Read Write

Making the world smile, one muscle at a time

Going nuclear

by Marrick on October 22, 2013

So, we’re handing billions to France and China to build something we used to build ourselves, then guaranteeing them a huge profit on the deal for 35 years. We will pick up the tab.
Three thoughts on this: hasn’t privatisation worked well eh? (answer = no). What has happened to the Tory’s free market principles? Why are nuclear energy subsidies (because that’s what this is) a good thing, but renewable energy subsidies a bad thing?
In the bad old days, the government would have told the CEGB, "build the damn thing" and being the single most efficient organisation in Britain, they would have.

Moreover, it would have worked and not caused a meltdown like Fukishima.

I asked a Tory apologist "What’s the difference between a guaranteed price and a subsidy?" Ten minutes of bluster later – "There isn’t an intrinsic difference, but governments don’t have to pay for the guaranteed price…" Who does then? "Ummmm, the consumer." You mean "us" then?

What it comes down to is: "the profit incentive" is nothing but a spin on the fact that WE have to pay extra. That’s all profit is – US having to pay extra. The same as "efficiency" is US getting paid less. The bottom line of privatised industries is ordinary people paying more for less and the workers in the industries getting paid less for their labour.

One thought on “Going nuclear

  1. Mike says:

    Normally I find threads on here to be eye opening and informative.

    This time however I have to say it smacks of stating the blatantly obvious and merely pointing out what is already in place for rail, electricity, gas, water, the phone companies, coal and practically every PFI arrangement labour or the tories have made some of which have already cost the taxpayer more before any construction has started than building it ourselves would have cost and then we still have to “rent” it back and pay huge “maintenance” charges for s few decades

    What would be interesting is to see how many MPs have the companies that make us suffer the most in their own stock portfolios, how many past MPs have landed paid “non jobs” with these companies after legislating favourable terms for them or how many MPs have businesses that operate in sectors they sit on one of more committees for

    Even when we look at privatisation of public sector jobs like employment the government pays as much or in many cases more, the companies have contracts that allow them to do less than the public sector department and the bulk of the money goes straight into the pockets of people that in many cases have close ties to the government (labour and tories)

    The (I think) E4S scandal was a prime example where something like 120 million of the 160 million the government gave them went straight to the directors and shareholders. One of the directors a neighbour and close personal friend of david Cameron resigned but kept her shares

    And the official government statement was along the lines of

    “When you let the private sector bid for public work you have to expect that this sort of thing will happen and we should expect more of it in the future”

    So unspurprisingly there were no prosecutions, the company didn’t have to close, no monies were paid back and they STILL get new government contracts

    I find it hard to believe that the government sending a train building deal abroad and causing the UKs last train builder to close not long before proposing the HS2 wasn’t a coincidence as very little in politics IS a coincidence or accident.

    Seems the foreign companies probably pay bigger kick backs or offer better paid chairmanships, consultancy or advisory positions in return for “favours” than the british train builders

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: