http://www.healthfreedom.info/Federal_Reserve_Fraud.htm
http://www.propagandamatrix.com/makow_banking_cartel_is_the_cause_of_humanitys_woes.html
http://www.prosperityuk.com/prosperity/articles/monftp.html
http://www.planetquo.com/The-Law-Is-An-Ass-And-You-Are-Made-Of-Straw

How does he know that prices were lower? Perhaps they were when the companies were first privatised, but thats not surprising as they were artificially raised by Conservative dictat to attract investors.

Better service after privatisation? Again how does he know? I used to work for one supplier, and the gold standard for keeping customers “on supply” was checked by the number of minutes the average customer was off supply through the year. This figure plummeted after privatisation and has never recovered.

The third point, switch to cleaner technology is true. Mr Redwood doesn’t mention however that the old CEGB was actually forebidden by the various government parties to use gas for electricity generation. It was considered “correct” to use poor quality coal to generate electricity, and to use a prime fuel like gas, for other purposes.

Alan Asher, of the latter, believes that the market is not working and has called for an OFT investigation into the market, to investigate, amongst other things, “Why small suppliers have been forced out of the market or are struggling, and new entry is regarded as nigh on impossible”.

Further down the same page the MoS reports on goings on at OFCOM and quotes Charles Ponsonby, CE of Simplifydigital at saying “Today there are 530,000 different TV and broadband packages …”

Before rushing into deregulating the water, should we not look at why is there such a difference between barriers to entry to the deregulated telecoms and energy markets. Take broadband for instance, yes there are problems, but it is relatively easy for a medium-size commercial venture to purchase bandwidth on the wholesale markets and sell it on to consumers.

The apparatus through which the consumer receives gas, electricty, water or communications services through the old BT lines does not change hands in any case, however there seems to be a huge difference is access to the consumers between communications providers and energy providers.

I strikes me that this must be something to do with the way in which the wholesale energy markets are working. How would you see the water ending up? An oligopoly like the energy or as competitive as consumer broadband?

Neither will make money without massive subsidy.

By specifying a cost for Cross rail in advance of getting the quotes all they have done is put a lower figure on the cost. The contractors will bid up from this figure, not down.

The interest bill (before any running costs) of cross rail are a billion plus a year.

Divided that by the most optimistic number of passengers and you get 15 quid a day. Add on running costs and you are talking over 20 pounds a head.

1) Would you pay it?
2) Would a poor person pay it?
3) Would they get their passenger numbers at the price?

The answer to 1 is yes if desparate. 2 is No. 3 is no.

The end result is a subsidy, and/or a tax on ‘those that benefit’. The last is real Winston Smith speak. It means taxing those that might use it, even if they don’t. The only people who benefit are those that use the service. For that there is a good system already in place to make sure they pay the cost. Its called a ticket.

John Redwood, you need to stop promoting subsidy.

Nick

Reply: I have not been promoting a subsidy and have not spoken in favour of Crossrail.

I only disagree with calling it a programme to “stabilise” the economy. We don’t want to stabilise we want to grow - at least at the world average. Brown has used the word “stabilise” very successfully since it implies everything is ok if we just keep on in the straight line we are going in. The Tories have not & should have pulled him up on this since the rest of the world (excluding the EU) has been doing, comparative to us, not a straight line but a rising curve.

What like the Gas and Electricity Industry!

I worked in the Electricity Supply Industry all my working life, and the nadir of that career was when Mr Redwoods mate, Cecil Parkinson ordered the Elecricity Boards to raise prices, just to attract private investors. Flogging off part of the countrys infrastructure at half price wasn’t enough inducement, so a quick cash pool had to be created.

What’s left now isn’t an industry owned by the British People, as promised by the Conservatives, but an industry stripped of all it’s movable assets, and now owned by semi-state owned foreign companies such as EDF.

Reply: Competition ushered in much lower prices, better service, and a switch to cleaner technology.

It is quite clear from what Jacqui Smith said on Question Time on Thursday, that she thinks that everything in the garden is lovely.
I understand that Polly Toynbee in the Guardian thinks the same.
So do not expect any action.
They honestly do not think it is needed.
Too many years of being driven round in chauffeured limos and posh noshes have insulated them from reality. They are like the dear old Tories at the end of Mrs Thatcher’s time when they had lost touch with their electors - and, indeed, everyone else.

Reply: The piece you comment contains requests for two tax cuts - CGT and small business tax - and of course we need more as my Economic Policy Report made clear - as we bring public spending under control.

Your list could be simplified;

The government needs to:

1. Get a grip.