd be a Brexit bonus I could get behind.
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
no, how do we nationalise a company owned by a foreign government who are one of our closest trading partners without basically fucked by them?
how do we nationalise a german without them giving us a kicking that fucks our economy?
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Don’t need to nationalise energy. Even Corbyns plans were to promote community owned competition IIRC.
You need to shift the up front cost of solar and wind from homeowners to developers really. People will pay another £5k on their house and pay it off over 30 years (along with lower bills) way easier than they’ll shell out for panels that take 15 years to pay back.
Make some level of generation mandatory on all new builds/major renovation, make community owned energy generation and storage a requirement of all developments over say ten houses (or whatever number makes sense). Put finance in place for existing communities to do the same. Then build nationally owned off shore wind, storage and large scale renewables. Let the existing companies wither on the vine.
Along with a proper push on insulation and other sensible retrofitting, you could decimate the residential energy market.
Its so frustrating that we have basically stalled on this stuff for the last decade.
You need to shift the up front cost of solar and wind from homeowners to developers really. People will pay another £5k on their house and pay it off over 30 years (along with lower bills) way easier than they’ll shell out for panels that take 15 years to pay back.
Make some level of generation mandatory on all new builds/major renovation, make community owned energy generation and storage a requirement of all developments over say ten houses (or whatever number makes sense). Put finance in place for existing communities to do the same. Then build nationally owned off shore wind, storage and large scale renewables. Let the existing companies wither on the vine.
Along with a proper push on insulation and other sensible retrofitting, you could decimate the residential energy market.
Its so frustrating that we have basically stalled on this stuff for the last decade.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Rail and buses are a no brainier, water too. Really don’t understand the support for mail being so high though. We have a decent market in package delivery and other usage has dropped off a cliff post internet age. Is the private market a lot worse when you don’t live in a city or something?
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
The french government has a bigger stakes in British rail and energy than the British government. I don’t think they’re the only EU government with a stake in British railways.
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
We’re being fucked by shareholders now anyway - once we’ve suffered the initial hit then it doesn’t happen anymore. Starmer is proposing to give £29 billion to companies anyway in his proposal.
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
this is the issue, we can pass laws and take control but the economic fallout will be massive
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
I agree with this totally - however this is the kind of forward planning and insight that is absent in politics completely.
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
Worse than the economic fallout of what’s coming anyway?
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
the economic reality is taking what belongs to france, germany and china will fuck our economy far more
we need to be realistic
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
pretty much this
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
If they banned Hermes Amazon and Yodel, it wouldn't be so bad...
tbf where my parents live, if the post office went there'd be a glut of pensioners totally unable to access their cash or get any contact - the postman's still old-skool too, and knows who he delivers to, enough that he can tell somebody if there's anything unusual that somebody needs to look out for their neighbour. It's a bit different to around here, where I'm lucky if they hang around long enough to put it through the letterbox properly!
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
yes, our biggest trading partners going into a trade war with us is the stuff of economic ruin on a macro level
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Well if you pay the market rate, it's down to the politicians to do some competent diplomacy. Our utilities were used as examples by some of their very owners to lobby the EU to restrict competition in other markets, it's all so ridiculous!
Exactly. Id have thought you can only really renationalise if you own or are buying up enough of the infrastructure. I guess rail would be relatively easy as Network Rail own and oversee the network. Other industries are trickier
People talk about EDF and France but EDF generate most/all the nuclear power in France, the French needed to replace a load of nuclear plants (which will cost 100bn) and EDF couldn’t afford it. The government already owned something like 85% of the company, so they’re just buying the remaining 15%. By all accounts EDF has been poorly managed, half of the plants are currently out of use/not in full working order, it’s dropped in value from 150bn to 40bn in the last 15 years and is 40bn in debt. Also because they’ve been generating cheap nuclear they’ve neglected renewables compared to others countries
Renationalisation would provide energy security which is why I think it’s worth a debate but more focussed around nationalising/keeping future energy infrastructure under public ownership. I could be wrong however I can’t see how we can renationalise the industry at the moment,
Edit - sorry, started this earlier and just seen shmmee and DOD had already mentioned similar types of points
Last edited:
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
So compensating shareholders once is worse than repeatedly paying them dividends for years to come?
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
it's not just compensating shareholders is it though, it's the reactions of france, china, and germany will be far worse for us in the long run
it's the lesser of 2 evils right now
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Well, Starmers policy is popular amongst voters across the board
Shame we’re being “led” by a zombie government led by a “man” who’s put himself on gardening leave until enough time has passed so he can say he was in the job longer than May. Another Tory balls up, the opportunity was there to boot him out and put a caretaker PM in charge but they chose not to.
Shame we’re being “led” by a zombie government led by a “man” who’s put himself on gardening leave until enough time has passed so he can say he was in the job longer than May. Another Tory balls up, the opportunity was there to boot him out and put a caretaker PM in charge but they chose not to.
Id be surprised if it wasn’t. It’s basically asking everyone if they want a free £1k+. I bet if the poll was ‘do you think millionaires should get 40-50% off their energy bills’ the percentages would be different, especially if it was also explaining that the money will have to come from somewhere
As the IMF has said, there’s no encouragement to use less energy by artificially suppressing costs across the board. Any measures should be targeted for those that are worse off inc smaller energy intensive businesses, encourage reduced consumption and will need to be longer term solutions than six months,
Having said that, it’s at least a possible solution which is better than what we’ve heard so far from the government
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Yep. Surely the price they can charge should be linked to the wholesale price they pay. Basically put a maximum mark-up.
And no-one is yet to tell why the standing charge went up by over 50%. That's got nothing to do with the price of the fuel.
They're profiteering - plain and simple.
Rather than let them make ridiculous profits and then make some half-arsed gesture about taxing the profits to give back to the consumers, how about cutting out the middleman and stop the extortionate amounts of money going to them in the first place?
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
They really don't give a fuck. I'm sure most of them would think "if they can't afford to heat their homes they should work harder and stop buying luxuries like chocolate and Netflix."
The PM is currently acting like a spoilt brat refusing to do any work because he's had his toys taken away.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Invade France?
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Ed Miliband coming across pretty well
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Always did. Country didn’t want him because he had a blocked nose
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Hell yeah
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
So does Starmer! Why can’t Labour leaders sound normal?