My Interventions in the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Bill

33 Comments

  1. Lifelogic
    May 19, 2023

    Darren Jones MP:
    I find myself in the unusual situation of being in complete agreement with (John Redwood).

    So clearly the man is not too bright in general. Another lefty lawyer it seems. But on this issue at least he is right.

    Fraser Nelson today “Europe is beginning to turn against the prophets of climate alarmism”. Alas but no where near quickly enough. The sooner politician realise they cannot pass laws to change the laws of physics and energy economics the better. Sunak is still wanting to piss ÂŁbillions of tax payers money down the drain on “green” hydrogen energy storage and carbon capture lunacies.

    “The Tories should embrace national conservatism” says Lord David Frost – rather too late now mate and under tax to death, open door immigration, green crap pushers Sunak and Hunt there is no chance whatsoever it seems.

    1. Ian+wragg
      May 19, 2023

      Now the bills are arriving, the public will soon see the lunacy of net zero especially when only a handful of countries are following the doctrine.
      Sunak and Hu t wish to harm Britain and its economy and the tory politicians are too stupid to see it.

      1. Mike Wilson
        May 19, 2023

        Sunak and Hu t wish to harm Britain and its economy

        Do you seriously believe that? I can believe they can’t see the wood for the trees – what politician can. They live in a world of information overload, 24/7 media scrutiny and their every action is analysed. Surely they are just getting everything wrong – they are not deliberately harming the country.

        1. Donna
          May 20, 2023

          I tend to think that if something looks deliberate, then it probably IS deliberate. The WEF has made its plans very clear and Sunak/Hunt are the WEF’s men.

          You can’t Build Back Better unless and until you have first destroyed what is already there (as Lenin knew only too well).

  2. Lifelogic
    May 19, 2023

    Ireland’s sinister hate crime bill should scare us all. New Culture Forum podcast Peter Whittle is right but very depressing.

    1. a-tracy
      May 19, 2023

      “New Bill to tackle hate crime and hate speech includes a clear provision to protect freedom of expression.” Why is this a bad thing as long as it applies evenly and equally?

      I wonder if ‘Tories’ can start to report people for calling us all SCUM? Those that say and write that anyone that associates with the national conservatism conference should be sacked from their jobs and cancelled from social media, do the English have protection if they express pride in their Country or any patriotism so they don’t get abused by people from the other Countries in the United Kingdom.

  3. Javelin
    May 19, 2023

    There are two types of oversight (1) regulators and (2) protectors. These two functions are extremely important in controlling how society evolves.

    The markets (and law, politics, families, information) are divided into consumers and producers. Families include Maslow the needs hierarchy such as health, safety, food etc. All of these systems “evolve” through small changes – money, votes, laws etc

    Regulators keep the producers in check and Protectors look after consumers interests. They are two different functions.

    There is a *very interesting* question about the general principles about deciding who the regulators and protectors are and who controls them.

    1. Lifelogic
      May 19, 2023

      The regulators nearly always get captured by the industry they regulate. They work together for the interests of the industry owners and of the regulators while fleecing the customers and the tax payers. See water, energy, trains, buses, the NHS…

      Meanwhile 700,000 legal net migration. Did Cameron not promise to reduce to “the tens of thousands” did he mean 70 tens of thousands or was he just lying to get votes.

  4. Bloke
    May 19, 2023

    If Industries functioned properly Regulators would not be needed.
    If Regulators functioned properly Select Committee scrutiny would not be needed.
    If Select Committees functioned properly additional Specialist Select Committees would not be needed.
    Govt should try getting things right first.

    1. Lifelogic
      May 19, 2023

      “Govt should try getting things right first.”

      Well it is not in civil servants interests to get things “right”. After all if they get it wrong they will then be asked to do more “work” to correct it but they will then get it wrong again & then demand more money and resources and a new smart office.

    2. Mickey Taking
      May 19, 2023

      Your last point is the point !

    3. Mark B
      May 19, 2023

      +1

  5. agricola
    May 19, 2023

    Like all of mans creations AI has plus and minus sides. Think the WWW, Atomic Power and Dynamite.
    Large organisations that have a direct impact on individuals daily lives have, with the advent of the computer, retreated from them. Telephones that are either never answered or put you through a costly maze of press 1 or 4 in trying to get answers or appointments. At times there are no phone numbers and no email contact points. They readily facilitate extracting your money, it being the life blood they thrive on, but anything else you might want them for and they are uncontactable. Even worse are their messaging services that refuse comment or question with answers that boast of their obscurity.
    AI will further enhance their facility for this and should be blocked in consumer rights law with heavy penalties for none compliance.

    1. Mark
      May 19, 2023

      I have been trying to elicit some answers from the National Grid LionLink interconnector project on its likely effects and consequences etc. for over 3 weeks. I got an automated email response to my first enquiries, promising a response in 10 working days. Nudges by email and phone have so far produced silence. I guess I shall have to see whether there is an MP interested in taking up the cudgels if they don’t respond soon.

  6. glen cullen
    May 19, 2023

    Did anyone see the PMs interview on Sky at 9.00am this morning ….oh my god, beyond car crash

    1. glen cullen
      May 19, 2023

      Beth Rigby at Sky today questioning the PM

      Beth – ‘what are your targets for legal and illegal immigration’?
      PM – ‘we’re going to reduce the numbers’
      Beth – ‘what are you key measures’?
      PM – ‘we want to reduce half over half the period’
      Beth – ‘what’s your success criteria’?
      PM – ‘that we have reduced the numbers’

      Its a must watch interview

  7. MFD
    May 19, 2023

    Well said Sir! I read in the Telegraph your comment yesterday, The last thing we need is to pander to the Global weather scam! Too many con merchants around these days! Then we have people who have not the intelligence to understand scientific and technical problems and feasible solutions.
    I think Sunack should return to money counting as he is a follower and not a leader-poor choice was made when he was selected!

    1. Lynn Atkinson
      May 19, 2023

      Those who ‘selected’ him were well paid.

  8. Ex-Tory
    May 19, 2023

    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

  9. Ian B
    May 19, 2023

    Sir John
    You have offered a lot on the Diary today. There is also a lot that can be commented on, but not easy in a sound-bite way as reasoning is also required.

    All taxpayer expenditure, as in money taken by the Chancellor should have a clear purpose, a clear return expected. Therefore accountability and responsibility attached – that means full Political over-site even when regulators(still a taxpayer cost) are concerned. There can be no such thing as full independents when it is money taken from others. Even a commercial Company with shareholders is answerable to those whose money it is, commercial Company Shareholders expect to see a reinvestable return so should the taxpayer.

  10. Ian B
    May 19, 2023

    Sir John
    You cant have competition when Governments set out themselves to manipulate markets. The prime illustration, the EU’s Common Agriculture policy all well meaning by ensuring internal continuity of supply within their home territory. However, as soon as those in receipt of this taxpayer funding which is what happens with CAP is used to export and undercut markets elsewhere, they have weaponised trade to the detriment of others.

    The UK Farmers suffer because of a weaponised trade from the EU.

    1. forthurst
      May 19, 2023

      The purpose of the CAP was to subsidise inefficient French farmers whose farms were postage stamp sized as a consequence of French inheritance law in which each sibling received an equal inheritance. It was not at all ‘well-meaning’ as it was rigged to deprecate British farming by hitting it with quotas and subsidies that artificially constrained production in favour of the Continent. Just like the CFP in fact designed to deprecate our fishing industry by thieving from our Exclusive Economic Zone whilst denying quotas to our fishermen.

      Now that we are out of the EU, allegedly, it is the Tory Party which is undermining our farming industry by replacing agricultural production with various schemes for Saving the Planet such as ‘rewilding’ or cultivating crops of solar panels. Cows of course are extremely dangerous, they believe, as they breath out some of the CO2 continuously captured by the grass they eat through photosynthesis.

  11. Ian B
    May 19, 2023

    Sir John
    You cant privatise things that were created with taxpayer funding and expect it to provide competitive services when the reality is competition is excluded. Thinking railways here, there is no competition just additional taxpayer funding going to commercial companies. Where is the taxpayer reinvestable return on their investment?
    Then if these were truly private companies, why is Government involved in wage negotiations and why should wages be seen as universal through out the Country when the services are not?

    Reply There is a competition based model for railways. It was used to secure the entry of Hull trains which showed it worked, then they blocked further examples

    1. Mark
      May 19, 2023

      There has also been competition via other transport modes – road and air – but both have been hobbled by government in various ways, with taxes, restrictions, imposed delays (e.g. extended check in times for air travel and security theatre, unnecessary speed limits etc.).

  12. Ian B
    May 19, 2023

    Sir John
    As you infer, markets can only grow from healthy competition. But that competition should not come from Government manipulation, that is distortion, weaponising and in the end destruction of the very thing needed for a vibrant, resilient, and self reliant future.
    The Political Class lead by a narrow thinking Government is trying to manipulate a future. A future they yet don’t know about. The UK needs Power/Energy and lots of it the Government encourages Foreign participation by giving away UK taxpayer money at the expense and punishment of creating home grown growth. Of course Foreign Domained for tax Companies are interested in receiving UK taxpayer money as they don’t suffer the burden of UK tax. It is the UK Domiciled entities that get punished so as others can remove their opportunities of wealth creation. That is by Government Decree!

  13. glen cullen
    May 19, 2023

    The G7 = The gathering of the world barons

    1. glen cullen
      May 19, 2023

      G7 Agenda /Issues to be address –
      ‘the goal to achieve net-zero by 2050 based on the Paris Agreement remains unchanged’
      Note – China nor Russia in attendance

    2. Lynn Atkinson
      May 19, 2023

      No, now a gathering of the impoverished.

      1. glen cullen
        May 19, 2023

        I had to think about that, I now realise you’re spot on Lynn

    3. Mickey Taking
      May 19, 2023

      A clique of would-be dictators?

  14. Mark
    May 19, 2023

    I used to recommend that backbench MPs each be given a handful of quangos that they would be responsible for monitoring, given the explosion of their number. The idea would be that they would have a formal review of their operational effectiveness and budget at least annually and on the public record. Evidently ministers are too busy to achieve this themselves. However, I suspect that too many backbenchers would not be capable of a meaningful review, and would instead concentrate on whether they were using the correct pronouns in the workplace.

  15. glen cullen
    May 19, 2023

    Home Office – 18 May 2023
    Illegal Immigrants – 48
    Boats – 1
    
.just one large hotel required today

  16. margaret
    May 19, 2023

    The employers in the NHS should be regulated. To build up a power network and effectively change the power structure certain professionals need to be excluded in order to create a type of nepotistic dominance. This practice is easily attained by refusal to give references to an employee who has a good record with concomitant documentation to underline abilities. The law need to be changed so that it is the right of every employee to receive a reference. Again we are letting the controllers get away with stealing power.

Comments are closed.