Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

Andy Burnham, "I was talking about the 1980s yesterday where things like water, transport, homes, energy, were broken up and sold off" "I was talking about that being the root cause of Britain's problems" "We gave up control" "We are one of only two countries in the world that...

23,537 просмотров • 2 дней назад •via X (Twitter)

Комментарии: 16

Фото профиля Bob Rankin
Bob Rankin2 дней назад

‘Britain’ didn’t sell off water to private companies. England did. Scotland didn’t. When will unionists acknowledge that conflating the UK with England is extremely irritating and possibly the last desperate throw of the dice in trying to cellotape the crumbling UK together?

Фото профиля Nigel Barthorpe ✊️✌️🇺🇦 🇵🇸 🇬🇱 🇨🇦 🇪🇦
Nigel Barthorpe ✊️✌️🇺🇦 🇵🇸 🇬🇱 🇨🇦 🇪🇦2 дней назад

He seems to be joining up all the dots & creating the right picture. But will he actually do anything about it to make the necessary changes & improve things? There's alot of damage to put right & the gravytrain riders aren't going to be happy. I hope he has the guts.

Фото профиля carl lee
carl lee2 дней назад

Nobody gives a shit about your view !! 😏 just show the vid & shut the fuck up

Фото профиля Ru-bee
Ru-bee2 дней назад

Britain does not have privatised water. Please. England is not Britain.

Фото профиля Derek, Scottish not British.
Derek, Scottish not British.2 дней назад

Scotland owns its water and it has never been privatised.

Фото профиля Steve Musgrave
Steve Musgrave2 дней назад

A lot of water has flowed under a lot of bridges since the 1980s.

Фото профиля Brent Livesey
Brent Livesey2 дней назад

And in the eighties the cost of living was excellent Burnham fuckin do one you useless asshole Burnham

Фото профиля 'Dame' of Cheese and Wine, Turnips & Tofu, Sienna
'Dame' of Cheese and Wine, Turnips & Tofu, Sienna2 дней назад

His use of 'taking back control' is very intelligent and shows up the meaninglessness and indeed wickedness of those who have used the phrase otherwise.

Фото профиля Scarramanga
Scarramanga2 дней назад

Water was sold in 1989 near debt-free. The debt and dividend extraction came decades later, when money was free and a regulated monopoly was the thing to borrow against. Scotland kept water public, creaking anyway. The failure is cheap leverage, not the change of owner.

Фото профиля Tommy Walker
Tommy Walker2 дней назад

Nae need to worry about us up here in Scotland Andy 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

Фото профиля Rage Against The Establishment
Rage Against The Establishment2 дней назад

But isn't going to nationalise them

Фото профиля But who's counting?
But who's counting?2 дней назад

Government wanted money so it sold assets. It said to allow investment so we didn't end up like we are now.

Фото профиля Arthas
Arthas2 дней назад

Well if you are going to lie might aswell make it a whopper

Фото профиля Rage Against The Establishment
Rage Against The Establishment2 дней назад

Pity he never talks about the fact the EDF energy is owned 100% by the FRENCH GOVERNMENT. Some is also owned by Spain and Germany.

Фото профиля Mike Cable
Mike Cable2 дней назад

Yes the British Rail and GPO were fabulous. Total delusion

Фото профиля Diana Briggs
Diana Briggs2 дней назад

They were sold to small investors, private individuals,then big companies bought them out. One of the reasons for the original sale was that everything was so badly run by the state & too much underinvestment. Neither govts nor business are better than each other in the long run.

Похожие видео

Andy Burnham says Britain is paying too much for the basics and promises “more public control” over water, energy and transport. That sounds fine until you remember one rather important fact. The price of water and electricity is already controlled by the state. Ofgem sets the energy price cap. Ofwat sets price controls for water companies. Regulators already decide what private monopoly utilities are allowed to charge, what returns they can make, what investment plans they can claim for, and how much of the burden gets pushed onto households and businesses. So what exactly does “more public control” mean? Because if Burnham means more regulation, we have already tried that. It has failed. Bills are still too high, rivers are still polluted, infrastructure is still creaking, and private investors are still extracting from assets the public cannot live without. The problem is not a lack of public control. The problem is ownership. You cannot properly control a monopoly utility while leaving the monopoly in private hands and pretending the regulator is a substitute for democracy. This is where Burnham’s fiscal confusion matters too. He talks about giving people breathing space, but refuses to say the obvious: a sovereign government is not a household. Within the real limits of labour, materials, energy, skills and inflation, Britain can build and own what it needs. The real fiscal rule should be simple. If the public pays, the public owns. Not “public control” while private firms keep the pipes, cables, profits and ransom note. Public ownership. Public investment. Public accountability. Anything less is just the same failed model wearing a northern accent. #weownit #andy

The Heartlands Tribune

27,839 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

THE WATER RIP-OFF IS NOT ADDING UP. Barry Gardiner MP has exposed the great trick at the heart of Labour’s position on water. Environment Secretary Emma Reynolds says bringing water back into public ownership would cost an “enormous amount of money”. But when challenged, her department’s own response admitted it has not assessed the cost of continuing with privatisation against the cost of public ownership. Read that again. The Government insists public ownership is too expensive, while refusing to do the maths needed to prove it. Water is a natural monopoly. People cannot shop around for a better pipe to their home. Yet billpayers are trapped in a system where their money must cover not only clean water, functioning infrastructure and sewage treatment, but the financial interests of private owners, creditors and shareholders. Public ownership is not some wild luxury. It is common sense. Remove the need to extract profit from an essential service and put billpayers’ money back into pipes, reservoirs, sewage works and lower bills. The question is no longer whether the privatised water model has failed. We can see and smell that failure in our rivers and on our beaches. The question is why a Labour Government is defending it without even calculating the public alternative. Come clean, Secretary of State. Publish the full comparison. Let the public see who this broken system is really serving. Labour Heartlands #LabourParty #PublicOwnership

The Heartlands Tribune

44,601 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

🚨 THEY TOLD YOU THE DATA CENTERS WERE FOR AI... BUT FOLLOW THE WATER Something about this feels VERY wrong. We're being told the biggest corporations on Earth are spending hundreds of billions of dollars building massive AI infrastructure because artificial intelligence needs more computing power. That's the official explanation. But while everyone is focused on AI, almost nobody is paying attention to what these facilities are consuming. Water. Enormous amounts of it. At the same time we're being warned about droughts, shrinking reservoirs, water restrictions, and future shortages. The explanation is simple: The servers get hot. The facilities need cooling. The cooling requires water. Case closed. Except some people think AI is the perfect cover story. While the public debates chatbots and robots, powerful institutions appear to be racing toward the one resource every human being needs to survive. Not oil. Not gold. Not land. Water. You can live without social media. You can live without artificial intelligence. You can live without most of the technology being sold to you today. You cannot live without water. And if water really is becoming the most valuable resource on Earth, then whoever controls it could control everything that depends on it. The official story is that this is an AI revolution. The conspiracy theory is that AI is simply the headline while a much larger resource grab unfolds in plain sight. What do they know about the future of water that the public doesn't?

HustleBitch

261,596 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад