Enterprise for everyone

Time was when your late or cancelled train, your high energy bill, your rationed water or your delayed phone line was the direct result of nationalised industries. Privatisation especially when it involved competition offered more choice, better quality and lower prices. After privatisation electricity and gas prices fell in the early years of the policy. Water was available all summer without hosepipe bans. The long post war decline in rail travel ended and passenger numbers and journeys started to increase. Competition in phones meant instead access to telephony for those who wanted it, rather than a long delay for the state company to put a line in or requiring you to have a line shared with the neighbours.

Today when things go wrong or prices go up in several of these areas it is the result of actions by privatised companies as the public see it. This is not always true. The bulk of rail assets are nationalised, with public ownership of all track, signals and stations. So often if there is a delay or cancellation it is owing to signal failures, overhead track power systems, or physical problems with track and points. It is true Southern Rail has let commuters down and that is a private company. The granting of near monopoly rights for train services is not ideal, but the franchise can be taken back, or the operator may lose it for poor performance when it comes up for rebidding.Energy prices may also be the result of EU renewables and energy policy, not the result of a company trying to up its margins.

Today people have issues with some large private sector companies. The popular enthusiasm for new social media, new mobile phones and modern computing is obvious from the fast growth rates of these businesses. There is also some disquiet about the power and governance of some large corporations. Large banks have been hauled before courts and Regulators for misdeeds. Various companies have been accused of paying too little tax in various countries. Some companies have not been sufficiently customer friendly, have been too keen to push up prices or keep out competitors.

The new challenge is to provide a legal and regulatory framework for more enterprise, more choice and more competition. There is also the problem of some international and EU governmental interventions in policy which make energy dearer or prevent banks lending, or impede new transport investment. Going back to nationalisation which added monopoly to a lack of innovation is not the answer. Today we need more enterprise for all, to take advantage of the fast moving technologies for growth and improvement.

Published and promoted by Fraser Mc Farland on behalf of John Redwood, both at 30 Rose Street Wokingham RG 40 1 XU

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

116 Comments

  1. Nig l
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 5:42 am | Permalink

    You reap what you sow. Politicians on all side have used Banks and other large PLCs as whipping boys to divert attention from their own failings. Therefore you should not be surprised that many people have a very cynical view of them. The fact that they employ vaste swathes of people and actually contribute a lot of tax, thus creating the wealth we rely on, is lost in a sea of recrimination. The fact is that they operate within the framework set out by the Government and International Law. The problem you have is that either people are too young to remember the bad days of nationalisation or people are so jaundiced that a kind if Stockholm syndrome kicks in. TM was weak on TV again last night which sums up the Tory campaign. Frankly I and many other people do not care what happened with the IRA 30 years ago, however abhorrent, it is history. Get on to the WIFM. What’s in it for me and what’s in it with the Labour Party is vast debt and high taxes. Unless Lyndon Crosby knows something we don’t or has something up his sleeve for the last week, you will hand Corbyn success even if he loses. He should be buried out of site. The fact that he is resurgent tells all.

    • Mark B
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 6:19 am | Permalink

      I find it rather gauling that they criticise a man for what he said and done years ago yet, never mention the fact that just recently TM stood at the despatch box praising a senior dead IRA commander,.

      Reply For turning to a peace process, rather different from praising those who use violence when using it.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 6:53 am | Permalink

      People want lower taxes, better services, better pensions, a competitive economy, jobs, cheap non green crap energy, less red tape and less government. They deserve these things. We pay far too much tax already and the services are dire. There is loads of fat that could be cut.

      The Tory manifesto, May and Hammond, for some idiotic reason promised the reverse. Why? Are they trying to lose this sitting duck election?

      • alan jutson
        Posted May 30, 2017 at 9:11 am | Permalink

        Lifelogic

        “Why” ?

        Simple.

        It is easier to take and spend someone else’s money, than to correct an error and make a decision to stop wasting it.

        Once you have passed legislation, you do not have to even ask anymore, you automatically get more funds to spend on what you like.
        Hence the reason we have so many vanity projects which end up a failure.

        • Mitchel
          Posted May 30, 2017 at 2:31 pm | Permalink

          “Hence the reason we have so many vanity projects which end up a failure”-but not for those that benefit -financially-from them!

          It’s a form of feudalism really- they have given themselves the right to spend,you are obliged to work to pick up the tab and keep them in the style to which they are accustomed.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted May 30, 2017 at 10:45 am | Permalink

        The largest problems for competitive enterprise in the UK are:- the size of the state sector (about 23% of employees, many of whom have the express job of actually inconveniencing the private sector at every turn).

        This plus the constant interference by the state sector everwhere and the unfair competition from the state sector, the expensive energy religion, the daft employment laws, the endless red tape, the restrictive planning laws, the high and very complex taxation laws, the dreadful virtual state monopolies in health care system and education systems, a banking system that is uncompetitive and clearly failing its customers ……

        • Ed Mahony
          Posted May 30, 2017 at 11:08 am | Permalink

          Competition isn’t really enough to inspire people (nor is socialist coercion). Yes, it works to a degree, and we all go along with it, stoically. But far more is needed to inspire people to be patriotic towards their country. To work hard for themselves but also for others. To work hard for their families and those they don’t know. To do charity work but also to be charitable in general. To nourish our British sense of humour and sense of fair play and so on.
          With out all this, tinkering around with economic policy here and there isn’t going to make that much difference to people’s lives, at least nothing profound.

          And if you really want to focus on economics, focus on the Quakers. They were brilliant business people whose success was built on work ethic and sense of duty and responsibility towards others.

      • Ed Mahony
        Posted May 30, 2017 at 10:58 am | Permalink

        We need to create a sense of patriotism.
        Where people love their country – in terms of public duty, wanting to help others, work ethic, supporting family life, creating great arts and culture.
        Politicians can do lots of clever economic policy (and that’s important and the Tories are good at that). But much more needs to be done. We need to TRY and capture people’s imaginations and hearts. Through education, arts and culture, nature, sport, and religion and the Church.

        And there is a debate to be had on this when you consider how the Trumpists want to cut spending on the arts. Philistines. And then look at the great patrons of the arts in history – of Mozart and Bach, and of the artists in medieval Florence, helping to create a sense of patriotism (just been reading Dante’s Divine Comedy – a man of the arts, and a great patriot of Florence).

      • Stephen Berry
        Posted May 30, 2017 at 2:50 pm | Permalink

        “Are they trying to lose this sitting duck election?” Lifelogic

        Good question. Yesterday the Tories had a day devoted to domestic violence. Why? It’s not an issue which is going to be huge vote winner for the Conservatives.

        Every day, and there are not that many left, should now be devoted to Brexit and whom between the Tories and Labour can best manage the economy. It should be remembered that Theresa May’s popularity was attained largely due to the perception that she would carry Brexit through against the wishes of the European and British establishments. That’s a no risk path to a good majority and a strong and stable Brexit.

    • Dame Rita Webb
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 6:54 am | Permalink

      Nig

      You have got to be joking! Lets just look at the state of play with the banks since 2007/8. Their balance sheets and exposure to derivatives are bigger than they were ten years ago. They have continued to rip off the retail/small business customers with PPI, “identity theft” insurance, loan swops etc. While judging from the fines they receive they do not seem to be much bothered about the anti money laundering regs either. One of them continues to need to be propped with guarantees from the taxpayer, until somebody in the Treasury realises its terminally ill and should be broken up. They may pay a lot of tax and provide a lot of jobs (and that number has diminished rapidly over the past ten years too). However I think the public do not need politicians to engender a sense of distrust when dealing with these people. Incidentally how many top bankers have suffered for their misdemeanours, instead of having their fines from the regulators dumped on their share/bond holders?

      • Nig l
        Posted May 30, 2017 at 3:07 pm | Permalink

        Dame Rita.

        Pretty much what I expected. Thanks

        • hefner
          Posted May 31, 2017 at 7:42 am | Permalink

          Nig I, the proponent of the zero answer. Pathetic.

    • Sir Joe Soap
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 7:59 am | Permalink

      Remember the public backs genuine people rather than people with a particular agenda. Look at the unpopularity of Clegg, merely because day after day he comes on the radio to spin a line about the EU which is then proved wrong. He’s a reasonably intelligent guy but is neck deep in the party and vested interest of staying in the EU.

      May is seen as pushing a line of Brexit when she was in favour of staying in; of letting families keep their homes when infact she is in favour of high IHT and NI going into a black hole of foreign aid and vanity projects rather than being used for care.

      Corbyn is seen as being wrong on many counts- of having faults but being genuine, and the public like that.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted May 30, 2017 at 10:49 am | Permalink

        She was in favour of ratting on the £1 IHT threshold promise, introducing a new probate IHT tax, increasing NICs, cutting the pension lock, reducing the pension cap, increasing medical (and all insurance taxes), attacking the GIG economy, pushing greencrap energy and daft vanity projects ……………

      • Mitchel
        Posted May 30, 2017 at 2:25 pm | Permalink

        “People always have been the foolish victims of deception and self-deception in politics,and they always will be until they have learnt to seek out the interests of some class or other behind all moral,religious,political and social phrases,declarations and promises.”

        Lenin*’s wise words (The Three Sources & Three component parts of Marxism,1913).Have the masses finally got the message?!

        *I’ve always found Lenin to be much more interesting than Marx himself -and you can agree with his analysis without (necessarily) supporting his solutions;probably why Trump’s Steve Bannon is said to have called himself a “Leninist”.

    • BOF
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 11:26 am | Permalink

      Nig 1 Well said and can TMs advisors please be confined to a basement room at No 10 until the election is over.
      Yesterday I was appalled to hear Amber ?………Rudd, on radio with a new ‘initiative’ on domestic violence. Are they hoping that this will be a distraction? This is not what this election is about! In fact it could be one of the poorest campaigns ever by the Conservative party.

      • Anonymous
        Posted May 31, 2017 at 6:45 am | Permalink

        To appeal to R4 producers.

  2. Posted May 30, 2017 at 5:59 am | Permalink

    This week, I was stranded in Abu Dhabi when BA let my wife and me down.
    I since learn that BA has been taken over and that it is now a vast conglomerate which has asset stripped the IT and outsourced it to India, putting all the devoted, experienced and vital staff on the dole.
    The CEO? Well, he is not responsible, everything in the garden is lovely and he has massively increased his own salary.
    While driving through Abu Dhabi with a Mexican, I was told that in Abu Dhabi the money goes into the buildings and the people, not into the pockets of the people who run the country. “That is why”, the Mexican said, “my country is poor.”
    Shame it doesn’t always happen here!

    • Nig l
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 6:15 am | Permalink

      This is an unacceptable slur on India.

    • Ian Wragg
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 8:03 am | Permalink

      A very naive Mexican. The vast amount of money in Abu Dhabi goes to the ruling families who dispense their largesse as they see fit. Behind the facade of beautiful buildings there is an underclass which services the feudal system.
      Even the Gulf States have privatised their utility companies and airlines. I have been reading the demands of Brussels regarding open ended free movement of EU citizens after we leave. I really hope Mrs May has the guts to walk away from this Franco German stitch up.

      • Leslie Singleton
        Posted May 30, 2017 at 11:35 am | Permalink

        Dear Ian–Yes–Hard to believe that Merkel allowed to spout as she does given the history. The Sun today has it absolutely right. If she doesn’t start paying her whack I for one am willing to say that I wouldn’t see it as the end of the world if Russia took over Germany or even France. I wouldn’t want to die in a ditch or anywhere else to prevent it. This is different from my saying I want it to be so but Germany causes a lot of the problems in the EU and glaringly obviously so. Besides, borders with Russia are not all bad, for instance the one with Finland.

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted May 30, 2017 at 1:35 pm | Permalink

        In July 2016 Theresa May took bad advice and refused to give any unilateral guarantee about the future position of EU citizens who were already settled here. One consequence is that UK is blamed for the worry this has caused those blameless people and has lost the moral highground, even though she did try to get bilateral agreements but was rebuffed. Another consequence is that it has become impossible to have any discussion about future policy on immigration from the EU without those people who are already settled here being dragged into it to muddy the waters. And now we see a third adverse consequence, that the EU has been allowed to take the lead in putting forward detailed proposals on how these people should be treated, and it will be for the horrid UK government to justify its rejection of many of them.

        • Leslie Singleton
          Posted May 31, 2017 at 8:30 am | Permalink

          Dear Denis–I think otherwise–It is entirely the EU’s fault–The whole idea they or some of them have that everything must happen in sequence as solely decided by them is ridiculous–They rebuffed us and that is that

          • Leslie Singleton
            Posted May 31, 2017 at 8:51 am | Permalink

            Postscript–Just read sensible and relevant article in The Express Online by an ex ECJ Judge

          • Denis Cooper
            Posted May 31, 2017 at 2:53 pm | Permalink

            It is mainly the EU’s fault, but that is not how it will seem.

      • a-tracy
        Posted May 30, 2017 at 3:42 pm | Permalink

        Ian, in the demands you read – does the free movement come with an entitlement to our UK national insurance provisions i.e pension, unemployment benefit, NHS plus working tax credits, child tax credits even for children out of our country, and housing benefits? Or is it just freedom to work here and visit here?

        • Ian Wragg
          Posted May 31, 2017 at 4:22 am | Permalink

          They want it with all the whistles and bells. Totally unacceptable.
          They want us to walk away or have a Corbyn capitulation

          • hefner
            Posted May 31, 2017 at 7:46 am | Permalink

            IW, I don’t think you’re right. For what I have seen on the .gov web site, the 85-page form for EU citizens to get the right to remain requires providing the proof of an independent health insurance.

          • a-tracy
            Posted May 31, 2017 at 9:48 am | Permalink

            We see how the Unions expect everyone to capitulate to their will regardless of the consequences. We hear Corbyn talk about appeasement jaw-jaw not war-war but capitulation often results in one party being disadvantaged and I don’t hear Jeremy being asked any questions about other taxes, inheritance tax, Council tax, extra taxes disguised such as the NI increase on individuals and business that was renamed NEST pensions which gives employed workers a 15% Employee NI (over the lel) and an Employer contribution for that employee of 16.8% a total insurance bill of 31.8% with no guarantee of financial defined benefit at the end of it.

            So a sixty-year-old EU citizen can come into the UK without 39 years UK NI contributions are they eligible for pension credits at 65 or not? Pension credits are the equivalent of the State pension and top up a weekly income to a guaranteed minimum of £159.35. Can we ask how many EU citizens are in receipt of Pension Credits, just for one year 2016, and how much did this cost and will this be continued after Brexit or not?

    • Roy Grainger
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 2:47 pm | Permalink

      In Abu Dhabi, where I’ve worked rather than just passed through, almost all low-paid (and medium-level) work is done by Indians, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis.,

    • APL
      Posted June 1, 2017 at 6:31 am | Permalink

      Mike Stallard: “conglomerate which has asset stripped the IT and outsourced it to India, putting all the devoted, ”

      If true, that has eerie echoes of the RBS/Nat West FUBAR three or four years ago, customers couldn’t get money out of their own accounts.

  3. Mark B
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 6:14 am | Permalink

    Good morning

    whilst I agree with much that is said I once again ask, what about all those subsidise we are paying for renewables and STOR ? The reason energy prices are too high is not just because of a EU , but because parliament gold plated the legislation and the Tory party refuses to amend it. That is why you went for price caps, you want certain members of the Tory party to continue to profit from us.

    There is something rotten at the core of our government and politics and leaving the EU is not going to change things .

    • Leslie Singleton
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 11:37 am | Permalink

      Dear Marcellus–But without the EU it will at least be our rottenness

    • NickC
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 12:06 pm | Permalink

      Mark B, But being in the EU has made it difficult to pin down exactly who is responsible. Particularly so because the EU is run on technocratic, trans-national lines: there is no proper government, no opposition, and no overall democratic control. So we can only find what is rotten by leaving the EU.

  4. eeyore
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 6:18 am | Permalink

    A nationalised industry is a monopoly industry. You buy from the State (itself a monopoly) or you don’t buy at all.

    The State already spends £37 of every £100 earned in Britain. When Mr Corbyn is in Downing Street and has nationalised everything he thinks would be better run by him, he will control nearly £50 of every £100. He will be more powerful than Henry VIII.

    This is a man who for 34 years was not trusted by those who knew him best so much as to buy the paperclips, and whose management experience does not extend beyond his allotment. Two years ago he was (not taken seriously ed). Now he’s nearly a Man of Destiny. You couldn’t make it up.

    • NHSGP
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 9:50 am | Permalink

      You buy from the State (itself a monopoly) or you don’t buy at all.
      ============

      A small correction. There’s a subsidy. You’re buying it anyway, for someone else, even if you don’t use it.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted May 30, 2017 at 10:55 am | Permalink

        Indeed in the case of the NHS you buy from the state (in advance like it or not) they get what you may or may not be given by them.

        If you choose to go privately (or have to) you pay four times. Once for others, then tax & NI on what you earn to pay for medical insurance, the insurance premium itself, then the IPT 12% tax on top.

        So nearly everyone has little choice but to use the dire state monopoly when they get round to it – if they do!

    • Jerry
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 5:36 pm | Permalink

      @eeyore; The fact that these privatised industries need to have legally binding state regulation suggests that the advantage you claim is just a mirage, if these private companies (many holding natural or effective monopolies) were truly wanting to charge the lowest possible prices there would be no need to have regulators, would there!

      Why is it that in Germany their railway system (DB), before and after German unification, has always worked as a state owned railway system yet BR could not, at least certainly not in its last 10 or so years, suggests the problem is not who owns it but who tries to control it and why…

      Also, as revenue raising industries (forgive me but who said anything about giving out free electricity, free gas, free water, free transportation) why would HMG need to spend anything more than they currently do -often subsidising private companies. If investment is needed, and the nationalised industry is not allowed to raise capital on the open market, then do as the Tory party did in 1955 with BR, issue a loan that has to be paid back from future revenue.

      • eeyore
        Posted May 31, 2017 at 6:14 am | Permalink

        You’ll learn, Jerry. When utilities and transport are nationalised, when strikes and chaos fill the papers, when the power’s off and the water’s off, when sneering union barons strut triumphant through Downing Street, when your taxes are rocketing and the pound’s on the floor along with Britain’s reputation, you’ll learn.

        • Jerry
          Posted May 31, 2017 at 3:23 pm | Permalink

          @eeyore; Yeah, why not, when all other rational argument fails cite union strife and strikes… You’re sounding more and more like your namesake, and as stubborn too. 🙁

      • libertarian
        Posted May 31, 2017 at 7:43 pm | Permalink

        Jerry

        Who said private business needed to have legally binding state regulation? Oh the State !

        Give over with your incorrect nonsense about German railways. Why do you always have to quantify German railways as DB thereby leaving aside the 400 odd private companies that are part of the German railway system?

        You do not pay loans from revenue you pay loans back from profits and nationalised industries dont make profits you told us.

        Why not mention the acknowledged worlds most advanced and best railway system, the Japanese ? Oh because its operated by 100 private companies.

  5. Richard1
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 6:19 am | Permalink

    Absolutely right. A pity jeremy paxman didn’t ask Corbyn anything along these lines. Nationalisation was a disaster in the UK in every industry where it was implemented.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 9:20 am | Permalink

      Nationalisation always is a disaster and always will be. Once nationalised they are never give a damn about their customer, but are run in the interests of their senior workers, the unions, bureaucrats and politicians. Especially if they are, like the NHS & schools, free at the point of delivery (or often non delivery).

    • Jerry
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 5:39 pm | Permalink

      @Richard1; “Nationalisation was a disaster in the UK in every industry where it was implemented.”

      Yes, and mostly because some politicos did not want it to succeed…

      @LL; Best tell that to the Germans and French…

      • libertarian
        Posted May 31, 2017 at 7:47 pm | Permalink

        Jerry

        Heres a list of all the state, regional and private railway companies that make up the German railway system

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_German_railway_companies

        Apart from long distance “inter city ” style services the French railway system is rubbish

        You keep banging on about French and German railways as if they were in any way comparable with UK. They aren’t for all kinds of pretty obvious reasons

        • Jerry
          Posted June 2, 2017 at 7:27 pm | Permalink

          @libertarian; You are mixing up, with a few exceptions, the owner of the system and TOC’s who pay to run trains upon that system. Please note the fifth paragraph down on the page of the URL you cited, follow the ‘ownership’, DB Netz, a subsidiary of Deutsche Bahn AG who is owned by the Federal Republic of Germany (100%) – in other words state owned.

          As for the SNCF, that is a matter of opinion, not fact.

          • libertarian
            Posted June 4, 2017 at 3:26 pm | Permalink

            Jerry

            I’m not mixed up, its you. My point and its a fact is that German railways is a mixture of mostly state owned and run with a few private services, THEREFORE its not compatible as an example with your wish to have a new version of BR , i.e. a nationalised industry with only one organisation in it

  6. progress m8
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 6:39 am | Permalink

    Water companies have noticeably different weather to everyone else in the UK. While we get soaked, the reservoirs are potential deserts. The methods, techniques and pipes are superior to what they were. Obviously an invisable alien spaceship sucking our water away.
    Telecommunications Ha! Tell me about it…if you are not “breaking-up” or in one company’s language when TV fails regularly ” No signal” or “…Starting….” I have never paid so much on a regular basis to receive the technologically advanced “No signal”. It all comes through things called fibre optics you know. Isn’t Science wonderful!

  7. Lifelogic
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 6:47 am | Permalink

    More choice and more competition is indeed the answer. But in health care and education the state forces a virtual state monopoly through taxation and “free” at the point of use. The Conservative seem to have no to desire to address this. Start by removing the fiscal distortions here and get real competition here, instead of these dire, state monopolies.

    The government should be a referee in these areas not a dire, state monopoly provider of services. They also provide unfair competition in housing. Gove even called for VAT on private school fees like Corbyn.

  8. Prigger
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 7:07 am | Permalink

    Mr Corbyn last night before any normal and randomly selected British voters pulled say off any two streets in the UK would have been booed off the stage on several counts and he would perhaps have needed a police escort away to keep him safe. ( Ireland, Falkland Islands etc )

    You do not attempt to make a joke and think you are going to get away with it when you are reminded you do not like HM The Queen. The more important you are, the more important the venue, then that would not be laughed at even if you were amongst British people who had their reservations about Royalty.
    My advice is, do not try this at home!!!!!!
    Shame on our Fake Media!

  9. Shieldsman
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 7:07 am | Permalink

    On Freedom of Movement.
    Why has the Media failed to make public the important statement on immigration made in the G7 communique?
    In plain English they confirm the right of Countries to have sovereign immigration policies.
    Hidden away in the G7 communique (EU signatories – Merkel, Macron, May and Gentiloni) is a damning rebuttal that freedom of movement is NOT sacrosant.

    The actual paragraph in the communique comes under Human Mobility.
    24. The ongoing large-­‐scale movement of migrants and refugees is a global trend that, given its implications for security and human rights, calls for coordinated efforts at the national and international level.
    The final sentence: – At the same time, while upholding the human rights of all migrants and refugees, we reaffirm the sovereign rights of states, individually and collectively, to control their own borders and to establish policies in their own national interest and national security.
    “We will safeguard the value of the positive aspects of a safe, orderly and regular migration, since properly managed flows can bring economic and social benefits to countries of both origin and destination as well as to migrants and refugees themselves.”

    Surely it is the insistence on freedom of movement (uncontrolled migration within the EU) that has forced us to leave the EU.

    TRADE & WTO
    “We reiterate our commitment to keep our markets open and to fight protectionism, while standing firm against all unfair trade practices. At the same time, we acknowledge that trade has not always worked to the benefit of everyone. For this reason, we commit to adopting appropriate policies so that all firms and citizens can make the most of opportunities offered by the global economy.“We push for the removal of all trade-distorting practices – including dumping, discriminatory non-tariff barriers, forced technology transfers, subsidies and other support by governments and related institutions that distort markets – so as to foster a truly level playing field.
    “We recognize the importance of the rules-based international trading system. We commit to working together to improve the functioning of the WTO, to ensure full and transparent implementation and effective and timely enforcement of all WTO rules by all Members and to achieve a successful 11th WTO Ministerial Conference.”

    The single market creates a European based cartel administered and controlled by the Brussels Commission.

    The signatories to the above statements from the EU – the leaders of Germany, France, Britain, Italy. The EU was also present in the forms of Presidents Juncker and Tusk, despite the EU not being a country. The European Union is described as “a non-enumerated member”. Now will such an important statement by the G7 – ‘the sovereign right to control your own borders’ made with the presence of Juncker and Tusk go unnoticed?

  10. Andy Marlot
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 7:15 am | Permalink

    What a shame that no party in the UK actually believes in free enterprise. Every single politician believes in state management of the economy- socialism in fact. The difference is merely in degree. Labour apparently want hard core state socialism of the kind that has ruined every country that has ever tried it, preferably overseen by Brussels. The Conservative party want a softer kind of central planning whilst pretending they really are free marketeers. All the others want some version of the same thing. Not one single candidate for political office in the UK actually believes in the free market yet, amazingly, many people can’t see the choices they are given are only minor ones. If voting actually changed much it wouldn’t be allowed by our owners.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 9:26 am | Permalink

      May/Hammond are certainly against free markets and want higher taxes. They even wants a “prices and incomes” policy, worker forced onto company boards, to kill the gig economy, to enforce gender pay reporting and even to build on EU workers “rights”.

      No other option though.

    • Jerry
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 5:46 pm | Permalink

      @Andy Marlot; “Every single politician believes in state management of the economy- socialism in fact.”

      That might have something to do with the majority believing in the need for something called “society”, rather than the pure free market that you (and others on this site want) were the logical end game would be a dog-eat-dog world, as found in some South American countries were on the east side of the hill there is great wealth and health, on the west side of the hill there is great poverty and illness/early death.

      • Edward2
        Posted May 31, 2017 at 5:49 am | Permalink

        What South American countries had “pure free market” economies?
        I can think of a few failed dictatorships and a number of failed socialist ones.

      • libertarian
        Posted May 31, 2017 at 7:53 pm | Permalink

        Jerry

        The fact that you haven’t a clue what a free market economy is and why free markets have never been and never will be “dog eat dog” speaks volumes.

        As Maggie said there’s no such thing as A society , society is the collective of people in a given place. Society therefore is also made up of the businesses, wealth generators and workers as well as young, old, infirm and supported needs citizens. ALL of their needs and aspirations need to be taken into account. This childish left wing notion that only lefties care about other people is pathetic and not born out by any facts at all.

        I dont know of a single South American country that has free markets, what are you talking about?

      • APL
        Posted June 1, 2017 at 6:42 am | Permalink

        Jerry: “for something called “society”, rather than the pure free market that you ”

        Human society exists upstream of economics. Once you have a society of freely cooperating individuals, because they cooperate they exhibit behaviours and practices that best suit the aims of the society, the behaviours you disparage; a market place, where members of the society can buy and sell goods and services at mutually advantageous prices. And where you do not have government coercion, you have a free market.

        What you are perhaps, unconsciously but I suspect not, advocating for is a massive government bureaucracy, the sole aim of which is to determine why someone might want to sell a thing, if they should be allowed to sell that thing, and at what price that thing should be sold at.

  11. agricola
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 7:22 am | Permalink

    Enterprise for everyone or call it jam tomorrow in the hope of keeping all those natural tory voters on message. The truth is you take us for idiots.

    If you want more enterprise remove the dead hand of government. You are the greatest burden on the country. Government is only there to stop the abuses of large enterprises that ultimately impede enterprise. Think of the large coffee house chains that pay little or no tax, but compete with the corner café that is hounded for tax but cannot incorporate in Luxemburg. Banks that lend to government at very low rates but crucify enterprise at usury rates. Government that spends on glory projects like Hs2, but cannot produce a national water grid or roads that are damage free. Government that accepts all the green nonsense and consequent high energy costs, but cannot frack for low cost energy. Government that cannot run a welfare state, but spends £12 billion a year on overseas aid. Government that denies qualified would be medical students training at a rate of 700 per annum, but is happy to import off the shelf doctors from poor countries that need them. Ill thought out action by government is the biggest block to enterprise that the UK suffers.

    It is only the management of Brexit that will allow you back into government, but not with the easy ride you expect. Screw that up and UKIP have a new and compelling raison d’etre.

  12. hefner
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 7:31 am | Permalink

    JR on the road to Damascus?

    • clear
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 5:48 pm | Permalink

      hefner
      I feel he ‘s been on the road a long time.

  13. Anonymous
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 7:39 am | Permalink

    The railways increased passenger numbers for one reason: the cities became overcrowded. It is certainly not through popularity.

    I recall trains being long and being affordable. They may have been ramshackle but without the BR stock still in service and going strong today (HSTs, Sprinters, locos) the railways would be in big trouble.

    These engines are proof that BR knew what it was doing but government was running the network down financially.

    Crowding at peak times is also proof that the population boom was unforseen.

    • Ken Moore
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 9:17 am | Permalink

      Mass immigration and low interest rates have also made homes unaffordable in cities so more people are forced to travel further to work.

      JR seems to believe it was all down to the privatisation of the train operators (which are heavily regulated and run on state run tracks).

      Please explain JR??

      Reply The change from decline to growth occurred shortly after privatisation and was much celebrated by Mr John Prescott amongst others.

      • graham1946
        Posted May 30, 2017 at 1:24 pm | Permalink

        John Prescottt – real heavyweight thinker. Now we know you are scraping the barrel looking for support. Was it not he who was going to integrate all transport so it ran for the passenger? How did that go?

      • Jerry
        Posted May 30, 2017 at 5:57 pm | Permalink

        @JR reply; Utter nonsense, the railways had become very popular again well before privatisation, first with the 125 MPH HST, and then again (at least in the Home counties) when BR introduced Network South East. You are either utterly ignorant of railway history or you have selective blindness to anything that disproves your narrative.

        • Edward2
          Posted May 31, 2017 at 5:51 am | Permalink

          Do have to be so agressive Jerry?

        • libertarian
          Posted May 31, 2017 at 8:04 pm | Permalink

          Jerry

          Stop ranting, stop being aggressive, stop being rude and provide a shred of evidence for your loony assertions .

          Oh and more than anything stop being totally wrong

          Heres a link to a graph showing that passenger numbers went DOWN after the introduction 125 MPH HST

          http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a70f77b0-0664-11dd-802c-0000779fd2ac.html?ft_site=falcon&desktop=true#axzz4igjxEeSK

          This is a quote taken from a History of UK Rail website

          In 2016, there were 1.718 billion journeys on the National Rail network, making the British network the fifth most used in the world (Great Britain ranks 23rd in world population). Unlike a number of other countries, rail travel in the United Kingdom has enjoyed a renaissance in recent years, with passenger numbers reaching their highest ever level This has coincided with the privatisation of British Rail.

          you owe JR an apology

          • Jerry
            Posted June 2, 2017 at 7:45 pm | Permalink

            @libertarian; Official figures from an official source if you please…. Not investor chitchat and an uncited ‘quotation’!

  14. Posted May 30, 2017 at 7:41 am | Permalink

    Corbyn’s renationalisation policy is nothing more than a gift – payback – for his Marxist comrades in Unite and the other big unions that are at the heart the movement that got him elected.

    You can imagine the outcome of nationalising the train operating companies : expensive new trains overmanned with staff that new technology has rendered unnecessary and lower fares subsidised with vast sums paid by the rest of us who don’t ever use them.

    A bit like the 100% of families who will have to pay for HS2 while the line will only ever be used by 5% of them.

    Corbyn’s Nationalised Train Operating Companies will be equivalent to paying for a several more HS2s !

    • 37/6
      Posted May 31, 2017 at 7:04 am | Permalink

      In fact the removal of TOCs under nationalisation would reduce the need for staff and lower their wages. The removal of contractual boundaries in cross covering each other’s work would mean fewer were needed.

      The Unions are Turkeys voting for Christmas. Privatisation is the best thing that happened to them.

      The only competition privatisation created was competition for trained staff.

      • Chris S
        Posted June 1, 2017 at 9:49 pm | Permalink

        I have to disagree : your version of the outcome should be correct but with Corbyn in charge and in hock to the Unions it will never happen as you suggest.

        The Unions will call the shots and |Corbyn will go along with what they want. Hence ever higher wages, poor terms and conditions ( for the taxpayer )and gross overmanning. That is what happened in every single nationalised industry from mining to the docks and over-powerful Unions are the reason we lost our shipbuilding and British-owned car industry. Of course poor management had something to do with it.

        However, can you imagine trying to run British Leyland with Red Robbo and his cronies running the shop floor and Tony Benn telling Lord Stokes how he had to do his job !

  15. Sir Joe Soap
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 7:50 am | Permalink

    Well I’d say the barriers to enterprise here are as follows:

    1 Property costs including business rates
    2 Availability of good skilled people
    3 Social costs in the early days of employing staff
    4 The tax system is tilted that if you succeed, you pay tax through the nose, if you fail you lose anyway with no recompense or write-backs.

    That being said, the internet and better communications with no input from government gives far better access to markets than 30 years ago.

    • NickC
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 12:27 pm | Permalink

      Sir Joe said: “2) Availability of good skilled people”. Cobblers. Not to put too fine a point on it.

      Let me give you an example: a young man with a degree in a technical subject, good English, good maths, always employed, responsible, honest, conscientious, personable. Redundant. Now on £19k at 31 for network management both day and night in the same week, every week.

      This is the reality for many. STEM is another politicians wheeze. This country needs fewer technicians, engineers and scientists, not more. Pay talks.

  16. An ill wind
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 7:58 am | Permalink

    I see British Airways under its greater name International Consolidated Airlines Group
    ( ticker= IAG.L in the UK )is over 3% down on the stock market today.
    The Labour Party “thinkers” are trying to figure how they can blame this on Brexit.The LibDems will have already blamed it on Brexit and will fill in the reason when they can think of one. The SNP no doubt blame it on Westminster and Elizabeth I.

  17. Ed M.
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 8:03 am | Permalink

    Capitalism and socialism are both realities we have to accept, to a degree, and put up with stoically. But neither are things we can get excited about.

    (Capitalism is essentially about profit – too much capitalism though, and you end up with greed leading to boom/bust / depression. Socialism is essentially about fairness – too much socialism though, and you end up with envy leading to strikes and revolution).

    Neither capitalism or socialism really fulfil. And if people are unhappy, all sorts of problems follow: families split up (which has profound negative ramifications on society), people get unwell (which has a huge impact on the NHS and on the taxpayer paying for it), and people just don’t work so well / to their full capacity.

    But it’s not just about happiness, it’s also about work ethic (both closely connected with happiness). Work ethic brings much more happiness than mere desire for profit / greed or desire for fairness / envy. Work ethic brings sense of fulfilment and everyone benefits from it not just the person practising work ethic. And work ethic is possible. Look at how the Christian Quakers in this country created so many great businesses from Cadburys to Barclays bank.

    So we need to find a way to inspire people to be happy. That our people work hard but that also our country has soul. First and foremost that our people like each other. But also that we have aesthetically-pleasing towns and public buildings and good and easy access to nature etc and healthy arts and culture and so on. That our country has a good vibe (having a ‘good vibe’ is often what attracts businesses to a place – for example, businesses are now flocking to Berlin because it’s got a great vibe).

    And I think we can TRY to achieve that through education, the arts and culture and religion / Church.

    • Ed M.
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 8:10 am | Permalink

      Just to like to add, the current administration in the White House has really challenged many Conservatives / Republicans about what it means to be a Conservative / Republican. The longer this administration continues, the more people are going to see that there is something really ugly about hard-nosed Capitalism (as there is about hard-nosed socialism or hard-nosed social liberalism).
      Conservatism / Republicanism isn’t just about profit. It’s also about (or should be / at its best historically) family values, work ethic and a healthy sense of public duty (not of which this current White House admin. seems to be concerned about – it just seems focused on power and $$$).

  18. margaret
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 8:40 am | Permalink

    If there are problems with nationalised companies, then they can be corrected. If private companies take over , then we have lost the national power and if they don’t like what GB has to offer then they can go overseas. When will GB learn that inefficiency doesn’t mean we need to throw away. The throw away nation has brought us 8into the mess we are experiencing now. especially in the NHS the biggest employer. We threw away all our own staff including managers and spivs were put into operation. Management is about solutions, not throw away your own and invite disaster in ! We need to admit that we are changing into a global economy and trading follows, but that doesn’t have to be at the expense of ourselves. We are not a melt down race. Keep up with the times.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 9:30 am | Permalink

      “If there are problems with nationalised companies, then they can be corrected.”

      Well in theory they could, but as these are run mainly for the management, unions, bureaucrats and politicians – not the public or customers – the problems never are addressed in practice. As history shows clearly.

      Look at the dire NHS for example.

      • My Ascent
        Posted May 30, 2017 at 3:24 pm | Permalink

        Lifelogic
        “these ( nationalised companies ) are run mainly for the management, unions, bureaucrats and politicians – not the public or customers ” How right you are!
        It makes it all the more difficult to change or get rid of bad things.Unions and politicians can never admit at times the workforce as a whole, not just in isolated domains, can be idle, incompetent, slow, bloody-minded, lacking devotion especially anything to do with “The caring professions”. Why? To a lesser extent it is the same with teaching. When I hear a politician speak of the absolutely devoted, sincere, caring, considerate, efficient, dedicated, highly trained, professional, truck driver or sewerage worker I’ll know the car I thought I’d dodged when crossing the road did in fact hit me and I’m in Heaven.

      • Jerry
        Posted May 30, 2017 at 6:11 pm | Permalink

        @LL; Then look at the US health service…

        Yes I know that there are other health systems in other countries, but there are also very successful state owned industries in other countries that the usual few never seem to want to acknowledge.

        • Lifelogic
          Posted May 31, 2017 at 4:37 am | Permalink

          US health care is far from perfect, but far, far better than the dire NHS. “very successful state owned industries” – not ones that compete on a fair basis with the private sector though. They are always protected by restrictive laws, subsidies or the likes, restrictions that kill the more efficient competition and reduce overall productivity and living standards.

          • Jerry
            Posted May 31, 2017 at 5:16 am | Permalink

            @LL; The USA health system is a total disaster,. and both Democrat’s and Republicans agree on this, it’s just their solutions differ.

            As for competition, who actually wants it, other than those who want to make money out of other peoples medical misfortune?

  19. JJE
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 9:23 am | Permalink

    I doubt we we will re-nationalise British Airways but when we see the impact of constant penny pinching and cost cutting and the sacking of experienced staff to take advantage of lax visa rules on overseas contractors we look for alternatives. The power failure story is at best a very partial explanation of what happened and those affected deserve to be told the true story. I hope the Transport Select Committee follows up.

    BA have 54% of the Heathrow take off and landing slots and thus an effective monopoly which they exploit at the cost of your constituents. There is not a free market in operation there and cannot be while slots are limited.

    A good question was asked at the weekend “How effectively are the aircraft maintenance functions ring fenced from all this cost cutting? Etc ed

  20. Bert Young
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 9:38 am | Permalink

    I made the mistake of watching the Paxman/Corbyn/May programme hoping I would witness the complete destruction of Corbyn ; I was disappointed . Corbyn maintained his posture as the extreme leftie and stuck to his guns when constantly challenged . Theresa did not impress and displayed a distinct lack of those characteristic leadership qualities expected of her – no wonder she chose not to take part in a face off with the other competitors.

    I am now worried that the Conservatives will not get the margin of control desired in the HoC post election results . The Conservative leadership team is not strong enough and too liberal in outlook . No one in their right mind would vote for Labour but they have stuck to traditional left policies and not attempted to woo voters with “rightish” conditions . Sooner – hopefully than later , the Conservatives will re-appoint leaders who are Conservative and be able to show that we are a country of low taxation and welcome business .

  21. NHSGP
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 9:48 am | Permalink

    So why not allow people to opt out of the state pension? The nationalised ponzi?

    Ah yes, that 10 trillion pound pension debt mountain run up by politicians and hidden off the books.

    You’re going to force people to fund that nationalization failure.

    You should have done an audit in 2010 and published the number. You still could.

    What you have to do is split the accruals before and after 2010.

    • Leslie Singleton
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 11:45 am | Permalink

      Dear NHSGP–Hard to believe you are such–Answer is that if they opted out many would spend it and we would have to pay them anyway–Why isn’t this unarguably obvious?

    • a-tracy
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 3:49 pm | Permalink

      I’d like to see these pension figures too, numbers of people-v-£outgoings.

      1. State Pensions paid out (from the NI contribution system)
      2. Pension credits for retirees without full contributions
      3. State workers on defined benefit pensions
      4. Private pensions

      Then a column for the tax you get back from tax paying pensioners (after all pensions are only deferred earnings)

    • Jerry
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 6:19 pm | Permalink

      @NHSGP; Come on, what chance of the Tories being honest and up-front on fiscal issues, we are talking about the Tory party who can’t even cost their own manifesto, although that doesn’t stop then from criticising those parties who have at least made an attempt.

      • a-tracy
        Posted June 2, 2017 at 9:02 am | Permalink

        Labour costings, are they a proper attempt or just wishful thinking?

        “We will scrap tuition fees and ensure universities have the resources they need to continue to provide a world-class education. Students will benefit from having more money in their pockets, and we will all benefit from the engineers, doctors, teachers and scientists that our universities produce. ”

        Labour has said it will pay for the £9.5bn policy by raising tax on higher earners, making those with an income of more than £80,000 pay the 45p rate of tax and assigning a 50p rate to those bringing in more than £110,000 a year.

        Taken from the Guardian
        https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/may/21/labour-abolish-university-tuition-fees-
        jeremy-corbyn-eu-uk-europe
        Sunday 21st May 2017

        My question :
        How many people in the UK earn over £80,000? What is their combined earnings that would be subject to this tax increase?

        If there were 1,000,000 people in this tax bracket they would each need to pay an extra £9,500.00 in tax.
        The first £30,000.00 generates an extra £1,500.00

        Between £110,000 and £150,000 generates an extra £4,000.00

        The remaining £ 4,000.00 comes from a 5p increase over £ 150,000 so the average earnings would need to be £230,000.00.

        Are there really that many people in the UK earning this level of income?

        • Jerry
          Posted June 2, 2017 at 7:39 pm | Permalink

          @a-tracy; You totally miss the point, at least we can have a debate about the Labour manifesto costings, wishful thinking or not, we can not do likewise with the Tory party manifesto.

  22. Antisthenes
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 10:06 am | Permalink

    Less government involvement in our lives and economic activity contrary to popular opinion will bring us the level of prosperity, security, social justices and protect our civil liberties that we seek but continues to elude us. In fact they are rapidly disappearing in direct proportion to the growth of government activity. By calling for more government and socialising of our society and economy we are in fact demanding the tried and failed political and economic systems that abound in the world that we perceive as either totally failed states or impoverished authoritarian communist/socialist autocracies.

    Why the West reputably a well advanced, educated, tolerant and democratic civilisation has decided to turn it’s back on a political and economic system that has served it well in favour of one that has been proven to be destructive is a mystery. However we are and undoubtedly we are going to have to pay the heavy price that comes with it.

  23. David L
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 10:07 am | Permalink

    The railways as a nationalised entity were disastrous in many ways, but they were kicked while they were down by a government favouring road haulage. As I’ve mentioned before, currently foreign governments have fingers in many of the railway (and energy etc) franchise pies and, consequently, profits are being taken out of the country. Funny how this outflow is unmentioned by people, while funds going to the EU is regarded as terrible.

    • Leslie Singleton
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 11:48 am | Permalink

      Dear David–Slight difference is that the EU do not own us (Thank God) but foreign owners do own what they (in the usual way) take profits from

    • hefner
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 6:33 pm | Permalink

      Do not say “people”, say Redwood.

  24. MPC
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 10:27 am | Permalink

    I hope Mrs May has not inadvertently become complacent about what appeals to various categories of voter, forgetting demography. Nationalisation sounds convincing to younger voters with no experience of it. It would also be good to hear stronger rebuffs to generalisations about higher corporate taxes bringing more income (and less inequality, as Mr Corbyn implied during the TV ‘debate’).

    • Leslie Singleton
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 11:56 am | Permalink

      Dear MPC–Yes–Nationalisation does sound good and if that weren’t bad enough making Profits does not and the reason for that is that (Competition apart, and that doesn’t always work) maximisation of Profits (aka Cost Cutting, Redundancies etc) can be terrible for too many.

  25. Kenneth
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 10:46 am | Permalink

    How can we have genuine competition when companies are sharing the same network?

    • Ed Mahony
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 12:08 pm | Permalink

      For all its good points, people often exaggerate the benefits of capitalism:

      1. The Great Wall Street Crash was probably the main cause of WW2 (without it, I fail to see how the Nazis could have got into power).
      2. Since the war, we’ve been struggling with Boom / Bust (who would have thought that people would lose lots of money in bank shares like they did in Ireland recently).
      3. We now have large corporations killing competition at the expense of smaller businesses and consumers.

      Sure, socialism has burdened us The Russian Revolution, Stalinism, and all the rest (and social liberalism has burdened us with abortion, gay marriage, and all kinds of others things), but raw capitalism has also been a great burden to our society and world in general.

      I’m a soft capitalist, more out of necessity than choice. But we’ve got to try and offer more than what the 20th century has burdened us with in terms of raw capitalism (socialism and social liberalism).

      • Ed Mahony
        Posted May 30, 2017 at 12:19 pm | Permalink

        Also, capitalism (in the form of globalisation) has helped to destroy patriotism. Cheap labour from abroad – often for short-term profits – led to lots of immigration, and the country losing its identity to a degree.
        Most Brexiteers aren’t racists. And they’re right in pointing out that our country has lost its identity to a degree because of mass immigration. And we mustn’t blame immigrants. They were allowed in by the governments we voted for, and we all benefited to a degree in a short-term way. But above all, it was the pressure of globalisation that led to some much immigration in recent years.
        Again, I’m not knocking capitalism. I’m a soft capitalist. But I am knocking hard capitalism and that we have to TRY and offer more than mere capitalism.

        Apologies for all the recent comments.

        • Anonymous
          Posted May 31, 2017 at 4:05 pm | Permalink

          I disagree. Not all of us benefited in a short term way. Things were better before. Certainly in the affordability of our homes.

    • hefner
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 6:31 pm | Permalink

      A great question, specially when thinking that all utility companies, whether electricity, gas, water, phone, internet, tend not to fill too responsible for the maintenance of the underlying networks they charge their customers for using.

      But I guess the great technician JR will provide you with the adequate explanations. Or if he does not, that will simply be that as so often he talks from his ideological hill without much consideration for the down-to earth little technical details.

  26. Ed Mahony
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 10:46 am | Permalink

    Glad to see Nigel Farage go on a political blind date with Rachel Johnson.
    British Humour is a thousand times more important than whether we’re in or out of the EU.
    You cannot put a price on that ..

    • agricola
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 1:23 pm | Permalink

      Yes , and in terms of him being a human being, isn’t he streets ahead of the bland talk over each other excuses we have at the head of our political scene these days. I sincerely hope his wit and straight talking remains with us for years to come. The fact that all the mainstream politicos hate him is recommendation enough.

      • Ed Mahony
        Posted May 31, 2017 at 7:55 am | Permalink

        We need the ‘bland’ talkers just as much as we need the more colourful ones – to balance things out. The best marriages / families always have opposites in them but know how to appreciate difference not scorn it.
        Regards

    • endofMaytomoz
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 7:15 pm | Permalink

      Ed
      Yeah, agree. Nige ain’t stupid.

  27. Ed Mahony
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 12:28 pm | Permalink

    Lastly, having knocked globalisation (to a degree), let’s not forget the importance of free trade.
    President Trump is going way overboard on protectionism. He’s a dangerous reactionary and will only affect the economy of the world in the long-term, which will eventually come back to affect America. He’s also extremely worrying when it comes to security matters. And he’s no friend to the UK over Brexit. We simply cannot rely on him.
    He completely represents the wrong type of capitalism for America and the world in general.
    And looking back on it now, the Speaker of the House of Commons was spot on in denying Trump the opportunity to speak to parliament.
    The sooner Trump goes, the better for Republicanism, the US, and the world.

    • Ed Mahony
      Posted May 30, 2017 at 6:10 pm | Permalink

      Lastly, I don’t want to say I told you so, but i said on this website a few months ago that Trump would be terrible for Republicanism, the US and the world. And that we couldn’t rely on him over Brexit.

      All that’s panning out right now. He’s the type of capitalist who has no idea about long-term partnerships and strategy. It’s all about short-term, aggressive tactics. And WIN-LOSE as opposed to WIN-WIN.

      If we’re going to have someone from business run a country, then you need someone such as a Lou Gerstner from IBM or a Bill Gates or a Steve Jobs who are creative-minded and good at strategy and know how to build brands and partnerships and work with a whole plethora of people with different skills and able to plan for the future for long-term growth.

      How Americans could vote for Trump or how some over here in the UK could support him back during the elections, is beyond me (I don’t think I know one person now in the UK who says they support him although I’m sure there are still a few).

  28. paul Wills
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 1:27 pm | Permalink

    We need to get involved big time in trading with huge economic blocs like the EU and other large economies except for the USA at the moment. Turning in on ourselves like we are soon to do with a hard brexit is not the answer it’ll only mean money going around and around in circles with no gain and with no added value. In a few years time we’ll be like Russia or some other isolated god-forsaken place. While I’m on about it – does anyone know of the whereabouts of Liam Fox and the new world wide trade deals we can expect? haven’t heard a word for ages?

  29. Aspirational Count
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 1:33 pm | Permalink

    N.Sturgeon and A.Burnham are recently startlingly into talking to ambassadors and diplomats. I have a very large back garden shed, greenhouse, coldframes and a dog kennel. I may start punching above my weight too.

  30. Posted May 30, 2017 at 4:12 pm | Permalink

    Completely agree with the points. Thanks for sharing the useful post. Looking forward to see the next one.

  31. fedupsoutherner
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 5:27 pm | Permalink

    Some very interesting comments here from John O’Connell of the Tax Payers Alliance.

    John O’Connell, Chief Executive of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said:

    “Anyone listening to Nicola Sturgeon today would be forgiven for thinking there was a magic money tree waiting to be shaken to fund this manifesto. Scotland’s finances have been in a dire state because of its leaders’ propensity for chronic overspending off the backs of English taxpayers. Policies such as scrapping tuition fees and abandoning the public sector pay cap will only spread these problems to the rest of the country.

    “It is intensely hypocritical of the SNP to seek to bring back the 50p tax rate: if they believed higher rates would increase revenue they would have used the powers available to them to increase tax in Scotland. Cutting the top rate has brought in more tax revenue so this is just politicking on the SNP’s part.”

    We released research in November 2016 which found that the deficit in Scotland is higher than any other member of the EU, including Greece.

    http://www.taxpayersalliance.com/scotlands_overspending_problem

    Once again this highlights how the English are subsidising the Scots to the tune of billions and with her announcement today of higher spending it can only get worse. God forbid that Labour get in with the SNP. This message needs to be sent out to the wider audience in England.

  32. Terry
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 6:18 pm | Permalink

    How can anyone ignore the progress of ‘Red’ China since they abandoned their Maoist policies?
    Or ignore the obvious comparisons between Communistic North Korea with the liberalised and Capitalistic South?
    As the old saying goes, “The proof of the pudding is in the eating”.
    In the case of free enterprise, the proof is in the working and the result is very clear to see. Wherever you may go.

    • bill
      Posted June 1, 2017 at 8:15 am | Permalink

      Excellent example and so obvious for years the Left maybe prefer not to think of these glaring examples and it goes to show the road to hell is paved with good intentions but along the way they lost the plot – and it is too painful going back.

  33. Jason wells
    Posted May 30, 2017 at 7:26 pm | Permalink

    Wish this election was over so that we can get on with the real brexit business..am so looking forward to seeing david davis mixing it with the big boys in brussells. I hear that all of the brexit negotiations talks will be reported on a daily basis at EU insistance..ringside seats.. should be good fun

    • Prigger
      Posted May 31, 2017 at 10:53 am | Permalink

      Jason Wells
      “I hear that all of the brexit negotiations talks will be reported on a daily basis at EU insistance”
      I did not know that. We do know the EU is certainly not into democracy at all. Its onlyt wish therefore to “go public” each day is to go public to the British people in order to undermine the negotiations of the British at the negotiating table. “See look what we are offering and your government is refusing!!!” The EU would under these circumstances be told to go to hell. But seeing that Hell is their starting, middle and end position, such advice on their direction of travel would be pointless.

  34. RDM
    Posted May 31, 2017 at 4:48 pm | Permalink

    Free Enterprise! In Wales?

    Who owns Welsh Water?
    Nice, new Car Racing Track, for the boy’s!
    Does any one really know what the Labour (Welsh Assembly) party spends our money on!
    Higher Council Tax, Rates, etc,…
    Councils bought (Invest) shares in a New chip maker (Cardiff Uni) …. with our money!

    Try to borrow Long term capital of the British Bank (Funding Circle)!

    O, sorry, not shaking the right hands!

  35. bill
    Posted June 1, 2017 at 8:09 am | Permalink

    ‘When you are in the quiet of the polling booth…
    Amber Rudd’s summing up after ‘the BBC entertainment’ – (it reminded me of the Muppets Show).

    This phrase sounds like John Redwood’s ‘Cool Heads before hearts’ but with TM’s ‘Compassionate Conservatives’ and living within our means (Sorry, theres no money Left Labour Legacies).

    After this media rabble rousing, posturing and point scoring by Johnnie come late-lies who cannot add up Team Teresa has a wonderful opportunity to expose their Fantasy Future and ‘Magic Money Tree’ as a mirage sans substance when you wake up facing the EU across the table on your own without any magic wand to hand.

  • About John Redwood


    John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, He graduated from Magdalen College Oxford, has a DPhil and is a fellow of All Souls College. A businessman by background, he has been a director of NM Rothschild merchant bank and chairman of a quoted industrial PLC.

  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page