Student funding U-Turn, Railtrack....Anyone notice a trend here

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Media Guardian today unearthed a memo sent on the afternoon of September 11th from Stephen Byers office which suggested that the world crisis gave the governement an excellent opportunity to bury bad news. Read it here.

Is this cynicism of the highest order, or just clever politics?

― Pete, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

If it's true, it's not at all surprising and I'm not complaining because I'm reasonably happy with their decisions on student grants and Railtrack. Personally, I'm hoping the London Underground gets the treatment next.

― Madchen, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

It's a well established policy to sneak in radical reforms on the back of an international crisis. But surely the "bad news" you describe is actually rather good? Working class students could do with some slack and Railtrack have been way overdue for a good spanking.

― Trevor, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Well exactly, and that would appear to be the major symptomatic problem of the current Labour party, and UK politics in general. Its fine putting forward radical policies, buit if they don't work there is no embaressment in a U-Turn. As Lucy says above another major embaressment for them over this period of governement has been PPP for the underground - beloved child of Gordon Brown. Thy've hoisted themeselve up to a position where the safety guarentees required cannot be met by the private firms without more spend from the public sector. If they were ever going to volte face on anything, this would be the next logical thing.

― Pete, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I see what you mean. It's an absurdly ironic situation really - for the first time in ages, the government serves up what can be construed as "traditional" Labour policies and it's almost like they're embarassed to announce them, even though these are the kind of values that the bedrock of their support is supposedly based on.

And the London Underground could do with a massive shake-up, although preferably not while I'm using it.

― Trevor, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

overfaithful commitment to "bedrock of support" = reason eg conservative vote has collapsed?

nu-lab constituency (as understood by blairistas) has conflicting interests: hence their long-term habit of slipping in progressive policies w/o trumpeting them as such

― mark s, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Personally I blame Essex. I'm allowed to because that's where I'm from. Essex was for decades considered to be the Tory heartland, and it was up until the penultimate election when Labour began to turn the tide. But the position in these former Tory heartlands is so precarious that even the faintest whiff of socialism will send those prodigal sons of Thatcher running back to their conservative bunkers.

I suppose I'm a little pissed off because Mark Thomas did a magnificent performance in my home town last night and some Tory jerkoff in the audience walked out, declaring "I'm English mate", as if hearing about the UK arms trade was some kind of personal affront. For me that sums up how fractious the New Labour concensus really is.

― Trevor, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I'm pleased that Railtrack have been sacked. The major shareholders are muttering to their lawyers despite falling foul of the 'shares go down too, bozos' truism they trot out when small investors take a drubbing.

I want the government to present the company with a CPO for the tracks for £1 and tell them to SWIVEL, personally. As a nation Britons are now too well-travelled to live in denial about public works actually working. Taking French trains etc. is a comparative joy and that takes massive investment I'm sure people would pay for if introduced incrementally. I would.

― suzy, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Yes, these policies are good news - but I fear they're not good enough. I no longer have enough faith in the govt's commitment to progressive causes to believe that they'll do the right thing re. the railways.

― the pinefox, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Independent today, front page - "Secret ministry e-mail: 'Use attack to bury bad news'. Byers is going to get sacked. Don't they know not to write stuff down by now?

― dave q, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

The aide who sent the email has now apologised.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk_politics/newsid_1588000/1588323.st m

― Madchen, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Railtrack getting it is not an answer to the whole problem, surely? Government control could just result in even more underfunding, and a whole new set of people in control with no idea what to do. And not paying back shares is a bad idea to anyone involved in a pension fund who had invested. A lot of innocent people might lose out because of this.
Although, clearly, something had to happen over too many companies running the railway problem.
It does rather stink how this all happens immediately after the bombing starts, doesn't it? Call me cynical...

― Bill, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

i don't think it stinks: i think it's common sense

― mark s, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Um, sorry, anyone who buys shares in a privatised company is pretty much looking for a kicking from me, on the basis that these companies actually belonged to every taxpayer in Britain. So you're asked to buy that which you already own, which is a stinker. It doesn't ultimately work for the smaller investor because they don't get the same license to print money as the larger corporate investor. And the license obviously expired!

A national rail company is at least accountable to the tax payer in a way that the private ones are not. We'll become passengers rather than customers, which I prefer.

― suzy, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Privatised utilities make me think of 'Total Recall', where people were charged for the use of oxygen

― dave q, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Again: does anyone really expect them to reverse the 'passenger = customer' abomination?

― the pinefox, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Byers shouldnt lose his job - the e-mail wasn't sent by him and wasn't even sent *to* him according to the report I read. The lesson is don't do business by e-mail, not because of security so much as the temptation to write something apparently reasonable and then hit send instantly is overwhelming. The spectrum of response to a crisis runs from hyper-emotional to hyper-rational and cynical (see ILE 9/11 threads for proof!) - if you're a civil service aide, the latter can land you in big trouble.

― Tom, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

At least if the companies running the railways only care about customers, you get better services (sometimes) because they want to keep you as customers and make more money. Does that make sense? Do I just sound like a Tory now? (If so, please shoot me.)

― Bill, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I'm afraid you do. Surely the evidence of trains since privatization, though, contradicts your view of the 'customer' thing? Also, there is no choice for the 'customer': we just have to wait for the delayed train.

― the pinefox, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Customer = sap, in Railspeak. The only beneficiaries of the current system were company directors until last week.

― suzy, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Ah well, the trouble is I'm just cynical of the days when BR drastically underfunded the system and ran it down, and since a lot of money may be going into the military and intelligence at the moment, I'm rather afraid the same might happen again.

― Bill, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

BR didn't drastically underfund the system. The government drastically underfunded BR and forced it to sell off most of its capital, leaving a company with bugger all assets apart from the rails and the trains they ran on.

― Richard Tunnicliffe, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.