Many people on the left seem to think that the problem is that the Tories are in power. I actually think the problem is that in many ways they aren't in power, merely in office. Cameron, Osborne and Clegg sit there like lemmings and expect the market to work its magic. Anyone who's actually paid attention to the British economy over a lifetime might think they'd be a problem with this. We have an executive class who's main talent in self-reward be it through buying back shares, paying dividends or whatever cunning scheme they can find to remunerate themselves at the expense of investment. Meanwhile much of the country remains reliant on Victorian infrastructure and we're left having to go to EDF and the Chinese government(!) to build a new generation of nuclear power stations. But the truth is we are far too supine. We may not respect the fat cats much any more but neither do we demand change.
On energy the issue isn't just with Cameron or Clegg, but with the poor level of expertise in Parliament. I literally can't understand the decision to pay the French and Chinese billions so they can saddle us with old technology for the next 50 years with dwindling Uranium supplies while both nations are investing in fourth and fifth generation reactors for their domestic markets.
If the government is dead set on spending £30bn on nuclear power, it would be better off incorporating a new company, selling some bonds and begin investing in molten salt reactors for delivery in 10-12 years. We have the expertise in the country and we have the graduates, what we don't have is the competence in Parliament for a long term view. Gas in the near term and fourth generation molten salt reactors in the medium term and laser fusion in the long term.
Another area in relation to energy policy is why we are spunking billions of pounds building a white elephant Tokomak in northern France when the Americans have achieved real fusion power for less than a tenth of the cost using lasers.
Energy is the one policy area for which I would bother being an MP. The current policy position is basically stupid, old nuclear power, old coal plants, subsidies for stupid wind power or even more laughable solar power.
One of the consequences of having not a single member of the Government with a degree in Science, Mathematics or Engineering.
@MaxPB The original idea for "off shoring" was all the work of your "blessed lady M" Make the country wealthy by allowing capital to "fly free" And fly it did....to Panama, Switzerland, and any roosting place outside the UK it could find. It isn't the Conservatives or New Labour I argue against, it is the mind numbing irrationality of believing the wealthy or business give flying frogs fornication about the UK.
Just hooey Mr S
offshoring had nothing to do with Thatcher. It only became possible post 1989 when the USSR collapsed and the global economy opened up.
Most offshoring in industry took place under Blair and was pushed by management consultants looking for fat fees.
@Alanbrooke British manufacturing boomed under Maggie? Or was it more that money came in through the service industries, and the fact we were able to offer clients ever more interesting ways to shift money around? A nice bit of sub-prime sir, and perhaps an expensive wine to go along with it?
Just an aside: people blithely assuming one side would win an EU referendum might recall Yes outperforming expectations and the defeat of the first effort at Lisbon in Ireland [which, alas, obediently rolled over the second time].
I would expect In to win, but Out would not be a dead duck of a campaign.
The fear I would have is that an In would be used as an excuse by EU-phile leftists to say that the British have given a green light to yet more surrendering of sovereignty.
You'd probably get a Scottish situation where "in" wins then everyone starts voting for UKIP, LOL!
I think I'd be very inclined to vote OUT if I was given the chance.
As would I - I have completely changed my view since the 90's when I thought the tories were mad on this.
I did not realize so many of the polls we read in the newspapers are coming from polling companies that have only begun since the general election. Perhaps we should not read everything at face value!
Comments
The American system has created theoretical power, which is not the same thing?
offshoring had nothing to do with Thatcher. It only became possible post 1989 when the USSR collapsed and the global economy opened up.
Most offshoring in industry took place under Blair and was pushed by management consultants looking for fat fees.
British manufacturing boomed under Maggie? Or was it more that money came in through the service industries, and the fact we were able to offer clients ever more interesting ways to shift money around?
A nice bit of sub-prime sir, and perhaps an expensive wine to go along with it?
"Do HR departments generally know their arse from their elbow ?"
No, but they do have a questionnaire and a wonderful algorithm that is guaranteed to find it (possibly)