The Conservative Party

[BobKowalski]

The Labour party advocated free broadband. Imagine how far that would have gone to help poor kids with their school work.

Yet they were roundly laughed at for it.

If only the Labour Leader hadn't spoke with the IRA prisoners in the Maze to see if he could get them to support the Good Friday agreement our kids would be getting help with schooling.

Broadband should be a utility, like gas or electric, every home should have access, and high speed access, to the net.

It was a good policy. The sort of policy everyone sneers at, then is quietly adopted. I would subsidise it for lower income homes.

 

[joe123]

Broadband should be a utility, like gas or electric, every home should have access, and high speed access, to the net.

It was a good policy. The sort of policy everyone sneers at, then is quietly adopted. I would subsidise it for lower income homes.

I agree, but rather than nationalise it, it would've been a better sell to incentivise/subsidise private companies to make the investment in better infrastructure and cheaper rates

 

[Vic]

The nationalised broadband argument was dismissed by every one within the industry.

You mean the firms making profits from it? They would, wouldn't they?

 

[Rascal]

I agree, but rather than nationalise it, it would've been a better sell to incentivise/subsidise private companies to make the investment in better infrastructure and cheaper rates

Why?

 

[Ban-jani]

You mean the firms making profits from it? They would, wouldn't they?

Well the guy who had retired as BT’s Chairman years ago, ie no profit in the game anymore, said countless jobs would be lost and it would be a disaster, I can’t recall his name but he was on the radio being interviewed at the time.

Here’s an overview of others saying similar- https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp....nationalisation-plan-cost-100bn-business-live

From my perspective on nationalising industry, I am certainly not against it if it makes sense to do so, for example for railways are a disgrace and a fortune, TFL have shown how it can work and Manchester needs similar.

But this policy from Labour was the final nail in a very heavy coffin for me.

In fact Corbyn’s policies and he himself, were that poor, I nearly voted Tory... and was relieved when they won, despite voting LibDem.

 

[Ifwecouldjust.......]

The nationalised broadband argument was dismissed by every one within the industry.

I agree, but rather than nationalise it, it would've been a better sell to incentivise/subsidise private companies to make the investment in better infrastructure and cheaper rates

The Tories own report into the provision of broadband across the whole of the UK (including those hard to reach areas) advocated a single supplier (Open Reach) because they own the infrastructure. It also concluded that it would be £12 billion cheaper to go down this route rather than have multiple providers.

Why publicly owned broadband isn't as radical as it seems

The Labour Party’s plan to nationalise BT’s networks and roll out full-fibre broadband to households across the UK was treated by the media as a startlingly new initiative. The plan uses futurist technology to shape a 21st-century economy, and would substitute the slow, piecemeal progress of the...

www.newstatesman.com

I have in the past posted the link to the actual report.

But hey ..... ideology.

 

[Rascal]

The Tories own report into the provision of broadband across the whole of the UK (including those hard to reach areas) advocated a single supplier (Open Reach) because they own the infrastructure. It also concluded that it would be £12 billion cheaper to go down this route rather than have multiple providers.

Why publicly owned broadband isn't as radical as it seems

The Labour Party’s plan to nationalise BT’s networks and roll out full-fibre broadband to households across the UK was treated by the media as a startlingly new initiative. The plan uses futurist technology to shape a 21st-century economy, and would substitute the slow, piecemeal progress of the...

www.newstatesman.com

I have in the past posted the link to the actual report.

But hey ..... ideology.

It doesn't need a report, it just makes sense.

As a nation we have to get away from this mindset that everything must be open to competition

 

[Ban-jani]

The Tories own report into the provision of broadband across the whole of the UK (including those hard to reach areas) advocated a single supplier (Open Reach) because they own the infrastructure. It also concluded that it would be £12 billion cheaper to go down this route rather than have multiple providers.

Why publicly owned broadband isn't as radical as it seems

The Labour Party’s plan to nationalise BT’s networks and roll out full-fibre broadband to households across the UK was treated by the media as a startlingly new initiative. The plan uses futurist technology to shape a 21st-century economy, and would substitute the slow, piecemeal progress of the...

www.newstatesman.com

I have in the past posted the link to the actual report.

But hey ..... ideology.

But that’s different from Labour’s nationalism policy isn’t it?

Similar to the water board, it just seems to work even though they’re private but highly regulated.

When you have retired industry experts saying it will be a disaster, who have nothing to gain nor lose, it’s obvious it’s an ideological policy over anything else.

As I keep repeating, I’m not a private enterprise monkey, who constantly pushes capitalism as an ideology in every industry, I fully support Starmer’s promise of nationalising rail, mail and utilities... I just think on this occasion I agree with Johnson... it’s a “crackpot idea”.

 

[joe123]

Why?

The Aussies tried and failed with nationalising. It's not an easy job and you'd be putting off the companies who have already started investing in full fibre. Also, it would be incredibly expensive to buy parts of BT. Far cheaper, and easier, to just incentivise the existing market to first of all build it and then make it affordable for everyone. I'm entirely on board with nationalisation of certain services, but with the state of the broadband situation in the UK, it just wouldn't be the best idea at the moment.

 

[Ban-jani]

Broadband should be a utility, like gas or electric, every home should have access, and high speed access, to the net.

It was a good policy. The sort of policy everyone sneers at, then is quietly adopted. I would subsidise it for lower income homes.

It would be a great policy if it was logistically possible to be a success.

 

[BobKowalski]

I agree, but rather than nationalise it, it would've been a better sell to incentivise/subsidise private companies to make the investment in better infrastructure and cheaper rates

Yeah, I can see that.

 

[Bill]

love this thread . like rag cafe on crack.

 

[Ban-jani]

love this thread . like rag cafe on crack.

More like RAWK.

 

[Vic]

But that’s different from Labour’s nationalism policy isn’t it?

Similar to the water board, it just seems to work even though they’re private but highly regulated.

When you have retired industry experts saying it will be a disaster, who have nothing to gain nor lose, it’s obvious it’s an ideological policy over anything else.

As I keep repeating, I’m not a private enterprise monkey, who constantly pushes capitalism as an ideology in every industry, I fully support Starmer’s promise of nationalising rail, mail and utilities... I just think on this occasion I agree with Johnson... it’s a “crackpot idea”.

Scottish and Welsh Water are nationalised.

Are you sure the former chairman of BT has nothing to lose? No shares in his remuneration package? And if he said nationalised broadband would lead to job losses, doesn't that suggest that it might be more efficient?

 

[Ban-jani]

Scottish and Welsh Water are nationalised.

Are you sure the former chairman of BT has nothing to lose? No shares in his remuneration package? And if he said nationalised broadband would lead to job losses, doesn't that suggest that it might be more efficient?

Well now you say it, of course I am not sure but one would think the old fella is probably done with making his cash and maybe he’s focused on what’s important.

Well if job losses for efficiency were a good thing, why would Corbyn support that as a socialist? Surely that’s a very capitalist perspective?

 

[Vic]

Well now you say it, of course I am not sure but one would think the old fella is probably done with making his cash and maybe he’s focused on what’s important.

Well if job losses for efficiency were a good thing, why would Corbyn support that as a socialist? Surely that’s a very capitalist perspective?

I have no idea how socialism equates to inefficiency. Compared to the US health system, the NHS is brilliantly efficient.

 

[Ban-jani]

I have no idea how socialism equates to inefficiency. Compared to the US health system, the NHS is brilliantly efficient.

I didn’t realise I said it did?

I said that if the point of nationalising Openreach was to get rid of jobs to make it more efficient, that’s against what socialism is supposed to stand for.

Oh and on a separate point, private healthcare is more efficient when you use it, if you can afford it but it’s not more efficient at saving lives.

I also happen to think socialism in the railway industry would work.

 

[Ifwecouldjust.......]

But that’s different from Labour’s nationalism policy isn’t it?

Similar to the water board, it just seems to work even though they’re private but highly regulated.

When you have retired industry experts saying it will be a disaster, who have nothing to gain nor lose, it’s obvious it’s an ideological policy over anything else.

As I keep repeating, I’m not a private enterprise monkey, who constantly pushes capitalism as an ideology in every industry, I fully support Starmer’s promise of nationalising rail, mail and utilities... I just think on this occasion I agree with Johnson... it’s a “crackpot idea”.

Nope .... labours policy on nationalisation of OpenReach (as per the last manifesto) was based on the Conservative report.

 

[Ban-jani]

Nope .... labours policy on nationalisation of OpenReach (as per the last manifesto) was based on the Conservative report.

How ?

 

[BobKowalski]

This is just phoning it in. It’s virtue signalling during a pandemic with over a thousand a day dying and Brexit issues galore.

Mr Jenrick wants to stop leftwing councils from replacing street names which are linked to the Empire with more modern versions if there is not clear majority for it among people living there. The move is one of the first salvoes by the Tory government in the culture war. @telegraph