Jeremy Corbyn Elected

ps do you think Michael Portillo and his Bradshaw have any views on the re-nationalisation of the railways?

I think it's too early to say about the next General Election. The Labour Party certainly seems to have been revitalised; whether it's the kind of revitalisation needed to win a GE only time will tell. We can speculate all we want but we won't know until the cows MPs come home (read 'get into parliament' for cows MPs come home).

Can threads not go over one thousand posts? Why not?

Have you only just realised that, jingl?

perhaps because they take ages to load (at least on my old machine which needs cranking up).

Interesting questions both.

Could go either way for numero uno.

Not sure about Portillo- but he is a huge admirer of nationalised Swiss railways that run like clockwork- and where all tickets are the same price, any day, any time- and where you can get an integrated timetable for your journey including buses and some cable-cars too. We live out in the sticks and buses start running at 6.30 and the last bus up from the valley is at 12.30 am- the bus waits for the train to arrive from the larger town below, which is linked to the whole network. Meaning that if ever we could no longer drive, we could still live here out int he sticks- with a great integrated nationalised network- that works- and tickets which are very reasonable in price- and montly, yearly tickets which are much much less than running a car.

Just finished a book written by a Brit called Diccon Bewes (! yes I know) - called 'Slow train to Switzerland' where he describes Thomas Cook's frist organised trip here in 1863. Fascinating.

Beeching and Mrs T have a lot to answer for? But so have overpowerful Unions which held public transport to ransom- and still do to some extent.

In Leicester, there were several bus companies, and if you bought a day ticket, you then found it was not accepted on half the buses. And even worse- there are 2 Bus stations serving different areas, not too far from each other- but not easy with luggage or if walking difficulties, handicap- and a train station at the other end of the town- wihtout a shuttle in between! Yiiiikes! And no buses to most of the surrounding villages either!

I think I was vaguely aware of it Ana. Never been on a thread before where it actually happened.

Seems a shame. Doesn't take long to load on my thingies.

the fact a new thread had to be started as the first got to 1000 in a couple of days, at least indicates it ha perked things up a bit ;)

On the plus side, and I am relieved, is that he backing down on some of his pet ideas that he has held for decades. Hurrah/.

The triumph of pragmatism over principle.

Trains and buses that run like clockwork sound ideal!

And it would take traffic off the roads - there are so many jams and gridlocks these days that something needs to be done.

Perhaps branch line closure was thought to be a very good idea at the time as more and more people bought cars and took to the roads. Driving was probably more of a pleasure as well in those days.
However, it can be a nightmare now - perhaps more branch lines need to be re-opened rather than spending a huge sum of money on HS2.

We've got buses! But they don't run in the morning at a time to suit people going to work because the roads are too busy and they couldn't stick to a timetable!
(or so I was told)

jingle I posted something a while ago which stated that the subsidy given to the railways is now, I think, four times what it was when the railways were nationalised. A spokesman for, I think it was called RailFuture - who seemed to be neither pro nor anti Corbyn's proposal - said that, given the very small subsidies that successive governments had previously given to the service before privatisation, the railways had done a pretty good job. It is a fact that when something is privatised, not only is it still necessary to pay for investment, staff, ongoing maintenance, etc., but it is also necessary to pay shareholders - so there is an extra expense. This can either come from cutting investment or cutting corners, increased fares - and we all know that our rail fares are the highest in Europe - or in cutting staff or freezing/cutting pay.

elegran durhamjen responded to Ana's question "why didn't it [the railways] stay under public ownership then" - so Ana initiated the questioning - and received an answer - but then got all snippy when she was similarly challenged.

The argument that has been used about subsidies to the railways is that most people don't travel regularly by rail so why should they subsidise those that do? This is, of course, the usual divide and rule tactic that, if taken to its logical conclusion, implies that it is a reasonable premise that people should only contribute to those services which they use.

I heard a news item today which reported Farage as saying neither the railway companies nor any other companies can be re-nationalised because of EU rules. If that's true - and I don't know if it is - that seems really worrying to me.

I agree with whitewave's point about water companies. At one time people had to agree to have a water meter but it seems that several water companies now force people into having them. We do not and will not voluntarily have one installed, not because we're bothered about our own water bill but because we don't agree with the principle of water metering. It places even more pressure on families with young children and on individuals or carers dealing with continence issues - there is a public health dimension. My mum was encouraged to have a meter on the basis that she got a "special rate". Recently that "special rate" was abolished so having induced people to install a meter the terms upon which it was agreed are then changed. I also agree with her point about South coast trains. My son and his partner and children moved to West Sussex but moved back to Chingford again because of the very unreliable and crowded rail service.

soontobe You keep saying the same thing about quantitative easing but, as several commentators have said, in effect quantitative easing is ongoing because financial institutions are loaning money to more and more people and businesses who are hardly keeping their heads above water and who may well at some stage be unable to service their debt. The EU itself is also using quantitative easing, as the Guardian reported in January this year:

"European government borrowing rates also plummeted to record lows after Draghi said a programme of quantitative easing (QE) worth ??60bn a month would start in March and last until at least next September or when inflation returned to near its 2% target."

My feeling - and that of many other people - is that we have a financial system that is out of control, with banks so sure that whatever mess they make governments will have to clear it up. One scandal follows another - manipulation of interest rates and currencies and no doubt they are even now finding new ways of using the system to their own ends. One man is imprisoned for a long time for engaging in these sorts of practices. I find it difficult to believe that none of his colleagues or bosses were aware of what was happening. Banks were fined for mis-selling products but who will ultimately pay those fines - their customers I suspect.

My mother used to not like banks in the 70s. She realised what they were like back then.
I have grown up hearing about banks. Dont worry, I very much agree with you Eloethan.

The general population tends to think that governments are in charge. They are to a degree.
But sometimes I think that lawyers and banks ultimately have more power than they do.

The triumph of pragmatism over principle

Halleluya!

It is a shame a lot more people dont go through that experience.

If he didnt do that, I doubt he would have lasted 1 month in power.

His head must be all over the place, having to ditch stuff he has held dear most of his life.
It only took 9 days, for him to sober up as it were.

Oh for a decent integrated transport system, granjura! We don't live in the sticks, but have one bus per hour to our nearest large town - 3 miles away - and the last one goes in at 1900h and back at 1920h. To add insult to injury, the route is the only one in the area served by this particular company, so fare deals are impossible. When we moved here we had 3 buses per hour till 2300h. We have the busiest crossroads for miles around, which has got worse as the bus service did. No train service - we've a station ripe for reopening, but it probably never will. At the moment we have a car and can still trek the mile uphill to the nearest decent bus link, but this doesn't apply to all.

JC is, and has always been a pluralist. What you are experiencing is nothing more than what we can expect. Democracy in action. The Labour Party is now in a period of debate and formulation of its policies that will gradually emerge after undoubtedly much heated argument. Democracy in action.
As Leader JCs job is to steer these debates towards a consensus, and then take them and present them to the voter.

Well said whitewave

I have already had to look up the definitions of pragmatism and pluralist this morning.

If I am understanding correctly, definition of pluralist is
dictionary.reference.com/browse/pluralistic

He is that?
I got the impression that he has not changed his views on anything since the 70s or 80s.

Now you are saying that he is loose on his views?

Oh dear no soon but he is democratic and inclusive enough to want to form policies that are just that - democratic and inclusive. Democracy in action.

So far as JC is concerned, 'pluralist' seems to mean different things to different people. To some it means he listens to the other more with it people around him, to others it simply means that he keeps changing his mind when they tell him not to be a silly billy.

I am confused.

If someone is a pluralist, where are principles?
I thought he was supposed to be very principled?

What is the point in having principles, to ditch them when reality strikes?

Does this mean that everyone knows that although you may be rebelling, when reality strikes, they re going to be ditched?

Interesting.

Not really fair in that case, against those who you are rebelling against.