Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
How MPs voted on the Save Our Forests debate
On Wednesday last, MPs's voted on whether or not to demand a rethink of the government's plans to sell our forests.
This vote was not binding - it was an "opposition day debate".
You can see how your MP voted here
In short, Lynne Featherstone voted yes to the policy as it stands and David Lammy voted no to the policy as it stands.
UPDATED with links to how to write to your MP, access the original debate in Parliament and previous discussions on this topic
contact your MP to discuss their vote with them, via the Write to Them site
If you don't want to filter your knowledge of how your MP is voting through a campaigning site, you can access the user friendly site They Work for You,
For those who wish to access the debate on this issue in full so that you can be more fully informed on how parliament sees the issue you can find it on this page
You will also find all previous recent discussion on the site on this issue, by clicking on the tag forests beneath this post
Tags for Forum Posts: forests
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by StephenBln on
-
Privatisation is of course also known as running every thing down to the lowest common denominator.. he who is the cheapest, gets the job.. (do it on the cheap culture) Oh, yes the Brits are very good at that, but that's not the way to run a decent (for the employees) or safe (for the passengers) railway service.
Investment into national infrastructure in the UK is lamentably low, compared to other western European nations - and it shows.. The British Railway system is always held up as 'The way NOT to run a railway' in Europe..
And to try and compare the nationalised analog GPO times with today's telephone market is ludicrous. A nationalised telephone company would also have had to introduce new systems.
But of course, nobody mentioned the other utilities where prices/profits have sky-rocketed..
-
Permalink Reply by Mr Growbag on
-
I've just been playing with Google's News Search and was inspired to do some quick research to see if British Rail prior to privatisation really was a golden age for the railways.
However, for some reason, Google only seems to have collected articles about strikes, packed trains and angry commuters. Maybe someone should write to them.
-
Permalink Reply by Liz on
-
I think you have missed my point. That BR had problems is not under dispute. That wholesale privatisation delivered the answer to the problems as it was supposed to is what I dispute. As yet to this sceptic, all you've proved is that it was bad before and Will has had a few nice journeys. Was that ever under dispute? I didn't say all was well and BR was perfect, but I don't see the evidence that the solution to the problems has been delivered by privitisation.
As yet, I have seen nothing that persuades me, although my experience of trains is very wide being a non-driver and frequent traveller to the North and East, they are usually much closer to B2s than Will's
We certainly do not have the kind of service that you find in France or Germany and no chance of it any soon. Don't believe me, believe the authority on transport Christian Woolmar, that the current attitudes to public transport by government will not help improve our service one bit. Oh and I would listen to Steve on the subject on transport, he knows more than google about it.
As to accountability, this government recently rescinded on its promise to make NetworkRail open to FOIs. Why since they are so keen on transparency in other areas like council finances (which I support incidentally)?
As to other situations raised, I do not have much faith in councils negotiating with private companies, they always seem to come off worse and they do often cock up. There are alternatives to rapacious asset stripping companies or bumbling councils: mutuals, co-operatives, social enterprises, community takeovers, all thrown into the pot before the elections, but as yet not getting the support they need to be successful because people can only think in terms of public/private.
Hard facts please, not glib comments about the bad old days of the 70s (which were more complex than modern politicians of any stripe would have you believe) or steam trains. This sceptic remains sceptical.
-
-
Links to stats please, Will. You are doing better with this comment than dismissing my reservations about the system with cosy comments about steam trains and railway children (both before my time)
You challenge me and I admit I base my conclusions on media reporting which I am happy to admit is not terribly reliable, and yet you ask me to take on trust what you say. Always happy to read evidence.
Some observations:
"TOCs such as Connex (now Veolia) which supposedly successfully run these amazing services in Europe failed miserably in the UK" why was this? Do we have a reason for that.
Network Rail: a half arsed attempt at nationalisation which gives taxpayers money to an unaccountable company - a public private partnership that takes from the public purse and does not deliver value for money. What to do with it? Again Woolmar provides an excellent overview which is highly critical of the last Labour administration. Woolmar does believe that transport should be subsidised but in an integrated system (not the bitty system we have now) similar to those more successful railway systems across the world. If anyone was guilty of railway children nostalgia it was harking back to the days of the old Rail services by the original privitising admin, without considering the problems.
No mention was made of children's inheritances from me, Will. The greatest gift this admin could give my kids is an integrated, affordable, well functioning public transport system as part of an overall policy on dealing with climate change and the scarcity of oil in their future.
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
Oh Mr G, if there was some kind of Meldrew type award for selective evidence gathering on the Internets then you would have it. Shameless.
-
Permalink Reply by Birdy_Too on
-
Virgin were that good that they lost the franchise to the south west?
I travel on Virgin trains too (in fact many operators), many times a month and you think the trains are good, do a intercity journey on an ICE or Thalyis train, Virgin are cheap (not price) and naff in comparison and the European price is far cheaper too. The major stumbling block for me is the price of the tickets, even more so now as the ConDem government have lifted the cap to do what they wish.
The price of tickets has rocketed even if bought twelve weeks ahead of travel. It's all good and well to say fifty quid is cheap up to the north, not for many people as you use to be able to get to Preston for around £25. It's far cheaper to use your car or fly, where's the incentive?
For me privatisation means, lowest possible service, most amount of profits for a few and selling off our children's inheritance. The sale of these forests with conditions is only the start. I am not anti privatisation but there are core services and properties that should remain in the public domain. If you want to sell off the Royal Family, feel free.
-
-
I don't think I said anything about an inheritance but if anyone can offer me one I'm happy to put it towards some forest (although an allotment might take priority). :p
Have to say that I hadn't really envisaged my earlier post turning into a thread on the evils or otherwise of privatisation. In fact I was careful to make clear that I don't really know whether selling forests is good, bad or other in my first post.
The only point I want to make is that a controversial issue like this should be presented dispassionately and reported accurately. Starting a thread which simply requotes the views of a campaigning site as if it is both of these things seems misleading to me. So, Liz, thanks for changing the post to make it more balanced.
-
-
Well, since I linked to the site and since people were able to see that it was a campaigning site, I suppose I didn't think much about it, particularly as it was a post that I did fairly quickly while cooking lunch for the small one.
Thank goodness you're here to keep me on my toes eh? ;)
-
-
Well, it appears I should stop travelling up and down the country and to the East and get myself to Merseyside since performance in the west of the country is much higher :0
What are your thoughts on Woolmar's criticisms of the current admin and the higher fares policy plus the DoT controls on buying new stock btw, that I linked to above? Surely, if people can't afford to use trains or companies can't buy new stock, safety improvements or punctuality targets met laudable though they are, will not stop the desertion of the public rail system by customers?
-
Permalink Reply by John D on
-
I suspect that there are many more rail journeys today than there were in the days of British Rail. If so performance has improved. I'll try to find figures.
edit to add ( it was in Will's link )
This record performance was delivered with well over a million more trains per year running on the rail network today compared to the days of Railtrack and British Rail. Network Rail and the train operators run more trains across Great Britain than are run in France and 60% more than operate in Italy. The UK's 24,000 trains per-day is also more than Spain, Switzerland, The Netherlands, Portugal and Norway combined.
-
-
John D wrote: Network Rail and the train operators run more trains across Great Britain than are run in France and 60% more than operate in Italy.
The majority of which are South of the Thames commuter trains which have to run due to the lack of investment (no Underground) and which are compensated by the Metro & RER in Paris which are no doubt not included in the figures quoted....
Statistics can be made to prove any argument..
Are we talking 'proper' railways here.. or commuter runs? Or what in Germany is classed S-Bahn
-
-
-
The sole basis for any private company is to make money, preferably lots of for the shareholders. Service is secondary and when you have exclusive rights (no choice) to a particular route then that isn't competition as the pro-privatisation folk would like to tell you.
Well journey times have been cut and punctuality improved, but if the price of travel is so expensive and beyond the reach of normal people, then surely it's failing? The price of tickets on trains is very expensive compared to Europe as is the standard of the stock, why?
I am sure your image of the privately owned train operators, ticket hikes and overcrowded conditions would be very different to the travelling public. I love travelling on trains and have done all over Europe, we are near the bottom of the pile.
Different ideologies I suppose, hey ho!
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
