Posts Tagged ‘privatisation’

@jeremycorbyn I would like to see Tuition fee’s scrapped, certainly not allowed to rise freely.

May 27, 2016
Letter to Daily Mirror 17/5/16
If you agree that College Students should be charged for tuition fee’s, then allowing annual rises seems logical.
I question the need for tuition fee’s at all.
As a Baby Boomer, I was fortunate enough to be born at a time, when the common people were considered worthy of equality of opportunity; hence, the Welfare State.
I, like many of the politicians, who brought in tuition fees, was able to, not only, have those costs paid by the State but also given a grant to pay for my living expenses, away from home.
The case given, at the time, was that the Nation relied on an educated workforce to provide its wealth.
The more Engineer’s, Scientists, Innovator’s etc, that we produced, the greater our ability to pay our way in The World.
That argument doesn’t fail just because Thatcher decided that we should rely on The City and its modern day “adventurer’s”.
It doesn’t fail because Tony Blair’s “education x 3” meant that you, now, needed qualifications just to drive a fork lift truck.
The Nation still needs skilled people in certain area’s and it should be investing in them.
This sort of investment fits in with both Socialism and Capitalism and is one of those area’s that points up the whole idiocy of the ideology of the State shedding its responsibilities onto the Private sector.
Let the Private Sector run its own private education system, where it’s prepared to invest its own money.
If a company wants to run a Clown College (Homer Simpson), that’s not a problem, although company turning out fake architects would be.
Why have another company trying to keep track of whether graduates have reached a salary level, whereby they can begin repaying these fee’s?
We already have a mechanism to recoup the costs of the fee’s: It’s called Income Tax.
If your degree or diploma has any value, then you will be remunerated at a level, whereby you will be paying more tax, anyway.
If Labour were to get in power and remove this burden, they’d earn the gratitude of a generation facing huge debts, on all sides.
They’d also earn the gratitude of their parents.
They might even earn the gratitude of businessmen, who’d appreciate interviewing graduates whose qualifications were reliable.

@no2id FOI to cost more but spooks want greater access to our privacy. Brits for sale

September 19, 2015

In a perfect world, there’d be no terrorists.
In a perfect world, there’d be no need for MI5 snooping on everyone.
In a perfect world, there’d be no need to worry about intelligence services ( spooks for short ) opening your mail, listening in on your phone conversations, recording your computer browsing, including any adult viewing, or marital infidelities etc.
It’d be nice to believe that the spooks could be trusted with your intimicies, as if they were medical professionals.
But there’s the rub:
Since the onset of privatisation of the NHS, the disclosure of personal details has become a source of concern.
Government in recent years have seen voters and their details as saleable commodities.
They have privatised the Office of National Statistics, who sell their anonymised data to Marketeers etc.
They have privatised the Swansea DVLA, who now offer car registration details for sale. This has led formerly free car parks, to become money makers, with firms able to send invoices for parking on what is private land belonging to supermarkets etc.
To an extent these invasions of privacy can be loftily dismissed, by a certain type of person, as trivial and legitimate business practices.
The real problem is deeper in that it gives greater power to politicians; whom we all trust implicitly?
Already in the USA, where their FOI laws have more teeth, it has been found that politicians have used (illicit) access to personal communications to besmirch political opponents.
Considering the nature of our own politicians, I, personally, do not trust them to show any integrity.
Consider Andrew Mitchell and Plebgate, Tony Blair and Iraq, Mandelson and anything  that irked him. Consider the latest Tory campaign to get Corbyn.
OK! You’re just an ordinary member of the Public. Suppose you expressed concern, on Facebook, over an issue, you had uncovered, would you feel safe, if some private indiscretion suddenly became public?
Getting paranoid?

I am.

there was no problem with missed appointments until Gov’t introduced them pre-privatisation.

July 8, 2015
Sent to Daily Express but not published.
I would like to echo the call made by your reader, Valerie Price.
End the G.P. appointments system.
Does every patient need a 10 minute slot?
I frequently read of working people having to make appointments two weeks in advance. This is a ridiculous state of affairs, forcing people to hold off making an appointment, until it becomes life threatening and they need emergency treatment.
This is bad enough for those needing dental appointments but with so many serious and contagious disease starting off with flu-like systems, the situation threatens lives, with the possibility of epidemics being incubated.
Before Politician’s decided to bureaucratise the NHS, we had GP surgery waiting rooms packed out at those times, which fitted in with the working day.
The receptionist performed a sort of triage function, pushing anyone, with obviously serious issues to the head of the list and those, with a boil to lance, to the end of the list. She would also gauge when to close the surgery to further patients.
Those, who didn’t wish to wait in such conditions, could always pay to go private.
In those days, you made sure that you got to Surgery early. If you turned up with something trivial, you were made to know it and the doctor despatched you in a lot less than ten minutes. If it was serious, then an ambulance was ordered, taking you to the head of the A&E queue, possibly straight to a ward, where a bed would have been prepared.

Before anyone claims that the NHS is not fit for purpose, Government needs to decide that purpose. Should it be to make its services chargeable, or should it be to make the sick whole?

#occupy #noneoftheabove #NHS #Education Academies mark penultimate stage in privatisation of Education

February 2, 2015

Academies don’t come under Ofsted, they come under the Independent Schools Inspectorate ( I.e. they are judged by different standards, although no doubt that statement will be contradicted by politicians, despite being unable to offer a reasonable justification  for this differentiation.
The next round of Ofsted is set on examining the management of LEA run schools, with a view to justifying their being turned into academies. — Hard Luck if you’re a Senior/Head teacher of a school in a wealthy catchment area, which hasn’t already applied to become an Academy.
David Cameron has announced, 3 months before a General Election, that he intends to turn more State Schools over to the ISC ( a private organisation managing independent schools) control, whether failing, or not.
This means that the DFE is setting up to manage this, despite the possibility of Labour achieving control of Government.
I have no doubt that Labour (Ed Miliband) will make no attempt to block this, especially as it was Labour, which initiated the setting up of the Academy structure.
Privatisation of the NHS has been successfully accomplished, through splitting hospitals into Trusts. Education will be privatised through the Academies being sold off, with the unprofitable ones being handed back to LEA control.
This process has been continuous under both Labour and Tory and is being accelerated to comply with TTIP and the eventual control of all State functions by Corporate bodies.

Privatisation = blackouts in Winter and hosepipe bans in Summer; welcome to Britain.

November 25, 2014

I read this on Facebook and added my own comment below:

”Belgium is already set to selectively switch off electricity in parts of the country this winter with its energy capacity at a low of 2 percent. The UK, at a seven-year low of just 4 percent capacity, is also cutting it fine… According to the global insurance company Allianz in an extensive report on blackout risks in the US and Europe, “privatization and liberalization” have contributed to “missing incentives to invest in reliable, and therefore well maintained, infrastructures.”…/…/the-coming-blackout-epidemic

The lights may go out sooner than you think.
my addition:
This a consequence of privatisation. When Fiddler’s Ferry was bought by an American company, California had a blackout because the same company had no spare capacity to cope with a sudden hot spell (air conditioners). The first thing privateers do is sell off spare capacity. It also happened when water was privatisef with reservoirs sold of as landfill and then building sites. That’s why we have hosepipe bans, which will get worse with a rapidly increasing population and nowhere to build new reservoirs.

@38Degrees_vol @UkLabour. How will a tax rise help protect the #NHS, once it’s gone?

September 17, 2014

I’ve had an e-mail from asking me to sign a petition to tell Ed Balls to put a 1p on tax.
It’s almost as if they were acting on behalf of Labour to raise support for raising taxes.

It would be a good propaganda move to set up a puppet protest group to mould popular opinion.

Much better than perverting an effective protest campaign into one chasing less worrying campaigns (Occupy seems to have dropped privatisation issues for anti-fracking and climate change).

Certainly better than besmirching them.

E.g. CND were all alleged to be KGB stooges and Greenham Common was alleged to be full of stinky, bull dykes.

This was my e-mail back to them:

what does a 1p tax rise mean?
Will it just go straight into share dividends?
This is too simplistic and doesn’t address the real problem— privatisation

@bringbackBR (#NHS). My MP is a Labour Whip (Shadow Cabinet member) and her comment may interest you.

August 29, 2014

This is my MP’s response to my signature on a petition email ref. future fare rises. I’ve isolated one sentence put it in Bold Face for emphasis.

As she is a member of the Shadow Cabinet, I would say that they still don’t favour this, or any other re-nationalisation.

Rather, their intent is to make privatisation “work”.

Yvonne Fovargue MP House of Commons
22 August 2014

Dear Mr Shale
Thank you for contacting me regarding rail fare increases and the ownership of the rail network.
I appreciate and share the concerns of passengers who are faced with steep rail fare increases and I know this is having a serious impact on household incomes. Rising rail fares and season ticket prices, which have gone up by 20% on average since 2010, are also contributing to the cost of living crisis that is affecting people across the country.
I believe there needs to be real reform of our railways in order to reduce costs and improve services for passengers. The Government should, for example, impose a strict cap on rail fares, reform ticketing and remove the power for train companies to `flex’ fares.
The Government have also made a real mess of their rail franchising programme. Their disastrous handling of the West Coast Main Line franchise has cost the taxpayer at least £55 million and they have taken the unnecessary and dogmatic decision to privatise Intercity services on the East Coast Main Line even though East Coast is working well and will have returned around £1 billion to the taxpayer by the end of this financial year.

There should, of course, be no return to old style British Rail and there can be no blank cheque.

However, it is clear that the current system is flawed and that we need to find a better way forward so that franchising arrangements reflect value for taxpayers’ money and create a more coherent system.
I know that the Shadow Transport Team are looking at pragmatic and affordable solutions to this as part of their policy review process and I can assure you that will continue to follow this closely.
I will continue to bear in mind the points you raise and I thank you once again for writing to me and for sharing your views.
Yours sincerely
Yvonne Fovargue
Labour Member for Makerfield

Giving HMRC licence to raid our accounts is simply an extension of privatisation philosophy , so why are Capitalists upset?

August 28, 2014
Posted (27/8/14) to D.Express but not published.
I fully endorse Stephen Pollard’s attack on the The Government’s giving HMRC the right to seize our assets, without recourse to Law.
However; this attitude of mind has not suddenly sprung up out of some archaic political theory. It has evolved from a long-standing and fossilised view of political reality.
I notice that he was careful to blame Parliament, rather than the Government of the day. He was right to do so but, I believe, it was for the wrong reasons.
I’m glad that it was not a Labour Government in power, as he would have fouled up his well presented case with an attack on Socialism, ignoring the fact that this attitude, assumed by
all Parliamentarians, irrespective of party, has been the norm for decades.
I’m sure Mr.Pollard was, and is, a very strong supporter of the privatisation of British Gas, along with all subsequent sales of tax-payer funded assets and tax-payer subsidised services.
I also hope he sees and accepts the connection that I am trying to make.
For me, it is clear that the two party system has created a duopoly, which is neither Left wing, nor Right wing but serves its own agenda of self-perpetuation.
It’s concern is to gain greater power over us and to treat both Capital and Labour, as theirs to command.
It’s reflected in their refusal to let us have a say in membership of the EU, or the destruction of the NHS.
It’s reflected in their ever newer forms of taxation, including those raised by private companies and quangoes e.g. Hospital car parking charges, speed camera fines and reduced wheelie bin collections.
It’s as if we had hired a shepherd and he was not only selling us our own mutton, he was hiring out grazing rights on our pastures to our neighbours.
Perhaps, if Mr. Pollard were to look again at some of the policies he has supported in the past, he will see that they do encourage politicians to have this view of their role.

@Daily_Express Has the campaign to privatise our roads begun?

April 28, 2014

John Ingham’s piece on motorists (Today he’s Transport Editor: a man with many hats) headlines that road rage drivers are scaredy cats. It’s on par with “all bully’s are really cowards”. It’s appealing but dangerous. Some bully’s are just psychopath’s with muscle.
The piece raises the question, not of whether it is even Newsworthy, but who prompted it. The very last paragraph seems to indicate its purpose and its source:”At least 3 in every 10 struggle to continue driving, because of the cost of motoring-which probably explains why at least 64% ‌ all groups oppose pay-as-you-go roads.”

Is this the beginning of a Ministry of propaganda campaign to slag off any motorists, who might campaign against the privatisation of our roads? We’ve already had the admission that Councils are complaining about insufficient funds to repair the growing menace of potholes. Presumably the next step is for a Junior Minister to go on BBC’s ” Question Time” and suggest that we need private money to be invested.

@Ed_Miliband: Could this be the future of our prison service (post-privatisation)?

April 16, 2014

I get regular e-mails from The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) (

We seem to be modelling ourselves on America’s system of Government and the issues raised by the ACLU make depressing reading.

It seems that when American Politicians spout about Freedom, they don’t mean freedom from hunger, fear, persecution etc.

They mean freedom from Government interference  in those causing hunger, fear, persecution etc.

We’ve seen it with the destruction of the NHS and the trade agreement, with the EU, that will harmonise our privatised Health Service with that of Obamacare.

The email below gives an image of what a privatised Prison Service might look like:

Do you know the CCA?

No, not the dance from the 1980s by the group with the colorful outfits (that’s the YMCA)—I’m talking about the company formed in 1983 that now makes $1.7 billion in taxpayer money each year for imprisoning people. It’s the Corrections Corporation of America.

And because the United States puts more people in jail than any country on earth, business is booming.

Of course, it also helps their bottom line that many states have given the CCA sweetheart deals—such as contracts that force the government to pay extra money if prison beds are any less than 90% full. Even worse, many of the CCA’s filthy prisons are understaffed and plagued by horrific cases of prisoner abuse and neglect.

But right now, states from Texas to Kentucky are waking up to this injustice and canceling their contracts with these prison profiteers. So we’re going to turn up the heat and bring the fight to the state where the CCA makes its home: Tennessee.

Will you stand with thousands of ACLU activists and sign the petition calling on Tennessee Governor Haslam to cut ties with the CCA?

If we can chip away at the CCA’s public image and push Governor Haslam to end contracts with them in their home state, it will have a ripple effect across the country.

It won’t be an easy fight. The CCA spends millions each year in campaign contributions propping up politicians who support the for-profit prison industry. Many of these politicians have also supported legislation—such as “truth in sentencing” and “three strikes” laws—that helped fill private prisons with more bodies for longer sentences.

That’s our taxpayer money hard at work, ruining the lives of so many people, often for non-violent crimes.

But this Tax Day, we’re launching a major initiative to reveal the CCA for what it really is: a national disgrace. If thousands of ACLU supporters stand together right now, we have a real chance to deal a major blow to their dirty business