" Red Wall " seats ....

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
Colburn_Claret
Posts: 4632
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:30 pm
Been Liked: 1777 times
Has Liked: 2653 times
Location: Catterick N.Yorks

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by Colburn_Claret » Mon Sep 07, 2020 8:44 pm

Spijed wrote:
Mon Sep 07, 2020 7:29 pm
In 1997 it was the exact opposite where Conservative seats with huge majorities were being toppled with ease. It's unlikely to last.

Remember the Portillo moment?
Beaten by a centrist Labour Party.
Despite the lefts moaning, Blair did more for the working class man, and Northern heartlands than any other Labour leader. Because he was electable. It doesn't matter what your slogans are, or how good your intentions, if you are unelectable then you cannot change anything.
This user liked this post: ZizkovClaret

aggi
Posts: 6142
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 1448 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by aggi » Mon Sep 07, 2020 8:51 pm

I struggle to buy the Corbyn is lazy, hates the country, etc narrative. He's a man who has spent the majority of his life working hard as a public servant and doing a good job for a lot of people by all accounts. As for the "hates his country", no-one ever seems to be able to provide hard evidence.

He certainly lacked competence as a leader and there were many things he got wrong so I don't really understand why people need to make up extra stuff.

For those red wall seats there was a perfect storm of an issue (Brexit) that cut across party lines and an inept labour leader.
This user liked this post: longsidepies

Billy Balfour
Posts: 1797
Joined: Mon May 28, 2018 3:00 pm
Been Liked: 738 times
Has Liked: 286 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by Billy Balfour » Mon Sep 07, 2020 8:57 pm

The worst thing to happen to Labour was the 2017 GE result.

Clarets4me
Posts: 3638
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 9:31 pm
Been Liked: 1705 times
Has Liked: 739 times
Location: Ightenhill,Burnley

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by Clarets4me » Mon Sep 07, 2020 9:03 pm

Colburn_Claret wrote:
Mon Sep 07, 2020 8:44 pm
Beaten by a centrist Labour Party.
Despite the lefts moaning, Blair did more for the working class man, and Northern heartlands than any other Labour leader. Because he was electable. It doesn't matter what your slogans are, or how good your intentions, if you are unelectable then you cannot change anything.
I think this is a point that is largely lost by some on the left. They get so bogged down by the purity of their position and their righteousness, that they are unable to make the compromises necessary to present an electable proposition, and regard others who don't see the world as they do, as " evil " or the enemy.

I fear the current arguments over the " rights & wrongs " of British history, Colonialism, BLM etc won't help. If you've got Dianne Abbott and others preaching that your Grandparents were " racists ", when actually they were probably good decent people, living their lives under a different set of values, then it's hardly a vote winner .... :roll:
This user liked this post: Colburn_Claret

KateR
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 556 times
Has Liked: 3750 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by KateR » Mon Sep 07, 2020 9:04 pm

Labour Manifesto of 1983 described by some wag as the longest suicide note in history, I think JC's suicide note came spectacularly close if not exceeded it. Many correlations between MF & JC with the same outcomes, but people still try to defend, regardless of the fact in front of them.

Must have been all those pesky media alerts against MF we were getting at the time on our phones I suppose
This user liked this post: Somethingfishy

Somethingfishy
Posts: 996
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 8:03 pm
Been Liked: 362 times
Has Liked: 281 times
Location: Padiham

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by Somethingfishy » Mon Sep 07, 2020 9:07 pm

Billy Balfour wrote:
Mon Sep 07, 2020 8:57 pm
The worst thing to happen to Labour was the 2017 GE result.
I agree. It gave them the false belief that Corbyn was electable. The fact is at that point they should have won by a clear margin but failed. That was lost on them as they were too busy celebrating the "victory" of a hung parliament.
This user liked this post: Billy Balfour

Billy Balfour
Posts: 1797
Joined: Mon May 28, 2018 3:00 pm
Been Liked: 738 times
Has Liked: 286 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by Billy Balfour » Mon Sep 07, 2020 9:17 pm

The spending policies in Tory and Labour's manifestoes didn't stand up to scrutiny. Both parties were promising the moon on a stick. The Tories won because of Brexit along with Labour's woeful campaign and its unpopular leader.

I think the Tories will ditch Johnson before the next GE. The more the public see of him, the further his popularity sinks. It's ok to bluster your way through like you know what you are doing, but sooner, rather than later, you get found out.

Clarets4me
Posts: 3638
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 9:31 pm
Been Liked: 1705 times
Has Liked: 739 times
Location: Ightenhill,Burnley

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by Clarets4me » Mon Sep 07, 2020 9:24 pm

Somethingfishy wrote:
Mon Sep 07, 2020 9:07 pm
I agree. It gave them the false belief that Corbyn was electable. The fact is at that point they should have won by a clear margin but failed. That was lost on them as they were too busy celebrating the "victory" of a hung parliament.
The current book on the bedside table is " Left Out: The inside story of Labour under Corbyn " ...... should provide an insight or two !!

KateR
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 556 times
Has Liked: 3750 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by KateR » Mon Sep 07, 2020 9:28 pm

everybody "should" rise to the level of incompetence, BJ is at that point, being PM, nobody will ever be able to take it from him, however few of us actually do. I can foresee him being a peer in the HoL, of course to bluster your way to these levels is incredibly easy obviously, and to achieve it without being found out, mmm, yes I will have to think more on this pearl of wisdom being offered.

Erasmus
Posts: 642
Joined: Tue May 17, 2016 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 524 times
Has Liked: 32 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by Erasmus » Mon Sep 07, 2020 9:55 pm

The Conservative Party is no friend of those on lower incomes, never has been, never will be. When has a Conservative government ever done much for towns like Burnley? Too many in the Labour Party at present put ideological purity above pragmatism. The first task of the Labour Party is to get the Conservatives out simply as a means to start providing help for those on lower incomes who are in desperate need of help.

The Labour Party has to put that as its first and last priority. Ideology exists only to create a more just and fair society, without discrimination and without the vast disparity of wealth distribution the Conservative Party relishes. If that means moving to the right, then do it. You can be as ideologically pure as you want to be, but if you are in opposition you can't do anything to help those most in need. At that point, ideology has to be set aside.

I say that as one who followed the dogma of ideological purity for many years. I haven't moved to the right as I've got old, so perhaps I don't have a brain. I still have the same values as when I was younger, but I have seen that doing something for those who are most in need is the one and only priority. And that starts with getting the Conservative Party out of office.
This user liked this post: levraiclaret

Damo
Posts: 4085
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 12:04 pm
Been Liked: 1572 times
Has Liked: 2406 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by Damo » Mon Sep 07, 2020 10:04 pm

Erasmus wrote:
Mon Sep 07, 2020 9:55 pm
The Conservative Party is no friend of those on lower incomes, never has been, never will be. When has a Conservative government ever done much for towns like Burnley? Too many in the Labour Party at present put ideological purity above pragmatism. The first task of the Labour Party is to get the Conservatives out simply as a means to start providing help for those on lower incomes who are in desperate need of help.

The Labour Party has to put that as its first and last priority. Ideology exists only to create a more just and fair society, without discrimination and without the vast disparity of wealth distribution the Conservative Party relishes. If that means moving to the right, then do it. You can be as ideologically pure as you want to be, but if you are in opposition you can't do anything to help those most in need. At that point, ideology has to be set aside.

I say that as one who followed the dogma of ideological purity for many years. I haven't moved to the right as I've got old, so perhaps I don't have a brain. I still have the same values as when I was younger, but I have seen that doing something for those who are most in need is the one and only priority. And that starts with getting the Conservative Party out of office.
Tricking your way into government, then ruining the economy is exactly what the last Labour government did.
Its not a great plan, long term
These 2 users liked this post: Somethingfishy GodIsADeeJay81

AndrewJB
Posts: 3759
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:20 pm
Been Liked: 1141 times
Has Liked: 729 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by AndrewJB » Mon Sep 07, 2020 11:07 pm

Damo wrote:
Mon Sep 07, 2020 10:04 pm
Tricking your way into government, then ruining the economy is exactly what the last Labour government did.
Its not a great plan, long term
I’d imagine that’s what people will be saying about this tory government in a few years.

elwaclaret
Posts: 2730
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
Been Liked: 680 times
Has Liked: 1295 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by elwaclaret » Mon Sep 07, 2020 11:36 pm

Clarets4me wrote:
Mon Sep 07, 2020 8:32 pm
Michael Foot was rejected on trying to volunteer at the start of the war due to his " chronic asthma " .

However amongst his generation, Denis Healey was a beachmaster at Anzio, Jim Callaghan was a Lieutenant in the Royal Navy, Roy Jenkins was a " codebreaker " at Bletchley Park and Tony Crosland was a Captain in the Parachute Regiment ...
Michael Foot was a British spy/assassin during the war. A fact that was only acknowledged many years later.

nil_desperandum
Posts: 6147
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1479 times
Has Liked: 2889 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by nil_desperandum » Tue Sep 08, 2020 4:43 am

Somethingfishy wrote:
Mon Sep 07, 2020 4:14 pm
What exactly is the problem with that? Surely we want them spending their vast wealth to help businesses and the economy out? Or are we banning anyone earning over 50 k from eating out now? :?
There's no problem with that aspect of the scheme, but it did disproportionately benefit those who had the most spending power, and arguably therefore didn't need the financial help.
I've no problem with supporting these businesses, but what about the 3 million plus who've basically lost heir livelihoods and have not qualified for any of the government grants or loans? How did it benefit them, when they've scarcely any money coming in, and certainly not enough to pay the bills?
As I recall, the original idea was to give everyone £1000 each to spend in order to boost the economy. This would have disproportionately benefited those who needed it the most.
This user liked this post: Billy Balfour

Caballo
Posts: 813
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2016 8:31 am
Been Liked: 313 times
Has Liked: 287 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by Caballo » Tue Sep 08, 2020 7:38 am

Erasmus wrote:
Mon Sep 07, 2020 9:55 pm
The Conservative Party is no friend of those on lower incomes, never has been, never will be. When has a Conservative government ever done much for towns like Burnley? Too many in the Labour Party at present put ideological purity above pragmatism. The first task of the Labour Party is to get the Conservatives out simply as a means to start providing help for those on lower incomes who are in desperate need of help.

The Labour Party has to put that as its first and last priority. Ideology exists only to create a more just and fair society, without discrimination and without the vast disparity of wealth distribution the Conservative Party relishes. If that means moving to the right, then do it. You can be as ideologically pure as you want to be, but if you are in opposition you can't do anything to help those most in need. At that point, ideology has to be set aside.

I say that as one who followed the dogma of ideological purity for many years. I haven't moved to the right as I've got old, so perhaps I don't have a brain. I still have the same values as when I was younger, but I have seen that doing something for those who are most in need is the one and only priority. And that starts with getting the Conservative Party out of office.
Not a pop at you personally Erasmus, but that is part of the issue for me. Negativity! The focus should be getting themselves in, not the the tories out.

Clarets4me
Posts: 3638
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 9:31 pm
Been Liked: 1705 times
Has Liked: 739 times
Location: Ightenhill,Burnley

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by Clarets4me » Tue Sep 08, 2020 7:54 am

elwaclaret wrote:
Mon Sep 07, 2020 11:36 pm
Michael Foot was a British spy/assassin during the war. A fact that was only acknowledged many years later.
I think you may be confusing the MP Michael Foot with Prof. Michael R.D. Foot the British Military historian, who went on to be Professor of Modern History at Manchester University. He was an SAS operative during the war.

The later MP Michael Foot spent most of the war editing the " Evening Standard ", at the behest of Lord Beaverbrook. I've never heard any story about him working as a British Spy.
These 2 users liked this post: KateR Rowls

Dy1geo
Posts: 630
Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2016 8:17 pm
Been Liked: 164 times
Has Liked: 49 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by Dy1geo » Tue Sep 08, 2020 8:15 am

There are many reasons why Labour lost its red wall as has been demonstrated in this thread. Yes Corbyn was toxic to many but to me they have to demonstrate that they are once again financially competent. Prior to 1997 they pledged to follow the Tories spending plans for first 3 years in office and in 2000 we had a budget surplus, the last one. Then from 2000 to 2008 there spending went up much of it warranted but it rose at such as level that when the Taxes derived from the deregulation of the financial sector dried up we had the huge deficit in 2010. Labour still blame the crash but if they hadn’t risen spending to such high levels they would have been protected. Now we have an even bigger deficit and yet the Tories outpoll Labour on the economy by a wide margin. Labour have got to get out of the we will spend more on this mantra to look financially competent.

On the other note they have to start to be seen to want to raise people up, to level up and not others down, to level up. In short look to reward those that “carry” the water not those that “drink” it.

RMutt
Posts: 461
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:08 pm
Been Liked: 181 times
Has Liked: 42 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by RMutt » Tue Sep 08, 2020 8:18 am

The Times accused him of being a Soviet spy. He sued them and the compensation paid for his kitchen. The 'Murdoch Kitchen' he called it. And of course all the donkey jacket nonsense, and yet the denials that the media influences public opinion continue.
*That's Michael Foot not Dy1geo.

tim_noone
Posts: 14847
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:12 pm
Been Liked: 3822 times
Has Liked: 13207 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by tim_noone » Tue Sep 08, 2020 9:31 am

Erasmus wrote:
Mon Sep 07, 2020 9:55 pm
The Conservative Party is no friend of those on lower incomes, never has been, never will be. When has a Conservative government ever done much for towns like Burnley? Too many in the Labour Party at present put ideological purity above pragmatism. The first task of the Labour Party is to get the Conservatives out simply as a means to start providing help for those on lower incomes who are in desperate need of help.

The Labour Party has to put that as its first and last priority. Ideology exists only to create a more just and fair society, without discrimination and without the vast disparity of wealth distribution the Conservative Party relishes. If that means moving to the right, then do it. You can be as ideologically pure as you want to be, but if you are in opposition you can't do anything to help those most in need. At that point, ideology has to be set aside.

I say that as one who followed the dogma of ideological purity for many years. I haven't moved to the right as I've got old, so perhaps I don't have a brain. I still have the same values as when I was younger, but I have seen that doing something for those who are most in need is the one and only priority. And that starts with getting the Conservative Party out of office.
I give you "Bleak House" 1985 ......a shocking watch on utube. I think labour were Running the show at the time.

TVC15
Posts: 7915
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 3148 times
Has Liked: 576 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by TVC15 » Tue Sep 08, 2020 9:52 am

tim_noone wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 9:31 am
I give you "Bleak House" 1985 ......a shocking watch on utube. I think labour were Running the show at the time.
Yep it was rough down bleak house for sure back in the 80s.
I didn’t live too far from there at the top end of Rossendale Road but we would go down there in the late 70s and often get chased !!
Labour was the local council - as it was for many years. Not sure it was “running the show” though - that was our Maggie T. Was not she in full flow in shutting down the mines in Burnley and trying to destroy every northern working class town by cutting back local funding, changing the union laws etc ?

But places like Bleak house existed in most places in the north. 1985 I started work in Manchester City Centre and within a couple of years I often had to visit some of the rougher areas as part of my work....believe me places like Gorton, Hulme , Moss side, Cheetham Hill and many more made Bleak House look like Kensington !

tim_noone
Posts: 14847
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:12 pm
Been Liked: 3822 times
Has Liked: 13207 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by tim_noone » Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:08 am

TVC15 wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 9:52 am
Yep it was rough down bleak house for sure back in the 80s.
I didn’t live too far from there at the top end of Rossendale Road but we would go down there in the late 70s and often get chased !!
Labour was the local council - as it was for many years. Not sure it was “running the show” though - that was our Maggie T. Was not she in full flow in shutting down the mines in Burnley and trying to destroy every northern working class town by cutting back local funding, changing the union laws etc ?

But places like Bleak house existed in most places in the north. 1985 I started work in Manchester City Centre and within a couple of years I often had to visit some of the rougher areas as part of my work....believe me places like Gorton, Hulme , Moss side, Cheetham Hill and many more made Bleak House look like Kensington !
It was a Labour Run Council is the point...the arrogance of those running the show as I call it ..was mind boggling. They took the rents and did bugger all to the properties.forcing people out of their homes was the plan. Labour :D

ZizkovClaret
Posts: 4902
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:50 pm
Been Liked: 1482 times
Has Liked: 1969 times
Location: Praha
Contact:

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by ZizkovClaret » Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:10 am

Trouble with voting Tory, is you get a Tory MP

tim_noone
Posts: 14847
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:12 pm
Been Liked: 3822 times
Has Liked: 13207 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by tim_noone » Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:14 am

ZizkovClaret wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:10 am
Trouble with voting Tory, is you get a Tory MP
Trouble is with voting Labour you get a Tory Leader.MrT.Blair.

ZizkovClaret
Posts: 4902
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:50 pm
Been Liked: 1482 times
Has Liked: 1969 times
Location: Praha
Contact:

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by ZizkovClaret » Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:16 am

tim_noone wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:14 am
Trouble is with voting Labour you get a Tory Leader.MrT.Blair.
I think history will judge Blair better than Cameron, May and Boris.

The Iraq war and tuition fees were clear mistakes, to put it mildly, but their domestic policy will be looked back on positvely.

GodIsADeeJay81
Posts: 5312
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
Been Liked: 1025 times
Has Liked: 2166 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by GodIsADeeJay81 » Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:18 am

ZizkovClaret wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:10 am
Trouble with voting Tory, is you get a Tory MP
My home town fared better under a Tory MP than it did under Labour.
This user liked this post: tim_noone

GodIsADeeJay81
Posts: 5312
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
Been Liked: 1025 times
Has Liked: 2166 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by GodIsADeeJay81 » Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:19 am

ZizkovClaret wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:16 am
I think history will judge Blair better than Cameron, May and Boris.

The Iraq war and tuition fees were clear mistakes, to put it mildly, but their domestic policy will be looked back on positvely.
The Iraq war was more than just a clear mistake.
We are suffering the after effects of it still today, it helped to destabilise an entire region.

If history judges him better than its because it was written by a fan boy.

tim_noone
Posts: 14847
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:12 pm
Been Liked: 3822 times
Has Liked: 13207 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by tim_noone » Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:46 am

ZizkovClaret wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:16 am
I think history will judge Blair better than Cameron, May and Boris.

The Iraq war and tuition fees were clear mistakes, to put it mildly, but their domestic policy will be looked back on positvely.
I cant put/File Murdering many thousands of innocent families under "Mistakes"and "Mildly".The mans a total Cnut.
These 2 users liked this post: bpgburn Damo

elwaclaret
Posts: 2730
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
Been Liked: 680 times
Has Liked: 1295 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by elwaclaret » Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:49 am

Clarets4me wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 7:54 am
I think you may be confusing the MP Michael Foot with Prof. Michael R.D. Foot the British Military historian, who went on to be Professor of Modern History at Manchester University. He was an SAS operative during the war.

The later MP Michael Foot spent most of the war editing the " Evening Standard ", at the behest of Lord Beaverbrook. I've never heard any story about him working as a British Spy.
Quite possibly, think it is something I picked up from QI rather than any direct research, which would make sense as my specialism is Britain pre-1920.

AndrewJB
Posts: 3759
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:20 pm
Been Liked: 1141 times
Has Liked: 729 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by AndrewJB » Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:54 am

Dy1geo wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 8:15 am
There are many reasons why Labour lost its red wall as has been demonstrated in this thread. Yes Corbyn was toxic to many but to me they have to demonstrate that they are once again financially competent. Prior to 1997 they pledged to follow the Tories spending plans for first 3 years in office and in 2000 we had a budget surplus, the last one. Then from 2000 to 2008 there spending went up much of it warranted but it rose at such as level that when the Taxes derived from the deregulation of the financial sector dried up we had the huge deficit in 2010. Labour still blame the crash but if they hadn’t risen spending to such high levels they would have been protected. Now we have an even bigger deficit and yet the Tories outpoll Labour on the economy by a wide margin. Labour have got to get out of the we will spend more on this mantra to look financially competent.

On the other note they have to start to be seen to want to raise people up, to level up and not others down, to level up. In short look to reward those that “carry” the water not those that “drink” it.
You’re plugging a myth when you talk about Tory economic competence, because it’s not borne out by reality. Even if you only look at debt, they’ve created a lot more than Labour, and the ratio to gdp has remained above 80%, whereas Labour kept it lower. Austerity was a disaster, and any shred of competence on a micro level should surely fall away after the shambles of shovelling public money into companies with no track record for sourcing PPE, and who failed to do so. I’m sorry, but unless you’re rich, you won’t have benefitted from their stewardship of the economy.

I think Labour make mistakes too, but I’d rather see a government invest in public services - which itself boosts the economy - than cut them to the bone, and give away the money saved in tax breaks for the rich.

AndrewJB
Posts: 3759
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:20 pm
Been Liked: 1141 times
Has Liked: 729 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by AndrewJB » Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:57 am

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:19 am
The Iraq war was more than just a clear mistake.
We are suffering the after effects of it still today, it helped to destabilise an entire region.

If history judges him better than its because it was written by a fan boy.
Corbyn was abused for voting against his party on various issues, but was clearly on the right side of history when it comes to the Iraq War.
This user liked this post: tim_noone

AndrewJB
Posts: 3759
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:20 pm
Been Liked: 1141 times
Has Liked: 729 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by AndrewJB » Tue Sep 08, 2020 11:20 am

Clarets4me wrote:
Mon Sep 07, 2020 3:29 pm
Just finished reading " The fall of the Red Wall ", a book analysing the last General Election, and in particular, the 41 " Red Wall " seats lost by Labour. It's quite academic in parts, but the conclusion is that the 2019 losses were 20 years in the making. The book plots a gradual decline in the Labour vote share in these seats, of which Burnley is one. This is attributed in part to decline in manufacturing industry and the associated Trades Unions, and also to the general feeling that " Labour no longer represents people like us " ...

The book argues that " Red Wall " voters tend to be socially conservative, ( wanting strong borders, tough prison sentences etc ) , deeply patriotic, and proud of our history and Armed forces. Labour's narrative over the last few years has been off-putting to them. The author makes a good point that in these traditional Labour seats, people either started to vote for the Lib-Dems/UKIP a few years ago, so finally voting Conservative in 2019 was less of a jump than going straight from Labour to the Tories. Even so, it's reckoned that over 1 million voters switched directly from Labour to the Conservatives in 2019. In 1997, the Labour majorities in Bolsover, Leigh and Burnley were 27,149, 24,496 and 17,062 respectively. All returned Tory MP's last December, despite the Brexit party polling over 3,000 in each seat ...

" I didn't leave Labour, Labour left me ", " I've always voted Labour but ... " and " Labour have taken us for granted " were all recurring themes from the hundreds of focus groups ...

Ring any bells with anyone ?
I agree with the perception, and I came across it a lot with Burnley social media sites. One thing I saw repeated quite often was “Julie Cooper has done nothing for Burnley.” I looked up her voting record and attendance and there was nothing out of the ordinary. Was it that she didn’t attend local meetings? Whenever I asked anyone to explain, I’d get at most that she was a remainer, though she voted to trigger A50. It seemed to me that “Julie Cooper is useless” was something people picked up and repeated like a popular slogan.

I think that goes with much else about these perceptions. “Labour hate our country” “Labour are for immigrants and not British working people” “Labour wreck the economy” - all are demonstrably false, and worse, silly and childlike things to say - Which doesn’t mean there isn’t a seed from which the ideas developed, but for them to become all encompassing truisms with a logic all their own, is a separation from reality.

I think very much the decline of trade unionism is the chief reason for this. Unions were a link from the party to working people. The negative perceptions would not have developed were shop stewards around. I think it was a mistake by the Blair and Brown governments not to build unions back up, and restore their status.

Dy1geo
Posts: 630
Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2016 8:17 pm
Been Liked: 164 times
Has Liked: 49 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by Dy1geo » Tue Sep 08, 2020 11:28 am

AndrewJB wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:54 am
You’re plugging a myth when you talk about Tory economic competence, because it’s not borne out by reality. Even if you only look at debt, they’ve created a lot more than Labour, and the ratio to gdp has remained above 80%, whereas Labour kept it lower. Austerity was a disaster, and any shred of competence on a micro level should surely fall away after the shambles of shovelling public money into companies with no track record for sourcing PPE, and who failed to do so. I’m sorry, but unless you’re rich, you won’t have benefitted from their stewardship of the economy.

I think Labour make mistakes too, but I’d rather see a government invest in public services - which itself boosts the economy - than cut them to the bone, and give away the money saved in tax breaks for the rich.
Andrew, my point was prior to 1997 it took Labour years to gain the electorates trust that they could manage the economy and they did this by sticking to the Tories spending plan for there first three years in office, which they did and we saw a budget surplus in 2000 and they actually paid off some of the National Debt and in Brown’s budget tv broadcast that evening he extolled the virtue of lower debt to GDP it went down to around 37% debt to GDP and debt repayments. But some of our public services needed investment and the above inflation increases in the NHS led to improved outcomes. But if you actually take time to have a look at overall spending from 2003 to 2008 it rose rapidly on the back of rising GDP and financial services receipts (Halifax paid around £10bn corporation tax in 2008 alone). Hence when we had the financial crash we were in a bad position due to the structure of our economy, in 2010 we had a deficit of around £150bn and debt to GDP had risen to around 80%.

Overall our National Debt has risen but our debt to GDP has been pretty stable until this year.

My argument is that you have to make the argument of economic competency, it’s great to have Free Broadband, WASPI women repaid in full etc but it comes at a cost.

At this stage I would rather have a Blair/Brown 1997-2005 government than the one we have but a Johnson/Sunak combination to Starmer/Dodds

Also in 1997 Labour had some real talent, Robin Cook, Mo Mowlam, Blunkett, Straw, Dewar, Darling etc which quite frankly puts the current crop of Rayner, Lammy, Thornberry etc to shame

Clarets4me
Posts: 3638
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 9:31 pm
Been Liked: 1705 times
Has Liked: 739 times
Location: Ightenhill,Burnley

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by Clarets4me » Tue Sep 08, 2020 11:40 am

elwaclaret wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:49 am
Quite possibly, think it is something I picked up from QI rather than any direct research, which would make sense as my specialism is Britain pre-1920.
That's interesting about your specialism, one of my other reads was Andrew Adonis' new biography of Ernie Bevin, the war-time Minister of Labour .. His background was in the Trades Union movement, after leaving school at 14 without any qualifications ... A fascinating and brilliant man in my opinion .

He's most remembered now for the " Bevin boys ", conscripts who went to work in the pits rather than the armed forces. He's also often quoted in relation to Herbert Morrison, Peter Mandelson's Grandfather who was a prominent Labour politician, pre & post war whom Bevin disliked intently. Morrison was known for sly plotting & underhand dealing ( not unlike Mandelson ), and one day, a fellow Cabinet minister said to Bevin, " the trouble with Herbert, Ernie, is that he's his own worse enemy " Bevin replied, " Not while I'm f*****g alive, he ain't ! "
These 2 users liked this post: Billy Balfour elwaclaret

AndrewJB
Posts: 3759
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:20 pm
Been Liked: 1141 times
Has Liked: 729 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by AndrewJB » Tue Sep 08, 2020 12:57 pm

Dy1geo wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 11:28 am
Andrew, my point was prior to 1997 it took Labour years to gain the electorates trust that they could manage the economy and they did this by sticking to the Tories spending plan for there first three years in office, which they did and we saw a budget surplus in 2000 and they actually paid off some of the National Debt and in Brown’s budget tv broadcast that evening he extolled the virtue of lower debt to GDP it went down to around 37% debt to GDP and debt repayments. But some of our public services needed investment and the above inflation increases in the NHS led to improved outcomes. But if you actually take time to have a look at overall spending from 2003 to 2008 it rose rapidly on the back of rising GDP and financial services receipts (Halifax paid around £10bn corporation tax in 2008 alone). Hence when we had the financial crash we were in a bad position due to the structure of our economy, in 2010 we had a deficit of around £150bn and debt to GDP had risen to around 80%.

Overall our National Debt has risen but our debt to GDP has been pretty stable until this year.

My argument is that you have to make the argument of economic competency, it’s great to have Free Broadband, WASPI women repaid in full etc but it comes at a cost.

At this stage I would rather have a Blair/Brown 1997-2005 government than the one we have but a Johnson/Sunak combination to Starmer/Dodds

Also in 1997 Labour had some real talent, Robin Cook, Mo Mowlam, Blunkett, Straw, Dewar, Darling etc which quite frankly puts the current crop of Rayner, Lammy, Thornberry etc to shame
I think you’re talking about perceptions again, because for me the case is clear that state ownership of our utilities, mass transport, broadband, for example, is the right approach, and therefore a statement of competence. The privatise everything Chicago School has been shown up for the con it is, and anyone clinging to that ideology doesn’t deserve to be described as economically competent.

You mention the cost of free broadband, but there’s a cost to it now already. What is the cost of not having sufficient coverage around the country? What’s the cost of paying broadband companies to extend the network, when our investments will belong to them? The system has been in place for over twenty years, and has only succeeded in getting fibre broadband to 15% of the country. What is the cost of continuing with a method that has not succeeded?

Again, when we’re talking about Tory economic competence, there’s very little if any on show.

aggi
Posts: 6142
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 1448 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by aggi » Tue Sep 08, 2020 1:28 pm

Dy1geo wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 11:28 am
Andrew, my point was prior to 1997 it took Labour years to gain the electorates trust that they could manage the economy and they did this by sticking to the Tories spending plan for there first three years in office, which they did and we saw a budget surplus in 2000 and they actually paid off some of the National Debt and in Brown’s budget tv broadcast that evening he extolled the virtue of lower debt to GDP it went down to around 37% debt to GDP and debt repayments. But some of our public services needed investment and the above inflation increases in the NHS led to improved outcomes. But if you actually take time to have a look at overall spending from 2003 to 2008 it rose rapidly on the back of rising GDP and financial services receipts (Halifax paid around £10bn corporation tax in 2008 alone). Hence when we had the financial crash we were in a bad position due to the structure of our economy, in 2010 we had a deficit of around £150bn and debt to GDP had risen to around 80%.

Overall our National Debt has risen but our debt to GDP has been pretty stable until this year.

My argument is that you have to make the argument of economic competency, it’s great to have Free Broadband, WASPI women repaid in full etc but it comes at a cost.

At this stage I would rather have a Blair/Brown 1997-2005 government than the one we have but a Johnson/Sunak combination to Starmer/Dodds

Also in 1997 Labour had some real talent, Robin Cook, Mo Mowlam, Blunkett, Straw, Dewar, Darling etc which quite frankly puts the current crop of Rayner, Lammy, Thornberry etc to shame
Given the current position free broadband is an interesting one. There is obviously a cost to providing it (although that cost would very possibly be much lower than the current cost if rolled out to all) but there's also an economic cost of loads of people having poor internet and trying to work from home. It's possible that the hidden cost of low productivity due to poor internet is more than the cost of providing everyone with internet.

CrosspoolClarets
Posts: 2697
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:00 pm
Been Liked: 903 times
Has Liked: 237 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by CrosspoolClarets » Tue Sep 08, 2020 2:21 pm

I have a lot of sympathy for the Yanis Varoufakis view (on Newsnight last night) that capitalism is broken and needs radical surgery. He tried to explain it as being capitalism used to be about small traders, risk, investment, day to day stuff, whereas it wasn’t meant to be billion pound multinationals dominating even politicians who have to bow to their power and the poor have zero influence.

I tend to hold the view that unless this “settlement” is reformed in the west, the east will rise and an autocratic, anti-democratic, hostile world will become dominant for the next century or two. I do feel it is quite existential. Add the woke madness to this (eventually the patience of the majority will snap) and we really may well be entering troubling times. That’s before mentioning Covid. Listening to a podcast this morning with Douglas Murray, it was commented that throughout history this kind of trajectory has always led to war.

Ok, grim, but is this relevant to a Labour red wall question?

The issue is one that I feel has led to this “red wall” situation. Labour haven’t come close to realising this stuff, Corbyn saw bits of it but he was never able to truly empathise with these red wall voters, he is a middle class woke radical really. If somebody born into a particular situation has no realistic chance of ever even owning their own home with a nice garden, they’ll turn another way. First they need someone to understand them, then to empathise with them, then to help them. Labour have done none of this.

So the future for these working class areas is to give people a reason to make capitalism and democracy relevant to them again. It doesn’t really matter which party does this, but it does need doing. Fast.

Foreverly Claret
Posts: 115
Joined: Sat Feb 20, 2016 9:45 pm
Been Liked: 92 times
Has Liked: 64 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by Foreverly Claret » Tue Sep 08, 2020 4:09 pm

Good topic this...some cracking well thought out posts.

The last 10 years have been hell for me .I'm a card-carrying life long Leftie but it's not been living under Tory governments that has ****** me off..it's been the abysmal performance of Labour as an opposition that has granted the current government an unassailable ( for now ) tenure ....we had no chance whatsoever .Corbynism and Momentum might be acceptable types of socialism for the Islington smart set but they didn't set pulses racing round here ( West Yorkshire ). Having said that we're still part of what's left of "The Red Wall "....I'm not au fait with the political scene in Burnley any more..my folks have passed on and I only visit for home games now but I don't think it's vastly different to where I live now and I have to say that I can't say that life has improved here in the last 10 years...if you think it has..tell me how !!! Times change .It will take a while for Starmer to stamp his authority on the party but he will...will it be enough to turn Burnley red again...who knows ? Hard times a comin' folks... let's see how they fare...if you're happy with what you are getting now you are easily pleased..but the wall stays down...for now !
This user liked this post: KateR

clarethomer
Posts: 1386
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:24 am
Been Liked: 390 times
Has Liked: 196 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by clarethomer » Tue Sep 08, 2020 6:22 pm

Nationalisation is the worst idea ever. Money thrown at it, no reward for achievement but equally no consequence of failure either. Just the mugs who pay tax continue to subsidise it.

Eventually it will lead to rising taxes and we won't ever see a return on this.

We can talk about hidden costs of poor broadband or anything else. Those hidden costs just get more expensive because of the inefficient nature of government run departments.

Yes the private sector isn't perfect and the drive for profit is unpalatable for some but at least their is motivation and consequence to ensuring businesses are run as well as they can. The cost of not doing it right is that it doesn't succeed.

If you have a national broadband provider, to take thousands of jobs out of that sector because they couldn't compete with free, the impacts would have been unimaginable to everyone. No competition, no need to do better, no consequence of failure from it.

Anyway, it wasn't my intention to re-run the last election debates but the point remains - they lost the red wall for focusing on silly schemes like this and not being coherent or aligned to their core voters in those areas.

A party run by millionaires building hate against millionaires.

aggi
Posts: 6142
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 1448 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by aggi » Tue Sep 08, 2020 6:33 pm

clarethomer wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 6:22 pm
Nationalisation is the worst idea ever. Money thrown at it, no reward for achievement but equally no consequence of failure either. Just the mugs who pay tax continue to subsidise it.

Eventually it will lead to rising taxes and we won't ever see a return on this.

We can talk about hidden costs of poor broadband or anything else. Those hidden costs just get more expensive because of the inefficient nature of government run departments.

Yes the private sector isn't perfect and the drive for profit is unpalatable for some but at least their is motivation and consequence to ensuring businesses are run as well as they can. The cost of not doing it right is that it doesn't succeed.

If you have a national broadband provider, to take thousands of jobs out of that sector because they couldn't compete with free, the impacts would have been unimaginable to everyone. No competition, no need to do better, no consequence of failure from it.

Anyway, it wasn't my intention to re-run the last election debates but the point remains - they lost the red wall for focusing on silly schemes like this and not being coherent or aligned to their core voters in those areas.

A party run by millionaires building hate against millionaires.
Where would you draw the line here? Health, roads, police, fire brigade all to be privatised?

clarethomer
Posts: 1386
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:24 am
Been Liked: 390 times
Has Liked: 196 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by clarethomer » Tue Sep 08, 2020 6:47 pm

aggi wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 6:33 pm
Where would you draw the line here? Health, roads, police, fire brigade all to be privatised?
I think the government and the provision of national public services are good as they are in what they control.

I wouldn't go any further in terms of privatisation in any of those areas.

I would frankly like the NHS, Police/Emergency services and roads to be funded differently which makes them less of a political football too.
This user liked this post: GodIsADeeJay81

Clarets4me
Posts: 3638
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 9:31 pm
Been Liked: 1705 times
Has Liked: 739 times
Location: Ightenhill,Burnley

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by Clarets4me » Tue Sep 08, 2020 7:08 pm

clarethomer wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 6:22 pm
Nationalisation is the worst idea ever. Money thrown at it, no reward for achievement but equally no consequence of failure either. Just the mugs who pay tax continue to subsidise it. Eventually it will lead to rising taxes and we won't ever see a return on this.
We can talk about hidden costs of poor broadband or anything else. Those hidden costs just get more expensive because of the inefficient nature of government run departments.

Yes the private sector isn't perfect and the drive for profit is unpalatable for some but at least their is motivation and consequence to ensuring businesses are run as well as they can. The cost of not doing it right is that it doesn't succeed. If you have a national broadband provider, to take thousands of jobs out of that sector because they couldn't compete with free, the impacts would have been unimaginable to everyone. No competition, no need to do better, no consequence of failure from it.

Anyway, it wasn't my intention to re-run the last election debates but the point remains - they lost the red wall for focusing on silly schemes like this and not being coherent or aligned to their core voters in those areas.
I think a lot of people thought " there must be better things to do with Government money ", when it came to Labour's nationalisation plans.

Again, this goes down to Corbyn and his supporters being too concerned with " means rather than ends " . The vast majority of the British public don't care who operates their electricity supply as long as it works, their water as long as it's safe and clean, and their Broadband if it's quick .... The Labour Government would have had to " buy out " the shareholders at full value, or else inward investment to the UK would have been killed stone dead.
Young people nowadays are horrified if they have no phone connection for 8 hours if they change their mobile phone or operator, imagine how they'd feel about a 5 month wait to have a phone line installed, as it was in the mid 1970's !!

clarethomer
Posts: 1386
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:24 am
Been Liked: 390 times
Has Liked: 196 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by clarethomer » Tue Sep 08, 2020 7:37 pm

Clarets4me wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 7:08 pm
I think a lot of people thought " there must be better things to do with Government money ", when it came to Labour's nationalisation plans.

Again, this goes down to Corbyn and his supporters being too concerned with " means rather than ends " . The vast majority of the British public don't care who operates their electricity supply as long as it works, their water as long as it's safe and clean, and their Broadband if it's quick .... The Labour Government would have had to " buy out " the shareholders at full value, or else inward investment to the UK would have been killed stone dead.
Young people nowadays are horrified if they have no phone connection for 8 hours if they change their mobile phone or operator, imagine how they'd feel about a 5 month wait to have a phone line installed, as it was in the mid 1970's !!
It was seen as a bribe in my eyes to tempt the youth.

The last minute WASPI inclusion confirmed that they were looking for last minute votes too from the nearly retired generation of women.

A 5 month wait for a telephone line/internet connection is exactly where we would have likely ended up if they had nationalised broadband.

elwaclaret
Posts: 2730
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
Been Liked: 680 times
Has Liked: 1295 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by elwaclaret » Tue Sep 08, 2020 8:02 pm

Clarets4me wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 11:40 am
That's interesting about your specialism, one of my other reads was Andrew Adonis' new biography of Ernie Bevin, the war-time Minister of Labour .. His background was in the Trades Union movement, after leaving school at 14 without any qualifications ... A fascinating and brilliant man in my opinion .

He's most remembered now for the " Bevin boys ", conscripts who went to work in the pits rather than the armed forces. He's also often quoted in relation to Herbert Morrison, Peter Mandelson's Grandfather who was a prominent Labour politician, pre & post war whom Bevin disliked intently. Morrison was known for sly plotting & underhand dealing ( not unlike Mandelson ), and one day, a fellow Cabinet minister said to Bevin, " the trouble with Herbert, Ernie, is that he's his own worse enemy " Bevin replied, " Not while I'm f*****g alive, he ain't ! "
Love it. Doing a bit of light reading about Peterloo, it’s only polite as I’m in the authors lectures for a couple of months from next week. Lol
This user liked this post: Clarets4me

Clarets4me
Posts: 3638
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 9:31 pm
Been Liked: 1705 times
Has Liked: 739 times
Location: Ightenhill,Burnley

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by Clarets4me » Tue Sep 08, 2020 8:24 pm

elwaclaret wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 8:02 pm
Love it. Doing a bit of light reading about Peterloo, it’s only polite as I’m in the authors lectures for a couple of months from next week. Lol
Easy way to remember the date of the Peterloo massacre .... same date ( 16th August ) as Elvis Presley's death, only in 1819 not 1977, obviously !
NB : Don't start humming " Suspicious Minds " during lectures .... ;)

GodIsADeeJay81
Posts: 5312
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
Been Liked: 1025 times
Has Liked: 2166 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by GodIsADeeJay81 » Tue Sep 08, 2020 8:25 pm

clarethomer wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 7:37 pm
It was seen as a bribe in my eyes to tempt the youth.

The last minute WASPI inclusion confirmed that they were looking for last minute votes too from the nearly retired generation of women.

A 5 month wait for a telephone line/internet connection is exactly where we would have likely ended up if they had nationalised broadband.
In regards to Waspi, wasn't that change to retirement age originally introduced by Labour?

clarethomer
Posts: 1386
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:24 am
Been Liked: 390 times
Has Liked: 196 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by clarethomer » Tue Sep 08, 2020 8:57 pm

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 8:25 pm
In regards to Waspi, wasn't that change to retirement age originally introduced by Labour?
https://fullfact.org/economy/increasing ... nsion-age/

Clarets4me
Posts: 3638
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 9:31 pm
Been Liked: 1705 times
Has Liked: 739 times
Location: Ightenhill,Burnley

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by Clarets4me » Tue Sep 08, 2020 8:58 pm

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 8:25 pm
In regards to Waspi, wasn't that change to retirement age originally introduced by Labour?
There are some strange statistics that go against the perceived views and memories ....

The only Government ever to cut spending year on year on the NHS was Labour in 1950
Between them, Clem Attlee and Harold Wilson closed 354 working coal-mines, as opposed to 115 which closed under Margaret Thatcher
In his first 3 years in Office, President Obama deported 1.18m illegals from the USA, 318,000 more than Donald Trump over the same period
This user liked this post: GodIsADeeJay81

GodIsADeeJay81
Posts: 5312
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
Been Liked: 1025 times
Has Liked: 2166 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by GodIsADeeJay81 » Tue Sep 08, 2020 9:06 pm

Cheers.

So yes it was at a set timescale but the Tories changed that and a number of people weren't aware.

AndrewJB
Posts: 3759
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:20 pm
Been Liked: 1141 times
Has Liked: 729 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by AndrewJB » Wed Sep 09, 2020 9:10 am

clarethomer wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 6:22 pm
Nationalisation is the worst idea ever. Money thrown at it, no reward for achievement but equally no consequence of failure either. Just the mugs who pay tax continue to subsidise it.

Eventually it will lead to rising taxes and we won't ever see a return on this.

We can talk about hidden costs of poor broadband or anything else. Those hidden costs just get more expensive because of the inefficient nature of government run departments.

Yes the private sector isn't perfect and the drive for profit is unpalatable for some but at least their is motivation and consequence to ensuring businesses are run as well as they can. The cost of not doing it right is that it doesn't succeed.

If you have a national broadband provider, to take thousands of jobs out of that sector because they couldn't compete with free, the impacts would have been unimaginable to everyone. No competition, no need to do better, no consequence of failure from it.

Anyway, it wasn't my intention to re-run the last election debates but the point remains - they lost the red wall for focusing on silly schemes like this and not being coherent or aligned to their core voters in those areas.

A party run by millionaires building hate against millionaires.
A statement like "nationalisation is the worst idea ever" is just ideological nonsense. You won't find me saying "privatisation is always wrong" And I note you amended this to say some things are better nationally owned - so we could begin by agreeing some things are better nationally owned, and others privately owned.

You claim that nationalised industries aren't run as well as privatised ones, but that is only if you take the industry out of the context of the whole economy. The US healthcare system is hugely profitable, but nobody would swap it for ours because it leaves tens of millions Americans uncovered, and leads to tens of millions more losing their cover if they develop a long term health issue. Nobody wants to have to fight cancer with one eye on their wallet. The US system is the most expensive in the world, and delivers the worst outcomes out of the first world in terms of mortality, child mortality, etc. But it's hugely profitable. Decades ago, Bolivia privatised its water utility. The French company who took this on managed to wrangle into the contract that they own all the water - even puddles, and lakes, and rain. Taken solely from a business perspective, this was good news for profits, because no Bolivian could avoid coughing up. Water butts became illegal. The company made lots of money - the business was successful, but the new rules led to civil unrest, and the country returned to a nationalised utility instead. The train companies here in the UK. As Richard Branson boasted in his autobiography, Virgin Trains was a license to print money. You talk about broadband being better under private ownership, then why not roads? It's really the same thing. You could pay per mile of road you use (which will vary according to the company that owns the road, and whether or not it's a motorway, etc), or you could just pay a monthly fee with a surcharge for motorway use, or perhaps a premium to allow you to use any road at any time. This would be very profitable for the companies fortunate enough to win the contract - and then it would be a matter of driving the costs down as much as possible to maximise profits, adhering as much as possible to the minimum terms of service. The real benefit would be for those who don't drive, because they could avoid paying anything.

There are areas that the profit motive just has no place, and introducing it just drives up costs and inefficiencies for everything else.

clarethomer
Posts: 1386
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:24 am
Been Liked: 390 times
Has Liked: 196 times

Re: " Red Wall " seats ....

Post by clarethomer » Wed Sep 09, 2020 12:56 pm

AndrewJB wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 9:10 am
A statement like "nationalisation is the worst idea ever" is just ideological nonsense. You won't find me saying "privatisation is always wrong" And I note you amended this to say some things are better nationally owned - so we could begin by agreeing some things are better nationally owned, and others privately owned.
I believe nationalisation in the context of how labour's vision portrays this is the worst idea ever... sorry you don't agree with it.

I don't think we really have a truly nationalised entity any more here in this country in the way that they operate which is probably a testament that the learns of full state ownership is not sustainable.

The NHS has private companies supplying services and existence of PFIs etc as an example have meant that private and public are truly interwoven within this gem of ours.

I believe nationalisation is accepted that its not something that works for inifinte period. Bloating, underperformance, lack of accountability etc all mean that eventually there is a point where you end up with underinvestment, inefficient, outdated, non-functioning industries. I have explained why this happens - tax payers having to cover this rather than shareholders or private individuals etc.

The area i would probably agree where nationalisation does work - where it is short term and an industry themselves are in trouble - like the banks for example (which wasn't labours fault). That needed government support to weather the storm and that was an example of that hybrid model existing.

In the context of nationalising broadband, offering it free and decimating the competition - Im still shaking my head at that now in terms of how anyone thought that was a good idea is beyond me.

You claim that nationalised industries aren't run as well as privatised ones, but that is only if you take the industry out of the context of the whole economy. The US healthcare system is hugely profitable, but nobody would swap it for ours because it leaves tens of millions Americans uncovered, and leads to tens of millions more losing their cover if they develop a long term health issue. Nobody wants to have to fight cancer with one eye on their wallet. The US system is the most expensive in the world, and delivers the worst outcomes out of the first world in terms of mortality, child mortality, etc. But it's hugely profitable. Decades ago, Bolivia privatised its water utility. The French company who took this on managed to wrangle into the contract that they own all the water - even puddles, and lakes, and rain. Taken solely from a business perspective, this was good news for profits, because no Bolivian could avoid coughing up. Water butts became illegal. The company made lots of money - the business was successful, but the new rules led to civil unrest, and the country returned to a nationalised utility instead. The train companies here in the UK. As Richard Branson boasted in his autobiography, Virgin Trains was a license to print money.
I can't even begin to unpick this fully as the UK/US/Bolivia are constitutionally run differently. State laws/federal laws etc. The history of those countries etc all have influence on how things have happened/built etc.
You talk about broadband being better under private ownership, then why not roads? It's really the same thing. You could pay per mile of road you use (which will vary according to the company that owns the road, and whether or not it's a motorway, etc), or you could just pay a monthly fee with a surcharge for motorway use, or perhaps a premium to allow you to use any road at any time. This would be very profitable for the companies fortunate enough to win the contract - and then it would be a matter of driving the costs down as much as possible to maximise profits, adhering as much as possible to the minimum terms of service. The real benefit would be for those who don't drive, because they could avoid paying anything.

There are areas that the profit motive just has no place, and introducing it just drives up costs and inefficiencies for everything else.
I think what you have suggested about the roads will come in from the government.

Taxes raised from VED and fuel duty are on the decline and with he move to banning of ICE cars and the drive towards EV's then this is only going to accelerate. I would favour a PPM way of paying for the use of roads and generating tax.

Currently I pay no road tax and I pay no fuel duty to drive my car so I am enjoying the benefits of this with more cost effective motoring. I expect that if a PPM charge came into driving, it would be a fair methodology of paying for things and seems to be one theory that people are consistent in believing that this is one of the few options the government have.

I appreciate you are a believer of big government and that that your socialist values can only be delivered through nationalisation and having more control on the supply and cost of things to ensure more people get access to things. If it was that simple, I would probably share similar views but it's not that simple unfortunately.

Post Reply