The UK law allows for nationalisation. The issue that could go to court would be the compensation paid for the take over. A company with £26billion deficit might not be worth as much as we imagine? But regardless its not going to be more than HS2.
I'm not saying everyone having fibre broadband access is bad, how can it be. What I'm saying is that the costs and proposed plan is so flawed it's farcical. The notion that Labour can name their price for open reach is ridiculous, it's already been suggested that the cost is likely to be many multiples of the figure Labour have used. That's before we get into competition laws and the knock on effect of the other suppliers in that industry and likely employment loss from that. Plus, those companies that use the provision of broadband services as a revenue stream (EE/O2/VODAFONE/VIRGIN/SKY) to name but a few will be forced to increase pricing across the board on their other services due to the loss of fibre payments. So they either get the money elsewhere or more people lose jobs. So this 'free' broadband paid for by the big Internet brand taxes won't be the end. Mobile bills will increase and if they don't it's because jobs have been cut.
BT say it might be 100Bn Lets say they are right? Thats less than HS2 and much more useful. My point earlier is that BT are simply making a fortune whilst not developing the network & provide the service the country needs. My figures show that clearly.
Finm, I am thinking as you. The SNP should beware the shy Tory voters and also the shy Indy remainer voters. I have met some and they do not promote their feelings
yip, might of got a bit carried away with early polling. they are up 5 points since 2017 and today won 3 byelections with good swings towards them. but, i got this nigly feeling.
As with the Tories and Boris, you won't find me sitting here defending the greatness of BT, they don't do a very good job and I've had my run ins with them over the years. That said, you can't fix a shit company performance with a shit plan, and thats what this is, absolute dogshit. Yes something needs to be done to improve coverage, yes rural areas need better network access speeds, yes provision could be given to those in dire need, but this plan has so many flaws, is likely to be plagued by delays and massively escalating costs, job losses and god knows what else. The idea of improving broadband provision across the country is good, but that doesn't make this pledge good, because its simply ill thought out and commercially niaive
I think more people will be swayed by 'big BREXIT' fever and think they can only vote Con, Lab or LibDem to push or stop Brexit - nigly feeling shared
Thats a rather broad generalisation? Labour could bring in a number of top execs to operate the company. Labour don't plan to run it themselves, and will only have part ownership. I think its crazy to say this is impossible to achieve - why would it be beyond anyones capability? Latvia can do it FFS! The thrust of the project is to wrest control of an essential service which the country and business needs, from ownership which drains profits, has a terrible record in developement, provides appaling service and according to Noob is £26Bn in the red. For less than the price of a train.
yip, its a simple fact that much of our services are provided by nationalized companys. from..... the EU.
Labour could bring in a number of top execs to operate the company The same execs that get paid to manage companies/services that size and get paid money that would put them in the same 1% that labour hate and have said they are going after? You can see why chuckles may follow I have not said bt is 26bn in the red, I DID say the bt pension fund has a £26 bn deficit in their pension fund. Pension funds are often run seperate to the actual company, the company itself is valued in the billions and in very good health the point for mentioning the pension fund is that any state purchase, to what ever that cost maybe , will be only one cost as the government would then have to fund the new aquisitions pensions as it would now be a state pension fund.
With the greatest of respect, Latvia probably weren't facing impending anti competition laws, or undervaluing the buyout of a powerhouse such as BT Open Reach by some five times (at least), and lets be frank, its Latvia.....im sure thing might work different over there Im not saying the idea isn't possible, of course it is. But the plan needs to be better and frankly the people proposing this have clearly shown a level of naivety unsurpassed by anyone before them. Just because its a noble and overall good idea, it doesn't mean this plan Labour have lifted the lid on is good. Its the sort of thing a college student would hand in to and be told to 'go away, re-work it and come back when its done' The very fact they've come out and announced this before even talking with and agreeing a figure with the very company they've got in their sights is just gobsmacking.....in facts its incredible that anyone is seeing this as sensible at all. Idea = Plan and overall performance so far =
At DINNER time, Rebecca Long Bailey said she had been working on the BT nationalisation for the past week!!! Nothing to be concerned about then, everything must have been thoroughly thought through. Steve
Then i take everything back, had i known the razor sharp intelligence and top level commercial acumen of RLB had been on the steering committee i would never have doubted its success. Perhaps she can negotiate the value of my next car? Yes that'd be £300/month sir Well we thought we'd pay you £50
Given that they have not revealed their plan and have allowed ten years to implement it, are you sure you aren't being overly negative and perhaps allowing a bias to creep into your judgement? NASA would have got nowhere with you on their staff! LOL.
