Southampton's council leader furious over Ford cash handout days before news that plant will shut

Daily Echo: Government is "taking the mick" over Ford cash Government is "taking the mick" over Ford cash

THEY'RE taking the mick.

That was Southampton's council leaders reaction to revelations that the Government has handed a multi-million pound cash deal to Ford just days before announcing the closure of Southampton's factory.

Now Cllr Richard Williams is set to take the matter to the top when he holds face to face talks over the crisis with deputy prime minister Nick Clegg next week.

The meeting on Monday comes as the Government is refusing to say whether it knew about Ford's closure plans when it handed it the cash-boost. But it appears the shock plans were not raised as part of the bidding process for the Regional Growth Fund Cash - and there is no chance of the offer being withdrawn in light of the bombshell.

As previously reported, Ford was approved for a share of £37 million, along with three other companies, to develop low-carbon engines in Essex.

Days later, it announced the closure of the Southampton plant and the loss of 500 jobs.

Asked what should happen to the cash Richard Williams, said: “For a start, it shouldn't go there, if they are reneging on their commitment to the community from the point of view of development that we need down here.

"We should not be giving public money to private sector companies that renege on their commitments.

"They say it's a separate project, but taxpayers in Swaythling are still paying for it."

Southampton Itchen MP John Denham, a former Business Spokesman for Labour, said the "big question" was whether the government had asked the right questions when negotiating the award.

Nick Evans, of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, said: "Bids submitted to the Regional Growth Fund are submitted on the basis that they are stand-alone projects. Bids are compared against each other - it's a competitive process."

While the final decision on grants belongs to ministers, the recommendations come from an independent panel chaired by Lord Heseltine, he said.

Mr Evans insisted the bidding process was transparent.

He added: "I am not going to talk about discussions that we had as part of the selection process, because I am not in a position to do that."

The size of the award to Ford is being kept confidential, and the company has not yet received the cash.

All that remains is for due diligence tests to be carried out. But these checks will only be within the framework of the original bid, the government said yesterday.

There are sure to be further questions for ministers in Parliament next week as local MPs seek to fix up a debate on issue.

Caroline Nokes, the MP for Romsey and Southampton North, said she took a "pragmatic" view of the cash award to Ford, saying: "What we need to do is focus our best efforts on getting support for the employees."

Cllr Williams said one use for the cash could be to bring the Ford site back to use as an employment site.

 

For all the latest Ford news, background and reaction click here

Comments (22)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:15am Sat 27 Oct 12

loosehead says...

So part of our green commitment we give money to three motor companies to develop green/more economic engines which I guess will be built in Dagenham or at least in this country.
So what we should withdraw the money from Fords one of the other countries fords produces in gives them the cash (if all engines are built there) Then we see the closure of another plant & Williams will be happy with that?
There comes a time when no matter what the workforce do, No matter how much cash is chucked at it the very most it will buy you is a couple more years.
If anyone can put their hand on their hearts & say they thought it would never closed I'd be shocked.
One of the reasons Germany kept it's motor factories is because the Unions agreed to a National pay cut they then saw a boom in jobs does that remind you of anything?
So part of our green commitment we give money to three motor companies to develop green/more economic engines which I guess will be built in Dagenham or at least in this country. So what we should withdraw the money from Fords one of the other countries fords produces in gives them the cash (if all engines are built there) Then we see the closure of another plant & Williams will be happy with that? There comes a time when no matter what the workforce do, No matter how much cash is chucked at it the very most it will buy you is a couple more years. If anyone can put their hand on their hearts & say they thought it would never closed I'd be shocked. One of the reasons Germany kept it's motor factories is because the Unions agreed to a National pay cut they then saw a boom in jobs does that remind you of anything? loosehead
  • Score: 0

7:16am Sat 27 Oct 12

loosehead says...

So part of our green commitment we give money to three motor companies to develop green/more economic engines which I guess will be built in Dagenham or at least in this country.
So what we should withdraw the money from Fords one of the other countries fords produces in gives them the cash (if all engines are built there) Then we see the closure of another plant & Williams will be happy with that?
There comes a time when no matter what the workforce do, No matter how much cash is chucked at it the very most it will buy you is a couple more years.
If anyone can put their hand on their hearts & say they thought it would never closed I'd be shocked.
One of the reasons Germany kept it's motor factories is because the Unions agreed to a National pay cut they then saw a boom in jobs does that remind you of anything?
So part of our green commitment we give money to three motor companies to develop green/more economic engines which I guess will be built in Dagenham or at least in this country. So what we should withdraw the money from Fords one of the other countries fords produces in gives them the cash (if all engines are built there) Then we see the closure of another plant & Williams will be happy with that? There comes a time when no matter what the workforce do, No matter how much cash is chucked at it the very most it will buy you is a couple more years. If anyone can put their hand on their hearts & say they thought it would never closed I'd be shocked. One of the reasons Germany kept it's motor factories is because the Unions agreed to a National pay cut they then saw a boom in jobs does that remind you of anything? loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:16am Sat 27 Oct 12

arthur dalyrimple says...

these corporations only loyalty is best bang for their buck , ditto , bankers and their parliament schills ,its called facism , 60 years in southampton and not one word of gratitude or regret on the factory closing ,says it all.
these corporations only loyalty is best bang for their buck , ditto , bankers and their parliament schills ,its called facism , 60 years in southampton and not one word of gratitude or regret on the factory closing ,says it all. arthur dalyrimple
  • Score: 0

9:53am Sat 27 Oct 12

Torchie1 says...

arthur dalyrimple wrote:
these corporations only loyalty is best bang for their buck , ditto , bankers and their parliament schills ,its called facism , 60 years in southampton and not one word of gratitude or regret on the factory closing ,says it all.
You don't think it's an indictment of the face of manufacturing in the UK when foreign companies have to be bribed to set up and stay there? For better or worse the businesses of the world now trade on a global basis and look to find the best financial climate in the same way that you compare prices at John Lewis, Comet and Aldi before buying a washing machine. The traditional view that John Lewis is expensive is soon forgotten if they offer your washing machine at half price and undercut the other shops.
[quote][p][bold]arthur dalyrimple[/bold] wrote: these corporations only loyalty is best bang for their buck , ditto , bankers and their parliament schills ,its called facism , 60 years in southampton and not one word of gratitude or regret on the factory closing ,says it all.[/p][/quote]You don't think it's an indictment of the face of manufacturing in the UK when foreign companies have to be bribed to set up and stay there? For better or worse the businesses of the world now trade on a global basis and look to find the best financial climate in the same way that you compare prices at John Lewis, Comet and Aldi before buying a washing machine. The traditional view that John Lewis is expensive is soon forgotten if they offer your washing machine at half price and undercut the other shops. Torchie1
  • Score: 0

10:31am Sat 27 Oct 12

Linesman says...

Why does it not surprise me that Cameron, Osborne & Co were pouring money into Ford, without checking out Ford's long-term plans for the UK?

I just hope that Cameron will stick to his most consistent policy that he has followed since coming to power when reviewing this funding -

AND DO A U-TURN
Why does it not surprise me that Cameron, Osborne & Co were pouring money into Ford, without checking out Ford's long-term plans for the UK? I just hope that Cameron will stick to his most consistent policy that he has followed since coming to power when reviewing this funding - AND DO A U-TURN Linesman
  • Score: 0

10:41am Sat 27 Oct 12

aldermoorboy says...

Multi nationals can go anywhere in the world with their factories.
If we want work here I suggest we are co-operative and friendly rather than rude.
Multi nationals can go anywhere in the world with their factories. If we want work here I suggest we are co-operative and friendly rather than rude. aldermoorboy
  • Score: 0

11:59am Sat 27 Oct 12

George4th says...

It was not a surprise!!!!

Fords warned months ago that this year Fords Europe was going to lose $1 Billion and that it would have to look at closures.
After that announcement, did the Unions ask for meetings to discuss? Did Southampton Council ask for meetings? Did the workers ask for meetings? Did the MPs ask for meetings?

If they did would they please advise us of the outcomes.
It was not a surprise!!!! Fords warned months ago that this year Fords Europe was going to lose $1 Billion and that it would have to look at closures. After that announcement, did the Unions ask for meetings to discuss? Did Southampton Council ask for meetings? Did the workers ask for meetings? Did the MPs ask for meetings? If they did would they please advise us of the outcomes. George4th
  • Score: 0

12:07pm Sat 27 Oct 12

Inform Al says...

aldermoorboy wrote:
Multi nationals can go anywhere in the world with their factories.
If we want work here I suggest we are co-operative and friendly rather than rude.
A good reason then to renationalise the power and water industries and not to allow multinational firms to buy our companies. Time for us to run our own affairs again perhaps.
[quote][p][bold]aldermoorboy[/bold] wrote: Multi nationals can go anywhere in the world with their factories. If we want work here I suggest we are co-operative and friendly rather than rude.[/p][/quote]A good reason then to renationalise the power and water industries and not to allow multinational firms to buy our companies. Time for us to run our own affairs again perhaps. Inform Al
  • Score: 0

2:18pm Sat 27 Oct 12

loosehead says...

A new economic engine/greener engine the EU will allow funding for to keep a plant open or as one poster has suggested to Nationalise the EU won't allow look at Rovers.
to suggest to not give Fords the money to invest in the development of said engine is ludicrous.
So we say keep Southampton open & we'll give you the money Fords say have it your way we're shutting all three facilities & we'll develop it abroad.
Exactly who's the winner then?
Put your hand on your heart & tell me you never thought this closure was going to happen sooner than later?
We must be honest about this & not try to shut down to other plants or have a very short term reprieve for this plant.
As I've said before we should be approaching one of the Asian car/vehicle manufacturers with the promise of help in modernising these buildings & the fact there's a highly skilled (cars production) workforce available as no matter what Politicians might say to make another look bad Fords seem to have been going this way for several years now
A new economic engine/greener engine the EU will allow funding for to keep a plant open or as one poster has suggested to Nationalise the EU won't allow look at Rovers. to suggest to not give Fords the money to invest in the development of said engine is ludicrous. So we say keep Southampton open & we'll give you the money Fords say have it your way we're shutting all three facilities & we'll develop it abroad. Exactly who's the winner then? Put your hand on your heart & tell me you never thought this closure was going to happen sooner than later? We must be honest about this & not try to shut down to other plants or have a very short term reprieve for this plant. As I've said before we should be approaching one of the Asian car/vehicle manufacturers with the promise of help in modernising these buildings & the fact there's a highly skilled (cars production) workforce available as no matter what Politicians might say to make another look bad Fords seem to have been going this way for several years now loosehead
  • Score: 0

6:27pm Sat 27 Oct 12

Saintsincethe60s says...

A good reason then to renationalise the power and water industries and not to allow multinational firms to buy our companies. Time for us to run our own affairs again perhaps.



I see no reason to spend good money renationalising the power and water industries, all the government needs to do is in the first instance become suppliers just like british gas edf etc and sell to the public at minimal profit margins, the result would be most if not all consumers would buy from them or it would force the parasite companies to drop their prices in line.

As the meerkat days "simples" and no taxpayers outlay Win Win as I see it
A good reason then to renationalise the power and water industries and not to allow multinational firms to buy our companies. Time for us to run our own affairs again perhaps. I see no reason to spend good money renationalising the power and water industries, all the government needs to do is in the first instance become suppliers just like british gas edf etc and sell to the public at minimal profit margins, the result would be most if not all consumers would buy from them or it would force the parasite companies to drop their prices in line. As the meerkat days "simples" and no taxpayers outlay Win Win as I see it Saintsincethe60s
  • Score: 0

7:16pm Sat 27 Oct 12

Inform Al says...

Saintsincethe60s wrote:
A good reason then to renationalise the power and water industries and not to allow multinational firms to buy our companies. Time for us to run our own affairs again perhaps.



I see no reason to spend good money renationalising the power and water industries, all the government needs to do is in the first instance become suppliers just like british gas edf etc and sell to the public at minimal profit margins, the result would be most if not all consumers would buy from them or it would force the parasite companies to drop their prices in line.

As the meerkat days "simples" and no taxpayers outlay Win Win as I see it
There is some merit in what you say, however as the means of producing power has already been put into the hands of foreign companies the cost of building new would probably exceed the cost of nationalising them.
[quote][p][bold]Saintsincethe60s[/bold] wrote: A good reason then to renationalise the power and water industries and not to allow multinational firms to buy our companies. Time for us to run our own affairs again perhaps. I see no reason to spend good money renationalising the power and water industries, all the government needs to do is in the first instance become suppliers just like british gas edf etc and sell to the public at minimal profit margins, the result would be most if not all consumers would buy from them or it would force the parasite companies to drop their prices in line. As the meerkat days "simples" and no taxpayers outlay Win Win as I see it[/p][/quote]There is some merit in what you say, however as the means of producing power has already been put into the hands of foreign companies the cost of building new would probably exceed the cost of nationalising them. Inform Al
  • Score: 0

9:31pm Sat 27 Oct 12

loosehead says...

Inform Al wrote:
Saintsincethe60s wrote:
A good reason then to renationalise the power and water industries and not to allow multinational firms to buy our companies. Time for us to run our own affairs again perhaps.



I see no reason to spend good money renationalising the power and water industries, all the government needs to do is in the first instance become suppliers just like british gas edf etc and sell to the public at minimal profit margins, the result would be most if not all consumers would buy from them or it would force the parasite companies to drop their prices in line.

As the meerkat days "simples" and no taxpayers outlay Win Win as I see it
There is some merit in what you say, however as the means of producing power has already been put into the hands of foreign companies the cost of building new would probably exceed the cost of nationalising them.
So when the workers of the said Nationalised companies turn back the clock & hold this country to ransom so ending the careers of thousands as they did under Labour & Dennis Healy that's alright because we run it not a private company is it?
Just thinking of it wasn't Leylands Nationalised & were they on strike most of the time with Red Robbo?
So no thanks for securing their jobs there then?
Any more Bright ideas?
[quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Saintsincethe60s[/bold] wrote: A good reason then to renationalise the power and water industries and not to allow multinational firms to buy our companies. Time for us to run our own affairs again perhaps. I see no reason to spend good money renationalising the power and water industries, all the government needs to do is in the first instance become suppliers just like british gas edf etc and sell to the public at minimal profit margins, the result would be most if not all consumers would buy from them or it would force the parasite companies to drop their prices in line. As the meerkat days "simples" and no taxpayers outlay Win Win as I see it[/p][/quote]There is some merit in what you say, however as the means of producing power has already been put into the hands of foreign companies the cost of building new would probably exceed the cost of nationalising them.[/p][/quote]So when the workers of the said Nationalised companies turn back the clock & hold this country to ransom so ending the careers of thousands as they did under Labour & Dennis Healy that's alright because we run it not a private company is it? Just thinking of it wasn't Leylands Nationalised & were they on strike most of the time with Red Robbo? So no thanks for securing their jobs there then? Any more Bright ideas? loosehead
  • Score: 0

10:59pm Sat 27 Oct 12

Linesman says...

Thatcher sold off our nationalised industries, telling us that they would be more efficient and would therefore, be cheaper.

Check your fuel bills.

These privatised companies will tell you that it is the rise in the price of crude oil.

Strange that these efficient, privatised companies can only see the rise in the price of crude, but never see the price drop.

Water? The price goes up because they have to repair pipes because they lose a lot because of leaks. A regular excuse, used every year, the price rises and the leaks continue to be used as an excuse.

So much for efficiency keeping the price down.

On principle, I did not buy any shares in nationalise companies when they were privatised. Why? Because I considered it to be a CON to sell me shares in something that I was already a shareholder in.

Who was responsible for this Cons?

The appropriately named CONServative government.
Thatcher sold off our nationalised industries, telling us that they would be more efficient and would therefore, be cheaper. Check your fuel bills. These privatised companies will tell you that it is the rise in the price of crude oil. Strange that these efficient, privatised companies can only see the rise in the price of crude, but never see the price drop. Water? The price goes up because they have to repair pipes because they lose a lot because of leaks. A regular excuse, used every year, the price rises and the leaks continue to be used as an excuse. So much for efficiency keeping the price down. On principle, I did not buy any shares in nationalise companies when they were privatised. Why? Because I considered it to be a CON to sell me shares in something that I was already a shareholder in. Who was responsible for this Cons? The appropriately named CONServative government. Linesman
  • Score: 0

1:45am Sun 28 Oct 12

George4th says...

The trouble with growing old is that there is a tendancy to live in the past. Sadly, the Unions and the Labour Party hold onto this past.
Life moves on and things modify and change, UK Plc was too slow to change because it was handicapped by Unions who had forgotten why they had come into existence.
The rest of the world took advantage of our slowness to modernise.
>
The Labour Party (backed by the Unions) furher handicapped us by their Political Engineering. Why would a Labour government increase benefit payments by 60% during their tenure?
The trouble with growing old is that there is a tendancy to live in the past. Sadly, the Unions and the Labour Party hold onto this past. Life moves on and things modify and change, UK Plc was too slow to change because it was handicapped by Unions who had forgotten why they had come into existence. The rest of the world took advantage of our slowness to modernise. > The Labour Party (backed by the Unions) furher handicapped us by their Political Engineering. Why would a Labour government increase benefit payments by 60% during their tenure? George4th
  • Score: 0

8:34am Sun 28 Oct 12

loosehead says...

Linesman wrote:
Thatcher sold off our nationalised industries, telling us that they would be more efficient and would therefore, be cheaper.

Check your fuel bills.

These privatised companies will tell you that it is the rise in the price of crude oil.

Strange that these efficient, privatised companies can only see the rise in the price of crude, but never see the price drop.

Water? The price goes up because they have to repair pipes because they lose a lot because of leaks. A regular excuse, used every year, the price rises and the leaks continue to be used as an excuse.

So much for efficiency keeping the price down.

On principle, I did not buy any shares in nationalise companies when they were privatised. Why? Because I considered it to be a CON to sell me shares in something that I was already a shareholder in.

Who was responsible for this Cons?

The appropriately named CONServative government.
Are you saying all companies need to be nationalised?
Look at the state of the Old Eastern Germanies car.
Are you saying British Leylands was a great success?
Was it a company to be proud of under Nationalisation?
If so why didn't the unions think so? Why were they continuously on strike?
Even though their company was running at a loss & the tax payer was footing the bill they still went on strike.
Do you not remember the power cuts & the three day weeks when many a company upped sticks & moved abroad?
Do you not remember the bodies on the streets outside morgues or the mountains of rubbish (far worse than a year ago)?
You say things so you say to wind me up but you cannot tell me things are worse now than under Nationalised Industries can you?
If you can exactly where were you living? what were you on?
[quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Thatcher sold off our nationalised industries, telling us that they would be more efficient and would therefore, be cheaper. Check your fuel bills. These privatised companies will tell you that it is the rise in the price of crude oil. Strange that these efficient, privatised companies can only see the rise in the price of crude, but never see the price drop. Water? The price goes up because they have to repair pipes because they lose a lot because of leaks. A regular excuse, used every year, the price rises and the leaks continue to be used as an excuse. So much for efficiency keeping the price down. On principle, I did not buy any shares in nationalise companies when they were privatised. Why? Because I considered it to be a CON to sell me shares in something that I was already a shareholder in. Who was responsible for this Cons? The appropriately named CONServative government.[/p][/quote]Are you saying all companies need to be nationalised? Look at the state of the Old Eastern Germanies car. Are you saying British Leylands was a great success? Was it a company to be proud of under Nationalisation? If so why didn't the unions think so? Why were they continuously on strike? Even though their company was running at a loss & the tax payer was footing the bill they still went on strike. Do you not remember the power cuts & the three day weeks when many a company upped sticks & moved abroad? Do you not remember the bodies on the streets outside morgues or the mountains of rubbish (far worse than a year ago)? You say things so you say to wind me up but you cannot tell me things are worse now than under Nationalised Industries can you? If you can exactly where were you living? what were you on? loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:46am Sun 28 Oct 12

Inform Al says...

loosehead wrote:
Linesman wrote:
Thatcher sold off our nationalised industries, telling us that they would be more efficient and would therefore, be cheaper.

Check your fuel bills.

These privatised companies will tell you that it is the rise in the price of crude oil.

Strange that these efficient, privatised companies can only see the rise in the price of crude, but never see the price drop.

Water? The price goes up because they have to repair pipes because they lose a lot because of leaks. A regular excuse, used every year, the price rises and the leaks continue to be used as an excuse.

So much for efficiency keeping the price down.

On principle, I did not buy any shares in nationalise companies when they were privatised. Why? Because I considered it to be a CON to sell me shares in something that I was already a shareholder in.

Who was responsible for this Cons?

The appropriately named CONServative government.
Are you saying all companies need to be nationalised?
Look at the state of the Old Eastern Germanies car.
Are you saying British Leylands was a great success?
Was it a company to be proud of under Nationalisation?
If so why didn't the unions think so? Why were they continuously on strike?
Even though their company was running at a loss & the tax payer was footing the bill they still went on strike.
Do you not remember the power cuts & the three day weeks when many a company upped sticks & moved abroad?
Do you not remember the bodies on the streets outside morgues or the mountains of rubbish (far worse than a year ago)?
You say things so you say to wind me up but you cannot tell me things are worse now than under Nationalised Industries can you?
If you can exactly where were you living? what were you on?
British Leyland was nationalised in much the same way as some banks were recently, ie bailed out. It became a rubbish firm therefore before the gumment tried to help it. Unfortunately due to poor government there are those who are again, wrongly in my opinion, calling for a general strike. This has nothing to do with whether a business is nationalised, but like last time to a bad government.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Thatcher sold off our nationalised industries, telling us that they would be more efficient and would therefore, be cheaper. Check your fuel bills. These privatised companies will tell you that it is the rise in the price of crude oil. Strange that these efficient, privatised companies can only see the rise in the price of crude, but never see the price drop. Water? The price goes up because they have to repair pipes because they lose a lot because of leaks. A regular excuse, used every year, the price rises and the leaks continue to be used as an excuse. So much for efficiency keeping the price down. On principle, I did not buy any shares in nationalise companies when they were privatised. Why? Because I considered it to be a CON to sell me shares in something that I was already a shareholder in. Who was responsible for this Cons? The appropriately named CONServative government.[/p][/quote]Are you saying all companies need to be nationalised? Look at the state of the Old Eastern Germanies car. Are you saying British Leylands was a great success? Was it a company to be proud of under Nationalisation? If so why didn't the unions think so? Why were they continuously on strike? Even though their company was running at a loss & the tax payer was footing the bill they still went on strike. Do you not remember the power cuts & the three day weeks when many a company upped sticks & moved abroad? Do you not remember the bodies on the streets outside morgues or the mountains of rubbish (far worse than a year ago)? You say things so you say to wind me up but you cannot tell me things are worse now than under Nationalised Industries can you? If you can exactly where were you living? what were you on?[/p][/quote]British Leyland was nationalised in much the same way as some banks were recently, ie bailed out. It became a rubbish firm therefore before the gumment tried to help it. Unfortunately due to poor government there are those who are again, wrongly in my opinion, calling for a general strike. This has nothing to do with whether a business is nationalised, but like last time to a bad government. Inform Al
  • Score: 0

9:58am Sun 28 Oct 12

Linesman says...

loosehead wrote:
Linesman wrote:
Thatcher sold off our nationalised industries, telling us that they would be more efficient and would therefore, be cheaper.

Check your fuel bills.

These privatised companies will tell you that it is the rise in the price of crude oil.

Strange that these efficient, privatised companies can only see the rise in the price of crude, but never see the price drop.

Water? The price goes up because they have to repair pipes because they lose a lot because of leaks. A regular excuse, used every year, the price rises and the leaks continue to be used as an excuse.

So much for efficiency keeping the price down.

On principle, I did not buy any shares in nationalise companies when they were privatised. Why? Because I considered it to be a CON to sell me shares in something that I was already a shareholder in.

Who was responsible for this Cons?

The appropriately named CONServative government.
Are you saying all companies need to be nationalised?
Look at the state of the Old Eastern Germanies car.
Are you saying British Leylands was a great success?
Was it a company to be proud of under Nationalisation?
If so why didn't the unions think so? Why were they continuously on strike?
Even though their company was running at a loss & the tax payer was footing the bill they still went on strike.
Do you not remember the power cuts & the three day weeks when many a company upped sticks & moved abroad?
Do you not remember the bodies on the streets outside morgues or the mountains of rubbish (far worse than a year ago)?
You say things so you say to wind me up but you cannot tell me things are worse now than under Nationalised Industries can you?
If you can exactly where were you living? what were you on?
How surprising that you wish to comment on something written by someone you described as Pond Scum.

In answer to your question, if you look what I have written, I have never claimed that these companies should be nationalised.

I have stated that they should never have been sold off in the first place, or certainly not in the manner that they were sold off.

If money had to be raised by selling off, then the government should have kept the majoritiy share so that it had some control over the actions that the companies took. Instead they chose to only take responsibility for raking in the money, and then losing a considerable amount of it on Black Wednesday.

Heaven only knows where the rest went.

You ask about British Leyland. I seem to recall that virtually every Corporation bus had Leyland on the front.

Have you asked yourself why it was Nationalised in the first place? Not because of political ideology, but because it was failing, and was considered to be vital to the nation. A troubled company with deep-rooted management problems that were not going to be sorted out overnight.

Yes, I remember power cuts and the three day week.

I have also heard forecasts that there will be power cuts this winter if we have a prolonged cold spell and with regard the three day week, there are plenty on the dole now that would be pleased to have a three day week.

No. I do NOT remember bodies being laid out in the streets outside morgues, but I am certain that you will be able to tell me where and when, the same as you have been forthcoming in letting me know where all the £billions raised by the sell-off of nationalised industries went.

You ask what is worse now than when we had nationalised industries.

At no time before the great sell-off did I ever hear of pensioner groups expressing fears that many of them were faced with the decision of whether to Eat or Heat, but it is a question that was asked last winter and is being asked again now.

Heating and Eating are the Basics of life these days. What have we seen? A cut in the heating allowance last winter and not reinstated this winter, and a cut in allowances accompanied by pensions that have not kept pace with inflation.

Perhaps, just perhaps, if North Sea Oil & Gas were not now mainly in foreign ownership, as well as Gas and Electricity companies, fuel prices would not have risen at such an alarming rate, and pensioners and the disabled would not worry about Heating, just worry about Eating.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Thatcher sold off our nationalised industries, telling us that they would be more efficient and would therefore, be cheaper. Check your fuel bills. These privatised companies will tell you that it is the rise in the price of crude oil. Strange that these efficient, privatised companies can only see the rise in the price of crude, but never see the price drop. Water? The price goes up because they have to repair pipes because they lose a lot because of leaks. A regular excuse, used every year, the price rises and the leaks continue to be used as an excuse. So much for efficiency keeping the price down. On principle, I did not buy any shares in nationalise companies when they were privatised. Why? Because I considered it to be a CON to sell me shares in something that I was already a shareholder in. Who was responsible for this Cons? The appropriately named CONServative government.[/p][/quote]Are you saying all companies need to be nationalised? Look at the state of the Old Eastern Germanies car. Are you saying British Leylands was a great success? Was it a company to be proud of under Nationalisation? If so why didn't the unions think so? Why were they continuously on strike? Even though their company was running at a loss & the tax payer was footing the bill they still went on strike. Do you not remember the power cuts & the three day weeks when many a company upped sticks & moved abroad? Do you not remember the bodies on the streets outside morgues or the mountains of rubbish (far worse than a year ago)? You say things so you say to wind me up but you cannot tell me things are worse now than under Nationalised Industries can you? If you can exactly where were you living? what were you on?[/p][/quote]How surprising that you wish to comment on something written by someone you described as Pond Scum. In answer to your question, if you look what I have written, I have never claimed that these companies should be nationalised. I have stated that they should never have been sold off in the first place, or certainly not in the manner that they were sold off. If money had to be raised by selling off, then the government should have kept the majoritiy share so that it had some control over the actions that the companies took. Instead they chose to only take responsibility for raking in the money, and then losing a considerable amount of it on Black Wednesday. Heaven only knows where the rest went. You ask about British Leyland. I seem to recall that virtually every Corporation bus had Leyland on the front. Have you asked yourself why it was Nationalised in the first place? Not because of political ideology, but because it was failing, and was considered to be vital to the nation. A troubled company with deep-rooted management problems that were not going to be sorted out overnight. Yes, I remember power cuts and the three day week. I have also heard forecasts that there will be power cuts this winter if we have a prolonged cold spell and with regard the three day week, there are plenty on the dole now that would be pleased to have a three day week. No. I do NOT remember bodies being laid out in the streets outside morgues, but I am certain that you will be able to tell me where and when, the same as you have been forthcoming in letting me know where all the £billions raised by the sell-off of nationalised industries went. You ask what is worse now than when we had nationalised industries. At no time before the great sell-off did I ever hear of pensioner groups expressing fears that many of them were faced with the decision of whether to Eat or Heat, but it is a question that was asked last winter and is being asked again now. Heating and Eating are the Basics of life these days. What have we seen? A cut in the heating allowance last winter and not reinstated this winter, and a cut in allowances accompanied by pensions that have not kept pace with inflation. Perhaps, just perhaps, if North Sea Oil & Gas were not now mainly in foreign ownership, as well as Gas and Electricity companies, fuel prices would not have risen at such an alarming rate, and pensioners and the disabled would not worry about Heating, just worry about Eating. Linesman
  • Score: 0

12:44pm Sun 28 Oct 12

Linesman says...

It has been announced that Hinchingbrooke Hospital, the first NHS hospital to be privatised by the Tory-led coalition government, is asking to be bailed out after just 5 months having racked up debts of £1.4m.

So much for efficiency.

I wonder how much of that amount is comprised of the dividend paid to the shareholders.

No doubt one of the Tory regulars will be able to explain that, although Labour has not been in power for more than two years, it is still their fault.
It has been announced that Hinchingbrooke Hospital, the first NHS hospital to be privatised by the Tory-led coalition government, is asking to be bailed out after just 5 months having racked up debts of £1.4m. So much for efficiency. I wonder how much of that amount is comprised of the dividend paid to the shareholders. No doubt one of the Tory regulars will be able to explain that, although Labour has not been in power for more than two years, it is still their fault. Linesman
  • Score: 0

3:33pm Sun 28 Oct 12

loosehead says...

Linesman wrote:
It has been announced that Hinchingbrooke Hospital, the first NHS hospital to be privatised by the Tory-led coalition government, is asking to be bailed out after just 5 months having racked up debts of £1.4m.

So much for efficiency.

I wonder how much of that amount is comprised of the dividend paid to the shareholders.

No doubt one of the Tory regulars will be able to explain that, although Labour has not been in power for more than two years, it is still their fault.
Sorry I actually thought I'd try a normal conversation with you but I forgot the only reply you'll get from the left is trying to justify the Winter of descent or the Heath years with all the jobs lost by union action.
I won't reply to a one sided debate which is all anyone gets with you
[quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: It has been announced that Hinchingbrooke Hospital, the first NHS hospital to be privatised by the Tory-led coalition government, is asking to be bailed out after just 5 months having racked up debts of £1.4m. So much for efficiency. I wonder how much of that amount is comprised of the dividend paid to the shareholders. No doubt one of the Tory regulars will be able to explain that, although Labour has not been in power for more than two years, it is still their fault.[/p][/quote]Sorry I actually thought I'd try a normal conversation with you but I forgot the only reply you'll get from the left is trying to justify the Winter of descent or the Heath years with all the jobs lost by union action. I won't reply to a one sided debate which is all anyone gets with you loosehead
  • Score: 0

3:47pm Sun 28 Oct 12

Inform Al says...

When will you two wake up to reality. Every government since Churchill, of whichever colour, has been worse than then one before. I actually thought we couldn't get worse than the Brown government, but have been quickly proved wrong by a PM who is only interested in looking after his old Eton chums. They are even talking about privatising the roads now which will probably get plebs like me off the road, but will end up with the transportation of our food costing more. Just to make C'moron's friends happy.
When will you two wake up to reality. Every government since Churchill, of whichever colour, has been worse than then one before. I actually thought we couldn't get worse than the Brown government, but have been quickly proved wrong by a PM who is only interested in looking after his old Eton chums. They are even talking about privatising the roads now which will probably get plebs like me off the road, but will end up with the transportation of our food costing more. Just to make C'moron's friends happy. Inform Al
  • Score: 0

7:42pm Sun 28 Oct 12

Linesman says...

loosehead wrote:
Linesman wrote:
It has been announced that Hinchingbrooke Hospital, the first NHS hospital to be privatised by the Tory-led coalition government, is asking to be bailed out after just 5 months having racked up debts of £1.4m.

So much for efficiency.

I wonder how much of that amount is comprised of the dividend paid to the shareholders.

No doubt one of the Tory regulars will be able to explain that, although Labour has not been in power for more than two years, it is still their fault.
Sorry I actually thought I'd try a normal conversation with you but I forgot the only reply you'll get from the left is trying to justify the Winter of descent or the Heath years with all the jobs lost by union action.
I won't reply to a one sided debate which is all anyone gets with you
A normal conversation?

Like calling someone Pond Scum?

I'm afraid that what appears to be normal for you, is far from normal for me.

As I believe I have mentioned before, I was serving abroad from 1976 until 1979 so have no personal experience of that time in UK. My understanding is that the Callaghan government attempted a Social Contract with the Unions (which you often claim run the Labour Party) that was not readily accepted.

The aim of the exercise was to save workers jobs, which were under threat because of inflation.

This was done by negotiation, not by government laws, and the dispute, according to reports, was settled in the February/March period.

This 'Winter of Discontent' led to Thatcher becoming Prime Minister, whose campaign slogan was, 'Labour is not working' showing long queues of unemployed workers.

Under Thatcher, the long queues of unemployed shown on her posters, became fact at the Labour Exchanges.

Her job was saved by the Falklands War.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: It has been announced that Hinchingbrooke Hospital, the first NHS hospital to be privatised by the Tory-led coalition government, is asking to be bailed out after just 5 months having racked up debts of £1.4m. So much for efficiency. I wonder how much of that amount is comprised of the dividend paid to the shareholders. No doubt one of the Tory regulars will be able to explain that, although Labour has not been in power for more than two years, it is still their fault.[/p][/quote]Sorry I actually thought I'd try a normal conversation with you but I forgot the only reply you'll get from the left is trying to justify the Winter of descent or the Heath years with all the jobs lost by union action. I won't reply to a one sided debate which is all anyone gets with you[/p][/quote]A normal conversation? Like calling someone Pond Scum? I'm afraid that what appears to be normal for you, is far from normal for me. As I believe I have mentioned before, I was serving abroad from 1976 until 1979 so have no personal experience of that time in UK. My understanding is that the Callaghan government attempted a Social Contract with the Unions (which you often claim run the Labour Party) that was not readily accepted. The aim of the exercise was to save workers jobs, which were under threat because of inflation. This was done by negotiation, not by government laws, and the dispute, according to reports, was settled in the February/March period. This 'Winter of Discontent' led to Thatcher becoming Prime Minister, whose campaign slogan was, 'Labour is not working' showing long queues of unemployed workers. Under Thatcher, the long queues of unemployed shown on her posters, became fact at the Labour Exchanges. Her job was saved by the Falklands War. Linesman
  • Score: 0

9:22pm Sun 28 Oct 12

loosehead says...

Linesman wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Linesman wrote:
It has been announced that Hinchingbrooke Hospital, the first NHS hospital to be privatised by the Tory-led coalition government, is asking to be bailed out after just 5 months having racked up debts of £1.4m.

So much for efficiency.

I wonder how much of that amount is comprised of the dividend paid to the shareholders.

No doubt one of the Tory regulars will be able to explain that, although Labour has not been in power for more than two years, it is still their fault.
Sorry I actually thought I'd try a normal conversation with you but I forgot the only reply you'll get from the left is trying to justify the Winter of descent or the Heath years with all the jobs lost by union action.
I won't reply to a one sided debate which is all anyone gets with you
A normal conversation?

Like calling someone Pond Scum?

I'm afraid that what appears to be normal for you, is far from normal for me.

As I believe I have mentioned before, I was serving abroad from 1976 until 1979 so have no personal experience of that time in UK. My understanding is that the Callaghan government attempted a Social Contract with the Unions (which you often claim run the Labour Party) that was not readily accepted.

The aim of the exercise was to save workers jobs, which were under threat because of inflation.

This was done by negotiation, not by government laws, and the dispute, according to reports, was settled in the February/March period.

This 'Winter of Discontent' led to Thatcher becoming Prime Minister, whose campaign slogan was, 'Labour is not working' showing long queues of unemployed workers.

Under Thatcher, the long queues of unemployed shown on her posters, became fact at the Labour Exchanges.

Her job was saved by the Falklands War.
It was unacceptable to Arthur Scargill or king arthur as he liked to be called.
John Prescott was hung over the side of Southampton docks by dockies for the way he sold out the Seamen & look what he achieved in your Labour Party.
Mandelson made a deal with Kraft lent our money to them to buy Cadburys & immediately they said they'd signed no such deal so a corrupt politician didn't get them to sign that condition as part of the loan agreement.
he then was no longer in Parliament but was making decisions that would effect this country in the EU?
If you weren't here in 76 if you weren't being paid three days pay a week if you never saw how the Dockies wanted to have only dockies working in at least half of the town & they went on strike to achieve just that but failed.
if you weren't around when a motor company was saved from bankruptcy & who's vehicles were becoming rubbish & old hat & were in no way paying for itself yet was on strike nearly every day how can you ridicule people who were?
I was 19 in 76 I( had my first chance to vote in the EEC ( not the EU) referendum where foodv shortages were used by the Yes campaign to get housewifes(mothers) to vote for the EEC.
I saw the conditions of going in holding wages but increasing food prices I warned against it but the people were conned.
I hate Ted Heath for that but the Union actions that were to come under a government I voted for ( LABOUR) told me this should never happen again & under any Labour government since this starts to happen.
I vote Tory & I wasn't & I voted against Maggie but with an open mind like mine I watched her do exactly what she had promised to do & our last council did just that.
Labour lied & used the Unions muscle to get to power so I now know the one party I will vote for & defend until I die & I hope our leader is as strong as Maggie if the lunatic left of the Union movement try to bring this country to it's knees again.
you told me what you think of me you ridiculed me so sorry I called you pond scum? well I won't apologise for giving back what I receive
[quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: It has been announced that Hinchingbrooke Hospital, the first NHS hospital to be privatised by the Tory-led coalition government, is asking to be bailed out after just 5 months having racked up debts of £1.4m. So much for efficiency. I wonder how much of that amount is comprised of the dividend paid to the shareholders. No doubt one of the Tory regulars will be able to explain that, although Labour has not been in power for more than two years, it is still their fault.[/p][/quote]Sorry I actually thought I'd try a normal conversation with you but I forgot the only reply you'll get from the left is trying to justify the Winter of descent or the Heath years with all the jobs lost by union action. I won't reply to a one sided debate which is all anyone gets with you[/p][/quote]A normal conversation? Like calling someone Pond Scum? I'm afraid that what appears to be normal for you, is far from normal for me. As I believe I have mentioned before, I was serving abroad from 1976 until 1979 so have no personal experience of that time in UK. My understanding is that the Callaghan government attempted a Social Contract with the Unions (which you often claim run the Labour Party) that was not readily accepted. The aim of the exercise was to save workers jobs, which were under threat because of inflation. This was done by negotiation, not by government laws, and the dispute, according to reports, was settled in the February/March period. This 'Winter of Discontent' led to Thatcher becoming Prime Minister, whose campaign slogan was, 'Labour is not working' showing long queues of unemployed workers. Under Thatcher, the long queues of unemployed shown on her posters, became fact at the Labour Exchanges. Her job was saved by the Falklands War.[/p][/quote]It was unacceptable to Arthur Scargill or king arthur as he liked to be called. John Prescott was hung over the side of Southampton docks by dockies for the way he sold out the Seamen & look what he achieved in your Labour Party. Mandelson made a deal with Kraft lent our money to them to buy Cadburys & immediately they said they'd signed no such deal so a corrupt politician didn't get them to sign that condition as part of the loan agreement. he then was no longer in Parliament but was making decisions that would effect this country in the EU? If you weren't here in 76 if you weren't being paid three days pay a week if you never saw how the Dockies wanted to have only dockies working in at least half of the town & they went on strike to achieve just that but failed. if you weren't around when a motor company was saved from bankruptcy & who's vehicles were becoming rubbish & old hat & were in no way paying for itself yet was on strike nearly every day how can you ridicule people who were? I was 19 in 76 I( had my first chance to vote in the EEC ( not the EU) referendum where foodv shortages were used by the Yes campaign to get housewifes(mothers) to vote for the EEC. I saw the conditions of going in holding wages but increasing food prices I warned against it but the people were conned. I hate Ted Heath for that but the Union actions that were to come under a government I voted for ( LABOUR) told me this should never happen again & under any Labour government since this starts to happen. I vote Tory & I wasn't & I voted against Maggie but with an open mind like mine I watched her do exactly what she had promised to do & our last council did just that. Labour lied & used the Unions muscle to get to power so I now know the one party I will vote for & defend until I die & I hope our leader is as strong as Maggie if the lunatic left of the Union movement try to bring this country to it's knees again. you told me what you think of me you ridiculed me so sorry I called you pond scum? well I won't apologise for giving back what I receive loosehead
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree