Jeremy Corbyn

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Jeremy Corbyn

Visit the current forum | Forum Rules

Page 51 of 279 < 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 >

legaleagle 23 Sep 15 4.05pm
Quote matt_himself at 23 Sep 2015 1.17pm Face it, you are ideologically wedded to the concept of a nationalised rail network without being prepared to face the reality that renationalisation is illegal under your precious EU law, the cost is prohibitive ................................................ It is a myth often spouted by those anti-state ownership of the railways that EU law prevents the vast majority of the passenger railway system being under national ownership as opposed to private sector. EU law does not require railways must be fully privatised. Nor is there a requirement for railway infrastructure to be in private ownership or a ban on train services being operated by a government-owned enterprise.The main caveat is simply that international services (we hardly have any) and freight services be open for competition. Some examples: In France, both the train operator SNCF and the infrastructure operator RFF are state-owned. In Germany the state-owned operator Deutsche Bahn runs 90 per cent of passenger services. In Italy, the state-owned railway company FS Holding owns both the national rail infrastructure manager RFI and train-operating company Trenitalia. The Spanish railway is almost entirely in public ownership. Even in Sweden, the first country in Europe to take steps towards privatisation, the state-owned rail operator SJ operates more than 80 per cent of all passenger services. As for the "cost",the primary issue is dealt with if "renationalisation" takes place in stages when an existing franchise expires.Also,as for cost,it is worth reflecting that from 2011 private operators paid out a total of £183m in dividends to shareholders, with Northern Rail – the recipient of £669m in subsidy – paying £27m.Overall the state underwrote these £183m of paid out profits with £3.8bn of subsidies.

legaleagle

23 Sep 15 4.05pm

Quote matt_himself at 23 Sep 2015 1.17pm

................................................

It is a myth often spouted by those anti-state ownership of the railways that EU law prevents the vast majority of the passenger railway system being under national ownership as opposed to private sector.

EU law does not require railways must be fully privatised. Nor is there a requirement for railway infrastructure to be in private ownership or a ban on train services being operated by a government-owned enterprise.The main caveat is simply that international services (we hardly have any) and freight services be open for competition.

Some examples:

In France, both the train operator SNCF and the infrastructure operator RFF are state-owned.
In Germany the state-owned operator Deutsche Bahn runs 90 per cent of passenger services.
In Italy, the state-owned railway company FS Holding owns both the national rail infrastructure manager RFI and train-operating company Trenitalia.
The Spanish railway is almost entirely in public ownership.
Even in Sweden, the first country in Europe to take steps towards privatisation, the state-owned rail operator SJ operates more than 80 per cent of all passenger services.

As for the "cost",the primary issue is dealt with if "renationalisation" takes place in stages when an existing franchise expires.Also,as for cost,it is worth reflecting that from 2011 private operators paid out a total of £183m in dividends to shareholders, with Northern Rail – the recipient of £669m in subsidy – paying £27m.Overall the state underwrote these £183m of paid out profits with £3.8bn of subsidies.

jamiemartin721 Reading 23 Sep 15 4.16pm
Quote matt_himself at 23 Sep 2015 1.17pm Quote Kermit8 at 23 Sep 2015 1.04pm Quote matt_himself at 23 Sep 2015 12.21pm Quote Kermit8 at 23 Sep 2015 9.25am Wouldn't have to pay shareholder dividends or fat cat bonuses for failure either. Could you provide some evidence of these fat cat bonuses you speak of? And explain how they are above the industry norm and delivering punitive service for rail users? Now, I didn't say they were above "the industry norm", did I? Anyway, although a couple of years old this report in The Daily Telegraph gives a good summary. [Link] You may like to research 'customer satisfaction' levels too. Seems that 25% of their commuter/business clients are 'dissatisfied' with their performance these last 12 months and most probably wondering why the company bosses make what they make? Edited by Kermit8 (23 Sep 2015 1.06pm) Fat Cat as a term would suggest that payments made are above the norm. They imply that that recipient is receiving money for doing nothing or is receiving excessively more money than they are due. Looking at the figures in your two year old report, most of the figures presented (GBP 100,000 to GBP 200,000) seem within the norm for directors and executives. The bigger figures of the CEO's of companies have their salaries approved by shareholders. Nice attempt to swerve and introduce yet more emotion over substance with the satisfaction issue. 25% dissatisfaction doesn't appear that bad at face value. Your last part is emotive guff. In response to Jamies point about civil servants, firstly there are many civil servants earning the same band of GBP 100,000 to GBP 200,000. And, again, where does Jamie think all the rail/transport savvy civil servants who could run a nationalised rail network are now? They are working for the rail companies and they will earn the same regardless of whether they work for the private or public sector. Face it, you are ideologically wedded to the concept of a nationalised rail network without being prepared to face the reality that renationalisation is illegal under your precious EU law, the cost is prohibitive and it is hard to see how, given that the budget for investment would be roughly the same as present, how services could be much improved. No one has provided a convincing argyment for this, just emotive blackmail and ideological nonsense. I'm not entirely convinced on the idea of actually paying to nationalize the railways is a good idea. I don't really think it seems very economical at the likely costs, within our 'reality'. That said the key aspect of executive earnings isn't salary, but bonuses and equity in terms of shares etc which isn't really a factor for senior civil servants. I don't really have an issue with someone earning a salary of 100-200k. Its a lot, but its not excessive. Its when they're also taking home 200-800k a year on top in bonuses just for doing their job. Most executives aren't actually qualified or experienced in running a railway (if any are), they tend to come from other executive positions at different companies. Arguably the same applies to Senior civil servants who typically will have worked their way up their career ladder through civil service positions and even from the private sector. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]

jamiemartin721

Reading 23 Sep 15 4.16pm

Quote matt_himself at 23 Sep 2015 1.17pm

Quote Kermit8 at 23 Sep 2015 1.04pm

Quote matt_himself at 23 Sep 2015 12.21pm

Quote Kermit8 at 23 Sep 2015 9.25am

Wouldn't have to pay shareholder dividends or fat cat bonuses for failure either.

Could you provide some evidence of these fat cat bonuses you speak of? And explain how they are above the industry norm and delivering punitive service for rail users?

Now, I didn't say they were above "the industry norm", did I? Anyway, although a couple of years old this report in The Daily Telegraph gives a good summary. [Link]

You may like to research 'customer satisfaction' levels too. Seems that 25% of their commuter/business clients are 'dissatisfied' with their performance these last 12 months and most probably wondering why the company bosses make what they make?

Edited by Kermit8 (23 Sep 2015 1.06pm)

Fat Cat as a term would suggest that payments made are above the norm. They imply that that recipient is receiving money for doing nothing or is receiving excessively more money than they are due.

Looking at the figures in your two year old report, most of the figures presented (GBP 100,000 to GBP 200,000) seem within the norm for directors and executives.

The bigger figures of the CEO's of companies have their salaries approved by shareholders.

Nice attempt to swerve and introduce yet more emotion over substance with the satisfaction issue. 25% dissatisfaction doesn't appear that bad at face value. Your last part is emotive guff.

In response to Jamies point about civil servants, firstly there are many civil servants earning the same band of GBP 100,000 to GBP 200,000. And, again, where does Jamie think all the rail/transport savvy civil servants who could run a nationalised rail network are now? They are working for the rail companies and they will earn the same regardless of whether they work for the private or public sector.

Face it, you are ideologically wedded to the concept of a nationalised rail network without being prepared to face the reality that renationalisation is illegal under your precious EU law, the cost is prohibitive and it is hard to see how, given that the budget for investment would be roughly the same as present, how services could be much improved. No one has provided a convincing argyment for this, just emotive blackmail and ideological nonsense.

I'm not entirely convinced on the idea of actually paying to nationalize the railways is a good idea. I don't really think it seems very economical at the likely costs, within our 'reality'.

That said the key aspect of executive earnings isn't salary, but bonuses and equity in terms of shares etc which isn't really a factor for senior civil servants. I don't really have an issue with someone earning a salary of 100-200k. Its a lot, but its not excessive. Its when they're also taking home 200-800k a year on top in bonuses just for doing their job.

Most executives aren't actually qualified or experienced in running a railway (if any are), they tend to come from other executive positions at different companies. Arguably the same applies to Senior civil servants who typically will have worked their way up their career ladder through civil service positions and even from the private sector.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

matt_himself Matataland 23 Sep 15 8.33pm
Quote legaleagle at 23 Sep 2015 4.05pm Quote matt_himself at 23 Sep 2015 1.17pm Face it, you are ideologically wedded to the concept of a nationalised rail network without being prepared to face the reality that renationalisation is illegal under your precious EU law, the cost is prohibitive ................................................ It is a myth often spouted by those anti-state ownership of the railways that EU law prevents the vast majority of the passenger railway system being under national ownership as opposed to private sector. EU law does not require railways must be fully privatised. Nor is there a requirement for railway infrastructure to be in private ownership or a ban on train services being operated by a government-owned enterprise.The main caveat is simply that international services (we hardly have any) and freight services be open for competition. Some examples: In France, both the train operator SNCF and the infrastructure operator RFF are state-owned. In Germany the state-owned operator Deutsche Bahn runs 90 per cent of passenger services. In Italy, the state-owned railway company FS Holding owns both the national rail infrastructure manager RFI and train-operating company Trenitalia. The Spanish railway is almost entirely in public ownership. Even in Sweden, the first country in Europe to take steps towards privatisation, the state-owned rail operator SJ operates more than 80 per cent of all passenger services. As for the "cost",the primary issue is dealt with if "renationalisation" takes place in stages when an existing franchise expires.Also,as for cost,it is worth reflecting that from 2011 private operators paid out a total of £183m in dividends to shareholders, with Northern Rail – the recipient of £669m in subsidy – paying £27m.Overall the state underwrote these £183m of paid out profits with £3.8bn of subsidies. Please. I provided evidence from a former minister that re nationalisation was against EU law and you have produced unsubstantiated stuff to 'rebut' this. Please provide your sources. "That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

matt_himself

Matataland 23 Sep 15 8.33pm

Quote legaleagle at 23 Sep 2015 4.05pm

Quote matt_himself at 23 Sep 2015 1.17pm

................................................

Some examples:

Please. I provided evidence from a former minister that re nationalisation was against EU law and you have produced unsubstantiated stuff to 'rebut' this.

Please provide your sources.

"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

Kermit8 Hevon 23 Sep 15 8.52pm
The pertinent question is, is it an insurmountable problem this EU railway law? Some important peeps who looked into it say it is and some other important peeps who have looked into it say it isn't. I find it very difficult to believe the former due to the fact that we have ridden roughshod over the EU since 1985 regarding our railways anyway so don't see it as a sudden problem for the future. And do your own research for evidence before you ask mr H as I did. Big chest and massive boobs [Link]

Kermit8

Hevon 23 Sep 15 8.52pm

The pertinent question is, is it an insurmountable problem this EU railway law? Some important peeps who looked into it say it is and some other important peeps who have looked into it say it isn't.

I find it very difficult to believe the former due to the fact that we have ridden roughshod over the EU since 1985 regarding our railways anyway so don't see it as a sudden problem for the future.

And do your own research for evidence before you ask mr H as I did.

Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]

matt_himself Matataland 23 Sep 15 9.52pm
Quote Kermit8 at 23 Sep 2015 8.52pm The pertinent question is, is it an insurmountable problem this EU railway law? Some important peeps who looked into it say it is and some other important peeps who have looked into it say it isn't. I find it very difficult to believe the former due to the fact that we have ridden roughshod over the EU since 1985 regarding our railways anyway so don't see it as a sudden problem for the future. And do your own research for evidence before you ask mr H as I did. I have answered yours, Sedlescombe and JamieTalk's questions. As you cannot provide evidence for the 'renationalisation is legal' position, none I have seen, I note you have dropped the emotive 'fat cat' talk and have started attacking me. Despite the fact that I have answered the questions put to me. I can only come to the conclusion that your 'ideals' are concept only and are not costed or based on any conventional fulcrum. They are, merely pie-in-the-sky. They are ideals based upon your myopic, detached from reality existence. By the way, tonight was tops. Shame you couldn't be here to enjoy it. Never mind, you can console yourself with the pride of being 'Scottish' despite being from Croydon and living in Devon and have educated so many people. So many people. Edited by matt_himself (23 Sep 2015 9.55pm) "That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

matt_himself

Matataland 23 Sep 15 9.52pm

Quote Kermit8 at 23 Sep 2015 8.52pm

The pertinent question is, is it an insurmountable problem this EU railway law? Some important peeps who looked into it say it is and some other important peeps who have looked into it say it isn't.

I find it very difficult to believe the former due to the fact that we have ridden roughshod over the EU since 1985 regarding our railways anyway so don't see it as a sudden problem for the future.

And do your own research for evidence before you ask mr H as I did.

I have answered yours, Sedlescombe and JamieTalk's questions.

As you cannot provide evidence for the 'renationalisation is legal' position, none I have seen, I note you have dropped the emotive 'fat cat' talk and have started attacking me. Despite the fact that I have answered the questions put to me.

I can only come to the conclusion that your 'ideals' are concept only and are not costed or based on any conventional fulcrum. They are, merely pie-in-the-sky. They are ideals based upon your myopic, detached from reality existence.

By the way, tonight was tops. Shame you couldn't be here to enjoy it. Never mind, you can console yourself with the pride of being 'Scottish' despite being from Croydon and living in Devon and have educated so many people. So many people.

Edited by matt_himself (23 Sep 2015 9.55pm)

"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

NickinOX Sailing country. 23 Sep 15 10.02pm
I don't know who is right or wrong about the legality of re-nationalizing the railroads, but I do remember British Rail and it was dreadful. Late, dirty, crowded, and much more expensive than the bus. The food was crap and the staff were invariably rude. The current railways have some good companies and some poor ones, but when I travel in the UK the trains are light years ahead of where they were under government ownership. That being said, I have often had better experiences with the trains in Germany, Switzerland, France, and sometimes even Italy. Thus, to me, it is not so much the problem of nationalization as to why nationalization ends up being so crap when combined with a British work force. If you come to a fork in the road, take it.

NickinOX

Sailing country. 23 Sep 15 10.02pm

I don't know who is right or wrong about the legality of re-nationalizing the railroads, but I do remember British Rail and it was dreadful. Late, dirty, crowded, and much more expensive than the bus. The food was crap and the staff were invariably rude.

The current railways have some good companies and some poor ones, but when I travel in the UK the trains are light years ahead of where they were under government ownership.

That being said, I have often had better experiences with the trains in Germany, Switzerland, France, and sometimes even Italy. Thus, to me, it is not so much the problem of nationalization as to why nationalization ends up being so crap when combined with a British work force.

If you come to a fork in the road, take it.

Kermit8 Hevon 23 Sep 15 10.26pm
Quote matt_himself at 23 Sep 2015 9.52pm Quote Kermit8 at 23 Sep 2015 8.52pm The pertinent question is, is it an insurmountable problem this EU railway law? Some important peeps who looked into it say it is and some other important peeps who have looked into it say it isn't. I find it very difficult to believe the former due to the fact that we have ridden roughshod over the EU since 1985 regarding our railways anyway so don't see it as a sudden problem for the future. And do your own research for evidence before you ask mr H as I did. I have answered yours, Sedlescombe and JamieTalk's questions. As you cannot provide evidence for the 'renationalisation is legal' position, none I have seen, I note you have dropped the emotive 'fat cat' talk and have started attacking me. Despite the fact that I have answered the questions put to me. I can only come to the conclusion that your 'ideals' are concept only and are not costed or based on any conventional fulcrum. They are, merely pie-in-the-sky. They are ideals based upon your myopic, detached from reality existence. By the way, tonight was tops. Shame you couldn't be here to enjoy it. Never mind, you can console yourself with the pride of being 'Scottish' despite being from Croydon and living in Devon and have educated so many people. So many people. Edited by matt_himself (23 Sep 2015 9.55pm) The new Hol you didn't last very long. Knew it couldn't last. Welcome back you little tiger. Grrrrrrr. Big chest and massive boobs [Link]

Kermit8

Hevon 23 Sep 15 10.26pm

Quote matt_himself at 23 Sep 2015 9.52pm

Quote Kermit8 at 23 Sep 2015 8.52pm

The pertinent question is, is it an insurmountable problem this EU railway law? Some important peeps who looked into it say it is and some other important peeps who have looked into it say it isn't.

I find it very difficult to believe the former due to the fact that we have ridden roughshod over the EU since 1985 regarding our railways anyway so don't see it as a sudden problem for the future.

And do your own research for evidence before you ask mr H as I did.

I have answered yours, Sedlescombe and JamieTalk's questions.

Edited by matt_himself (23 Sep 2015 9.55pm)

The new Hol you didn't last very long. Knew it couldn't last. Welcome back you little tiger. Grrrrrrr.

Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]

oldcodger 23 Sep 15 10.30pm
I'm pretty sure I'll find a way of getting ripped off regardless of who runs our trains! Edited by oldcodger (23 Sep 2015 10.34pm)

oldcodger

23 Sep 15 10.30pm

I'm pretty sure I'll find a way of getting ripped off regardless of who runs our trains!

Edited by oldcodger (23 Sep 2015 10.34pm)

lankygit Lincoln 24 Sep 15 12.23am
Quote matt_himself at 23 Sep 2015 9.52pm Quote Kermit8 at 23 Sep 2015 8.52pm The pertinent question is, is it an insurmountable problem this EU railway law? Some important peeps who looked into it say it is and some other important peeps who have looked into it say it isn't. I find it very difficult to believe the former due to the fact that we have ridden roughshod over the EU since 1985 regarding our railways anyway so don't see it as a sudden problem for the future. And do your own research for evidence before you ask mr H as I did. I have answered yours, Sedlescombe and JamieTalk's questions. As you cannot provide evidence for the 'renationalisation is legal' position, none I have seen, I note you have dropped the emotive 'fat cat' talk and have started attacking me. Despite the fact that I have answered the questions put to me. I can only come to the conclusion that your 'ideals' are concept only and are not costed or based on any conventional fulcrum. They are, merely pie-in-the-sky. They are ideals based upon your myopic, detached from reality existence. By the way, tonight was tops. Shame you couldn't be here to enjoy it. Never mind, you can console yourself with the pride of being 'Scottish' despite being from Croydon and living in Devon and have educated so many people. So many people. Edited by matt_himself (23 Sep 2015 9.55pm) That`ll teach you Kerms. I bet it`ll be some time before you,so viciously, attack mattersonlytohimself again. Is this a five minute argument, or the full half hour? [Link]

lankygit

Lincoln 24 Sep 15 12.23am

Quote matt_himself at 23 Sep 2015 9.52pm

Quote Kermit8 at 23 Sep 2015 8.52pm

The pertinent question is, is it an insurmountable problem this EU railway law? Some important peeps who looked into it say it is and some other important peeps who have looked into it say it isn't.

I find it very difficult to believe the former due to the fact that we have ridden roughshod over the EU since 1985 regarding our railways anyway so don't see it as a sudden problem for the future.

And do your own research for evidence before you ask mr H as I did.

I have answered yours, Sedlescombe and JamieTalk's questions.

Edited by matt_himself (23 Sep 2015 9.55pm)

That`ll teach you Kerms.
I bet it`ll be some time before you,so viciously, attack mattersonlytohimself again.

Is this a five minute argument, or the full half hour? [Link]

dannyh wherever I lay my hat....... 24 Sep 15 8.46am
Quote matt_himself at 23 Sep 2015 1.17pm Quote Kermit8 at 23 Sep 2015 1.04pm Quote matt_himself at 23 Sep 2015 12.21pm Quote Kermit8 at 23 Sep 2015 9.25am Wouldn't have to pay shareholder dividends or fat cat bonuses for failure either. Could you provide some evidence of these fat cat bonuses you speak of? And explain how they are above the industry norm and delivering punitive service for rail users? Now, I didn't say they were above "the industry norm", did I? Anyway, although a couple of years old this report in The Daily Telegraph gives a good summary. [Link] You may like to research 'customer satisfaction' levels too. Seems that 25% of their commuter/business clients are 'dissatisfied' with their performance these last 12 months and most probably wondering why the company bosses make what they make? Edited by Kermit8 (23 Sep 2015 1.06pm) Fat Cat as a term would suggest that payments made are above the norm. They imply that that recipient is receiving money for doing nothing or is receiving excessively more money than they are due. Looking at the figures in your two year old report, most of the figures presented (GBP 100,000 to GBP 200,000) seem within the norm for directors and executives. The bigger figures of the CEO's of companies have their salaries approved by shareholders. Nice attempt to swerve and introduce yet more emotion over substance with the satisfaction issue. 25% dissatisfaction doesn't appear that bad at face value. Your last part is emotive guff. In response to Jamies point about civil servants, firstly there are many civil servants earning the same band of GBP 100,000 to GBP 200,000. And, again, where does Jamie think all the rail/transport savvy civil servants who could run a nationalised rail network are now? They are working for the rail companies and they will earn the same regardless of whether they work for the private or public sector. Face it, you are ideologically wedded to the concept of a nationalised rail network without being prepared to face the reality that renationalisation is illegal under your precious EU law, the cost is prohibitive and it is hard to see how, given that the budget for investment would be roughly the same as present, how services could be much improved. No one has provided a convincing argyment for this, just emotive blackmail and ideological nonsense. Winner "It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'"

dannyh

wherever I lay my hat....... 24 Sep 15 8.46am

Quote matt_himself at 23 Sep 2015 1.17pm

Quote Kermit8 at 23 Sep 2015 1.04pm

Quote matt_himself at 23 Sep 2015 12.21pm

Quote Kermit8 at 23 Sep 2015 9.25am

Wouldn't have to pay shareholder dividends or fat cat bonuses for failure either.

Could you provide some evidence of these fat cat bonuses you speak of? And explain how they are above the industry norm and delivering punitive service for rail users?

Now, I didn't say they were above "the industry norm", did I? Anyway, although a couple of years old this report in The Daily Telegraph gives a good summary. [Link]

Edited by Kermit8 (23 Sep 2015 1.06pm)

Fat Cat as a term would suggest that payments made are above the norm. They imply that that recipient is receiving money for doing nothing or is receiving excessively more money than they are due.

Looking at the figures in your two year old report, most of the figures presented (GBP 100,000 to GBP 200,000) seem within the norm for directors and executives.

The bigger figures of the CEO's of companies have their salaries approved by shareholders.

Nice attempt to swerve and introduce yet more emotion over substance with the satisfaction issue. 25% dissatisfaction doesn't appear that bad at face value. Your last part is emotive guff.

Winner

"It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'"

chris123 hove actually 24 Sep 15 9.04am
Quote legaleagle at 23 Sep 2015 4.05pm Quote matt_himself at 23 Sep 2015 1.17pm Face it, you are ideologically wedded to the concept of a nationalised rail network without being prepared to face the reality that renationalisation is illegal under your precious EU law, the cost is prohibitive ................................................ It is a myth often spouted by those anti-state ownership of the railways that EU law prevents the vast majority of the passenger railway system being under national ownership as opposed to private sector. EU law does not require railways must be fully privatised. Nor is there a requirement for railway infrastructure to be in private ownership or a ban on train services being operated by a government-owned enterprise.The main caveat is simply that international services (we hardly have any) and freight services be open for competition. Some examples: In France, both the train operator SNCF and the infrastructure operator RFF are state-owned. In Germany the state-owned operator Deutsche Bahn runs 90 per cent of passenger services. In Italy, the state-owned railway company FS Holding owns both the national rail infrastructure manager RFI and train-operating company Trenitalia. The Spanish railway is almost entirely in public ownership. Even in Sweden, the first country in Europe to take steps towards privatisation, the state-owned rail operator SJ operates more than 80 per cent of all passenger services. As for the "cost",the primary issue is dealt with if "renationalisation" takes place in stages when an existing franchise expires.Also,as for cost,it is worth reflecting that from 2011 private operators paid out a total of £183m in dividends to shareholders, with Northern Rail – the recipient of £669m in subsidy – paying £27m.Overall the state underwrote these £183m of paid out profits with £3.8bn of subsidies. There was a strike last summer in France about the proposed privatisation of SNCF wasn't there.

chris123

hove actually 24 Sep 15 9.04am

Quote legaleagle at 23 Sep 2015 4.05pm

Quote matt_himself at 23 Sep 2015 1.17pm

................................................

Some examples:

There was a strike last summer in France about the proposed privatisation of SNCF wasn't there.

dannyh wherever I lay my hat....... 24 Sep 15 9.36am
CAn we at least all agree that Corbyn is Compo reborn from last of the summer wine. Attachment: compo.jpg (15.03Kb) "It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'"

dannyh

wherever I lay my hat....... 24 Sep 15 9.36am

CAn we at least all agree that Corbyn is Compo reborn from last of the summer wine.

Attachment: compo.jpg (15.03Kb)

"It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'"

Y Ddraig Goch In The Crowd 25 Sep 15 8.11am
So as suspected the vegan shadow farming minister is unable to resist trying to force her beliefs on the general public. [Link] the dignified don't even enter in the game

Y Ddraig Goch

In The Crowd 25 Sep 15 8.11am

So as suspected the vegan shadow farming minister is unable to resist trying to force her beliefs on the general public.

[Link]

the dignified don't even enter in the game

palace_in_frogland In a broken dream 25 Sep 15 8.41am
Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 25 Sep 2015 8.11am So as suspected the vegan shadow farming minister is unable to resist trying to force her beliefs on the general public. [Link] Wouldn't. Doesn't touch meat anyway.

palace_in_frogland

In a broken dream 25 Sep 15 8.41am

Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 25 Sep 2015 8.11am

So as suspected the vegan shadow farming minister is unable to resist trying to force her beliefs on the general public.

[Link]

Wouldn't. Doesn't touch meat anyway.

jamiemartin721 Reading 25 Sep 15 9.39am
Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 25 Sep 2015 8.11am So as suspected the vegan shadow farming minister is unable to resist trying to force her beliefs on the general public. [Link] Fortunately we are so lucky that ministers on all sides, but a lot of conservatives didn't do this on the 'Assisted Suicide Bill'. Upto 82% of the population support the idea euthanasia as an option. Around 70% of the MPs voted against it. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]

jamiemartin721

Reading 25 Sep 15 9.39am

Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 25 Sep 2015 8.11am

So as suspected the vegan shadow farming minister is unable to resist trying to force her beliefs on the general public.

[Link]

Fortunately we are so lucky that ministers on all sides, but a lot of conservatives didn't do this on the 'Assisted Suicide Bill'. Upto 82% of the population support the idea euthanasia as an option. Around 70% of the MPs voted against it.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

DanH SW2 25 Sep 15 10.02am
Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 25 Sep 2015 8.11am So as suspected the vegan shadow farming minister is unable to resist trying to force her beliefs on the general public. [Link] MP in standing up for what she believes in shocker. I don't agree with her whatsoever but glad there's actually some polar views in parliament now.

DanH

SW2 25 Sep 15 10.02am

Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 25 Sep 2015 8.11am

So as suspected the vegan shadow farming minister is unable to resist trying to force her beliefs on the general public.

[Link]

MP in standing up for what she believes in shocker. I don't agree with her whatsoever but glad there's actually some polar views in parliament now.

Hoof Hearted 25 Sep 15 10.13am
Quote DanH at 25 Sep 2015 10.02am Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 25 Sep 2015 8.11am So as suspected the vegan shadow farming minister is unable to resist trying to force her beliefs on the general public. [Link] MP in standing up for what she believes in shocker. I don't agree with her whatsoever but glad there's actually some polar views in parliament now. She's my local MP Dan... I've met her... she turned up to our protest meeting about the Gipsy camp that Bristol council were trying to impose on our community. She was useless and completely overshadowed by the conservative local councillor who got stuff done. Kerry McCarthy also looked like she could do with a good hearty meal inside and dressed like a new age traveller. She's only interested in her own pet projects like being a vegan and other Greenpeace style bollocks. It was obvious she was going to upset the farmers with her views - yet another stupid move by Corbyn to appoint her.

Hoof Hearted 25 Sep 15 10.13am

Quote DanH at 25 Sep 2015 10.02am

Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 25 Sep 2015 8.11am

So as suspected the vegan shadow farming minister is unable to resist trying to force her beliefs on the general public.

[Link]

MP in standing up for what she believes in shocker. I don't agree with her whatsoever but glad there's actually some polar views in parliament now.

She's my local MP Dan... I've met her... she turned up to our protest meeting about the Gipsy camp that Bristol council were trying to impose on our community.

She was useless and completely overshadowed by the conservative local councillor who got stuff done.

Kerry McCarthy also looked like she could do with a good hearty meal inside and dressed like a new age traveller.

She's only interested in her own pet projects like being a vegan and other Greenpeace style bollocks.

It was obvious she was going to upset the farmers with her views - yet another stupid move by Corbyn to appoint her.

DanH SW2 25 Sep 15 10.36am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 25 Sep 2015 10.13am Quote DanH at 25 Sep 2015 10.02am Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 25 Sep 2015 8.11am So as suspected the vegan shadow farming minister is unable to resist trying to force her beliefs on the general public. [Link] MP in standing up for what she believes in shocker. I don't agree with her whatsoever but glad there's actually some polar views in parliament now. She's my local MP Dan... I've met her... she turned up to our protest meeting about the Gipsy camp that Bristol council were trying to impose on our community. She was useless and completely overshadowed by the conservative local councillor who got stuff done. Kerry McCarthy also looked like she could do with a good hearty meal inside and dressed like a new age traveller. She's only interested in her own pet projects like being a vegan and other Greenpeace style bollocks. It was obvious she was going to upset the farmers with her views - yet another stupid move by Corbyn to appoint her. Don't particular disagree with any of that Hoofy, just finding it refreshing to have some people with actual opinions in parliament. Same as why I think UKIP are a good thing; it creates a discussion and makes people think a bit more.

DanH

SW2 25 Sep 15 10.36am

Quote Hoof Hearted at 25 Sep 2015 10.13am

Quote DanH at 25 Sep 2015 10.02am

Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 25 Sep 2015 8.11am

So as suspected the vegan shadow farming minister is unable to resist trying to force her beliefs on the general public.

[Link]

MP in standing up for what she believes in shocker. I don't agree with her whatsoever but glad there's actually some polar views in parliament now.

She's my local MP Dan... I've met her... she turned up to our protest meeting about the Gipsy camp that Bristol council were trying to impose on our community.

She was useless and completely overshadowed by the conservative local councillor who got stuff done.

Kerry McCarthy also looked like she could do with a good hearty meal inside and dressed like a new age traveller.

She's only interested in her own pet projects like being a vegan and other Greenpeace style bollocks.

It was obvious she was going to upset the farmers with her views - yet another stupid move by Corbyn to appoint her.

Don't particular disagree with any of that Hoofy, just finding it refreshing to have some people with actual opinions in parliament. Same as why I think UKIP are a good thing; it creates a discussion and makes people think a bit more.

Cucking Funt Clapham on the Back 25 Sep 15 10.39am
Quote DanH at 25 Sep 2015 10.36am Quote Hoof Hearted at 25 Sep 2015 10.13am Quote DanH at 25 Sep 2015 10.02am Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 25 Sep 2015 8.11am So as suspected the vegan shadow farming minister is unable to resist trying to force her beliefs on the general public. [Link] MP in standing up for what she believes in shocker. I don't agree with her whatsoever but glad there's actually some polar views in parliament now. She's my local MP Dan... I've met her... she turned up to our protest meeting about the Gipsy camp that Bristol council were trying to impose on our community. She was useless and completely overshadowed by the conservative local councillor who got stuff done. Kerry McCarthy also looked like she could do with a good hearty meal inside and dressed like a new age traveller. She's only interested in her own pet projects like being a vegan and other Greenpeace style bollocks. It was obvious she was going to upset the farmers with her views - yet another stupid move by Corbyn to appoint her. Don't particular disagree with any of that Hoofy, just finding it refreshing to have some people with actual opinions in parliament. Same as why I think UKIP are a good thing; it creates a discussion and makes people think a bit more. The Metrosexual Bender Party. Wife beating may be socially acceptable in Sheffield, but it is a different matter in Cheltenham

Cucking Funt

Clapham on the Back 25 Sep 15 10.39am

Quote DanH at 25 Sep 2015 10.36am

Quote Hoof Hearted at 25 Sep 2015 10.13am

Quote DanH at 25 Sep 2015 10.02am

Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 25 Sep 2015 8.11am

So as suspected the vegan shadow farming minister is unable to resist trying to force her beliefs on the general public.

[Link]

MP in standing up for what she believes in shocker. I don't agree with her whatsoever but glad there's actually some polar views in parliament now.

She's my local MP Dan... I've met her... she turned up to our protest meeting about the Gipsy camp that Bristol council were trying to impose on our community.

She was useless and completely overshadowed by the conservative local councillor who got stuff done.

Kerry McCarthy also looked like she could do with a good hearty meal inside and dressed like a new age traveller.

She's only interested in her own pet projects like being a vegan and other Greenpeace style bollocks.

It was obvious she was going to upset the farmers with her views - yet another stupid move by Corbyn to appoint her.

The Metrosexual Bender Party.

Wife beating may be socially acceptable in Sheffield, but it is a different matter in Cheltenham

Hoof Hearted 25 Sep 15 10.46am
Quote DanH at 25 Sep 2015 10.36am Quote Hoof Hearted at 25 Sep 2015 10.13am Quote DanH at 25 Sep 2015 10.02am Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 25 Sep 2015 8.11am So as suspected the vegan shadow farming minister is unable to resist trying to force her beliefs on the general public. [Link] MP in standing up for what she believes in shocker. I don't agree with her whatsoever but glad there's actually some polar views in parliament now. She's my local MP Dan... I've met her... she turned up to our protest meeting about the Gipsy camp that Bristol council were trying to impose on our community. She was useless and completely overshadowed by the conservative local councillor who got stuff done. Kerry McCarthy also looked like she could do with a good hearty meal inside and dressed like a new age traveller. She's only interested in her own pet projects like being a vegan and other Greenpeace style bollocks. It was obvious she was going to upset the farmers with her views - yet another stupid move by Corbyn to appoint her. Don't particular disagree with any of that Hoofy, just finding it refreshing to have some people with actual opinions in parliament. Same as why I think UKIP are a good thing; it creates a discussion and makes people think a bit more. It's a shame Dr Shipman topped himself... he would have been an ideal health secretary... LOL Have a nice day Dan... you little tinker!

Hoof Hearted 25 Sep 15 10.46am

Quote DanH at 25 Sep 2015 10.36am

Quote Hoof Hearted at 25 Sep 2015 10.13am

Quote DanH at 25 Sep 2015 10.02am

Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 25 Sep 2015 8.11am

So as suspected the vegan shadow farming minister is unable to resist trying to force her beliefs on the general public.

[Link]

MP in standing up for what she believes in shocker. I don't agree with her whatsoever but glad there's actually some polar views in parliament now.

She's my local MP Dan... I've met her... she turned up to our protest meeting about the Gipsy camp that Bristol council were trying to impose on our community.

She was useless and completely overshadowed by the conservative local councillor who got stuff done.

Kerry McCarthy also looked like she could do with a good hearty meal inside and dressed like a new age traveller.

She's only interested in her own pet projects like being a vegan and other Greenpeace style bollocks.

It was obvious she was going to upset the farmers with her views - yet another stupid move by Corbyn to appoint her.

It's a shame Dr Shipman topped himself... he would have been an ideal health secretary... LOL

Have a nice day Dan... you little tinker!

Page 51 of 279 < 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 >

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Jeremy Corbyn

Site Map