Interesting. On the face of it there's plenty of competition, but I wouldn't be surprised if it all depends on BT at the end of the day. Does this make sense? And if BT are crap is that because they're close to a monopoly or something else?
UK General Election - 12th December 2019 | Con 365, Lab 203, LD 11, SNP 48, Other 23 - Tory Majority of 80
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
- Status
You're missing the point, it's not feasible funding wise and will actually slow the process down apart from the damage it will do to the country because people won't invest in the UK in case they get nationalised.
Ps The roads and motorways in the UK are awful.
Anything to back the first 2 points up?
I think one's personal view as to whether governments are good at providing this kind of service or not will inform whether you think this is a good policy or not. Historically, I don't think governments have done these things particularly well, which was one of the main drivers behind privatisation. Might they be able to do better in future? Maybe, but my general feeling is that its best to leave as much as possible to the market to decide.
The biggest shareholder in BT is Deutsche Telekom, the 4th biggest is Orange - doubt they want government gilts instead of a telecommunications company. Then we have Google and Amazon etc paying for another thing in the long list of things they'll be paying for.
A Virgin Media spokesperson said:
Virgin Media has the fastest scaled network in the UK and has pledged to bring next-generation Gigabit broadband to half of the UK, by the end of 2021. As this commitment shows, private investment is essential to delivering improved broadband infrastructure.
With billions of pounds worth of private money invested in the UK, Virgin Media continues to expand its network, providing competition and choice to consumers.
Government policy has a role to play and can help to accelerate broadband deployment in a way that minimises the level of public subsidy needed and provides the UK and consumers with incredible connectivity within a competitive market.
Matthew Fell, CBI’s Chief UK Policy Director, says:
Fast reliable broadband is an absolute priority for people and firms and does need improving. But Labour’s plan is not the way to do it. The roll out of full fibre broadband across the country is underway, and all renationalisation will achieve is to slow down a process that needs speeding up.
It is private sector investment that has driven connectivity, massively widened internet access and put faster speeds within reach for most UK households. This progress will be stopped in its tracks and the bill passed to pensioners and savers.
With so many challenges facing the UK, blinkered ideologies must be left behind and replaced by forward-looking public-private partnerships that deliver rather than delay.
As the scope of Labour’s radical re-nationalisation plans expands almost daily, firms around the world lose confidence in the UK as a place to invest safely. Some will be asking if they are next. This threat damages the livelihoods of communities across the country. It’s time for all parties to work with business, not against it.
I have the impression that if Corbyn said that he would give everyone who voted for him a million pounds Labour supporters would do all kinds of mental gymnastics to believe it.
Wait, how does the Virgin statement back up any of your points?
Your second quote doesn't say how the government will slow down roll out of full fibre. It's just a lobby group vaguely saying that it will and you are lapping that up.
The last line of your post is ironic considering.
The exchange box in my village has had the 'Fibre is coming' advert on it replaced, twice, in the time it's taken for fibre to still not come and no date announced for when that'll change.
I bet the crossover wouldn't be particularly marked. This is what the "Liberal intelligentsia" don't get, it is the left wing but fairly wealthy people who don't want trident. Having a nuclear deterrent is popular amongst working class people, the same people I imagine labour are targeting with the broadband policy.
I mean you can setup your own domain and give yourself any email address you desire.
Just the entire press, based on the reaction to the broadband policy, plus the entirety of at least one party's MPs and a good majority of at least two others in the Commons.
Truth hurts, does it ??
If ' England ' is full of people like yourself, I'm surpised that everyone else hasn't already left but I suppose you mean the UK although maybe deep down inside you are a little Engerlander after all ??
It’s not just poor people. The UK is severely lagging behind in regards to high speed internet infrastructure. I’m a software dev and it amazes me how our contractors who dial into meetings from India consistently have a better connection than when I dial in from my home in Hertfordshire.
If the UK wants a thriving tech industry it’s absolutely paramount, more so if we leave the EU.
Not everyone disagrees with the policy because they think the state is too technically incompetent, there are a variety of reasons for disagreeing.
I was having a look at some BT shareholders discussion boards and they aren't all convinced the CL deal is a good one. £1.2bn is a hell of a lot of money. Plus most of them think the chances of a Labour government getting in are tiny.
I'm a little alarmed that the government can forcibly buy whatever it likes and dictate the price itself. As a Centrica shareholder myself (unfortunately) I'm worried they'll be coming for my shares next, which have tanked in recent years thanks to government intervention, and then they'll buy my shares at the low price they've created.
Anyway you learn from your mistakes... I'll never buy shares in anything governments are likely to interfere with again.
And thus things being taken into public ownership becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, as private companies don't get the capital they need to invest.
True enough. The state broadcaster has today covered the story with the tagline 'Broadband Communism?'
As the grandson of an immigrant that escaped two political regimes that did just that to his wider family, go feck yourself.
The price of broadband will tend to three fifths of sweet FA in any case. Driven by private investment and competition.
This is a Labour gimmick first and last.
This is a Labour gimmick first and last.
Just a couple of examples.
As I said in my last line. Because Corbyn or McDonnell say something anyone who doesn't agree with them must be wrong. Hilarious.
How come France will be 10 years ahead of the UK without nationalisation? Or other European countries like Spain.
I don't know what France and Spain's plans are. Maybe because this government subsidised company has been primarily in charge of roll out so far?:
Aren't companies forced to deliver the same internet access in the countryside in France as they deliver in the cities? And isn't TC1 that helps deliver it state owned?
"It'll cost the taxpayer an extra £60 a year in taxes booooo"
Meanwhile some people are paying over £60 a month for broadband.
I should stop trying to judge people by my own standards, I forgot this country is populated by a bunch of selfish nasty cnuts who just want everything they can get for nothing.
It probably won't even do that as I'd imagine having a much better broadband infrastructure for home and businesses would improve the economy
My sweet summer child.
After over 10 years of vicious cuts to public services, I am sure that many voters take all these so called promises or pledges with a massive pinch of salt.
Even if 10% were to actually happen I would be amazed.
This is just a juvenile spending pissing competition which is rediculous in the extreme.
Just be truthful for goodness sake and stop treating the electorate like half-whits.
The objective was to give everyone ultrafast internet access but is a combined operation between all the providers like Orange, SFR, Bouygues, Scopelec etc. then by 2021 5G - and by the time 2030 arrives 5G and fibre will probably be out of date.
But it's not free.
Like the much better cars we all had when the government interfered with British Leyland.
Seems to work
This is exactly how North Korea started.
"...and then f*cking Sky cut me off just before Rashford equalised!"
OMG! I thought you were taking the piss.
Friend of the fash, producer Rob Burley's rushed to Twitter to explain that it's fine because that is what some people have said about the issue. So we can look forward to the interview the BBC have been promoting all day with Prince Andrew having the caption 'Prince Andrew 'Massive Nonce'?' on screen throughout when it is shown this weekend.
I had one of those once....The RAC and the AA and Green Flag grew tenfold during the Government's ownership of BL.
What is really strange is that whenever the UK tried nationalised industries and companies, it never worked out happily. No idea why.
Unlike other countries in Europe whose nationalised companies thrived and prospered to the extent that they now own most of the TOC's in the UK ; most of the famous ' Red Buses ' in London ; VW became the world's largest and most profitable car manufacturer ; and there are plenty of other examples.
I think failure of state owned companies and industries in the UK was a particularly UK problem, and I don't really consider state owned infrastructure something to be avoided at all costs. It just needs to be done properly with the State as investors and owners but absolutely not as day-to-day managers.
Or like when the Thatcher government killed broadband.
https://www.techradar.com/uk/news/world-of-tech/how-the-uk-lost-the-broadband-race-in-1990-1224784
The whole thing needs massive reforms and even that might not be enough to save it.
To be fair, Thatcher killed a lot more than broadband.
Most of all, she killed self-respect for millions.....
This is glorious
- Status