B1518 – Public Services, Infrastructure and State Competition Act 2019 Watch

This discussion is closed.
Andrew97
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#1
B1518 - Public Services, Infrastructure and State Competition Act 2019; The Rt. Hon. Aph MP



Public Services, Infrastructure and State Competition Act 2019





A
B I L L
T O


make provisions for a singular infrastructure planning and maintenance board for the UK to ensure joined up thinking and strategic goals. To provide for state owned and operated companies to be formed and operate in competition against private firms to ensure value for money and efficiency. To provide provisions for providers of last resort to guarantee minimum levels of service and infrastructure to all citizens.

Be it enacted by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:




PART I
DEFINITIONS



Article 1: Definitions
1. For the purposes of this Act the following definitions shall apply:

(a) Local Authority shall mean:
“Any combined authority as defined in the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009; any unitary authority, metropolitan borough, non-metropolitan county as defined in the Local Government Act 1972; any principle area of Wales as defined in the Local Government (Wales) Act 1994; any unitary authority as defined in the Local Government etc. (Scotland) Act 1994; and any district as defined by the Local Government (Boundaries) Act (Northern Ireland) 2008.”

(b) Company of last resort shall mean:
“The company may not bid for any franchise or create any service of its own volition, it may only acquire a contract by means of acting as a backstop should the contracted supplier be unable to fulfil their obligations or if the franchise awarding body determines that no bidding provider can meet the requirements of the franchise.





PART II
HER MAJESTY’S INFRASTRUCTURE COOPERATION



Article 2: Establishment
1. There shall exist a body corporate called Her Majesty’s Infrastructure Cooperation (HMIC).

2. HMIC shall be entirely owned by the Crown.

3. The Board shall consist of:
(a) The Secretary of State;
(b) The Director of Highways England;
(c) The Director of Network Rail;
(d) The Director of the British Broadcasting Corporation;
(e) The Director of the National Grid;
(f) The Director of British Water and Waste;
(g) The Director of British Communications;
(h) The Director of British Waterways; and,
(i) The Director of the National Health Service;

4. It shall be the duty of the HMIC Board in the exercise of their powers under this Act to provide or secure the provision of all infrastructure projects in the United Kingdom.

5. The Board shall advise Parliament on its strategic goals; and,

6. Shall seek to improve the availability and provision of infrastructure in the country.

Article 3: Constituent Boards and their Powers
1. There shall be established a British Water and Waste Board (in this Act referred to as the BWW Board).
(a) The British Water and Waste Board shall consist of:
i. a director, appointed by Parliament;
ii. two vice-directors, appointed by parliament; and,
iii. not more than ten and not less than five other members appointed by the minister in consultation with HMIC.
(b) It shall be the duty of the BWW Board in the exercise of their powers under this Act to provide or secure the provision of adequate clean water and sewerage systems in England and Wales.
(c) The Board shall have the power to set rates charged to suppliers of water and sewerage services. The Board shall charge whatever rates are reasonable to ensure the good running of services it oversees.

2. There shall be established a National Grid Board (in this Act referred to as the NG Board).
(a) The National Grid Board shall consist of:
i. a director, appointed by Parliament;
ii. two vice-directors, appointed by parliament; and,
iii. not more than ten and not less than five other members appointed by the minister in consultation with HMIC.
(b) It shall be the duty of the NG Board in the exercise of their powers under this Act to provide or secure the provision of adequate and effective electricity and gas supply and infrastructure in the United Kingdom.
(c) The Board shall have the power to set rates charged to suppliers of energy distribution services.
(d) The Board shall charge whatever rates are reasonable to ensure the good running of services it oversees.

3. There shall be established a Network Rail Board (in this Act referred to as the NR Board).
(a) The Network Rail Board shall consist of:
i. a director, appointed by Parliament;
ii. two vice-directors, appointed by parliament; and,
iii. not more than ten and not less than five other members appointed by the minister in consultation with HMIC.
(b) It shall be the duty of the NR Board in the exercise of their powers under this Act to provide or secure the provision of adequate and effective rail infrastructure in the United Kingdom.
(c) The Board shall have the power to set rates charged to suppliers of rail services.
(d) The Board shall charge whatever rates are reasonable to ensure the good running of services it oversees.
(e) The Board shall also be responsible for franchising of mainline routes.

4. There shall be established a British Communications Board (in this Act referred to as the BC Board).
(a) The British Communications Board shall consist of:
i. a director, appointed by Parliament;
ii. two vice-directors, appointed by parliament; and,
iii. not more than ten and not less than five other members appointed by the minister in consultation with HMIC.
(b) All current infrastructure relating to the powers and duties of this board will be subject to compulsory purchase orders.
(c) It shall be the duty of the BC Board in the exercise of their powers under this Act to provide or secure the provision of adequate mobile network, mobile internet, high speed internet, landline and all other such public communications infrastructure.
(d) The Board shall have the power to set rates charged to suppliers of communications services services.
(e) The Board shall charge whatever rates are reasonable to ensure the good running of services it oversees.

5. There is to be a body corporate called The National Health Service Strategic and Franchising Board (NHS-SF Board).
(a) The Board is to consist of:
i. The Director, appointed by parliament;
ii. No more than 12, no fewer than 7 other members appointed by Parliament;
iii. The Chief Executive; and,
iv. Any number of other executive members, providing the number of executive members is a minimum of 2 fewer than non-executive members.
(b) The Board shall make provisions for the provision and franchising of health services in England, in particular shall:
i. Set budgets for different franchises;
ii. Make strategic decisions for the provision of NHS services in the areas which it oversees;
iii. Run the franchising process for England; and, iv. Consult with HMIC to provide suitable infrastructure such that Health Services are accessible and emergency vehicles can respond to calls quickly.

6. There shall be established a British Waterways Board (in this Act referred to as the BW Board).
(a) The British Waterways Board shall consist of:
i. a director, appointed by Parliament;
ii. two vice-directors, appointed by parliament; and,
iii. not more than ten and not less than five other members appointed by the minister in consultation with HMIC.
(b) All current infrastructure relating to the powers and duties of this board will be subject to compulsory purchase orders.

7. There shall be established a Highways England Board (in this Act referred to as the HE Board).
(a) The Highways England Board shall consist of:
i. a director, appointed by Parliament;
ii. two vice-directors, appointed by parliament; and,
iii. not more than ten and not less than five other members appointed by the minister in consultation with HMIC.
(b) It shall be the duty of the HW Board in the exercise of their powers under this Act to provide or secure the provision of adequate road infrastructure in England.

Article 4: General Provisions Relating to the BBC
1. On the date that the Royal Charter for the BBC expires this Article shall take effect.

2. The BBC shall be a body corporate by the name of the British Broadcasting Corporation.

3. The members of the Board of the BBC shall be the members of the Corporation, but the membership of the Corporation shall not enable any individual to act otherwise than through the Board.

4. The BBC shall be a subsidiary of HMIC.

5. The Mission of the BBC is to act in the public interest, serving all audiences through the provision of impartial, high-quality and distinctive output and services which inform, educate and entertain.

6. The BBC must be independent in all matters concerning the fulfilment of its Mission, particularly as regards editorial and creative decisions, the times and manner in which its output and services are supplied, and in the management of its affairs.

7. The BBC must act in the public interest.

8. In complying with this article, the BBC must:
(a) ensure that the benefits (whether direct or indirect) of decisions relating to the fulfilment of its Mission and the promotion of the Public Purposes outweigh the costs (whether direct or indirect); and
(b) in doing so, have regard to economic, social and cultural benefits and costs.

9. Subject to the provisions of this Act, Her Majesty produce any charter or proclamation relating to the running or directives of the BBC.

10. The board shall produce a terms of reference for the operations of the BBC, these shall:
(a) be subject to approval by parliament;
(b) be amenable by order in council; and,
(c) be enforced by Ofcom and HMIC.





PART III
HER MAJESTY’S PUBLIC SERVICE COOPERATION



Article 5: Establishment
1. There shall exist a body corporate called Her Majesty’s Public Service Cooperation(HMPSC);

2. HMPSC shall be entirely owned by the Crown; and,

3. All profits made by HMPSC, save for those which are approved by order of council for re-investment into said body, shall be paid to the exchequer.

4. HMPSC shall have a governance board which will consist of:
(a) The Chief Executive Officer;
(b) The Chief Operating Officer;
(c) The Secretary of State;
(d) The Director of Crown Rail;
(e) The Director of Crown Energy;
(f) The Director of Crown Water;
(g) The Director of Crown Trains;
(h) The Director of Crown Buses;
(i) The Director of Crown Trams and Metros;
(j) The Director of Crown Construction;
(k) The Director of Crown Mail and Post Offices;
(l) The Director of Crown Telecommunications; and,
(m) The Director of Crown Health.

5. The Board shall be responsible for ensuring the continued profitability and running of all services provided by Her Majesties Public Service Cooperation.

6. All members of the Board, other than the Secretary of State, will be subject to approval by parliament.

7. HMPSC shall own and operate the following companies:
(a) Crown Energy;
(b) Crown Water;
(c) Crown Trains;
(d) Crown Buses;
(e) Crown Trams and Metros;
(f) Crown Construction;
(g) Crown Mail and Post Offices;
(h) Crown Telecommunications; and
(i) Crown Health;

8. In addition, the Board may approve the creation of other ventures provided these do not place undue financial risk on the exchequer.

Article 6: Subsidiaries of HMPSC
1. There shall exist a body corporate called Crown Water, which shall be a water and sewerage supplier operating in England and Wales.

2. There shall exist a body corporate called Crown Energy, which shall be an electricity and gas supplier operating in the United Kingdom.

3. There shall exist a body corporate called Crown Trains, which shall be a rail company operating in the United Kingdom.

4. There shall exist a body corporate called Crown Buses, which shall be a bus company operating in the United Kingdom.

5. There shall exist a body corporate called Crown Trams and Metros, which shall be a tram and metro train company operating in the United Kingdom.

6. There shall exist a body corporate called Crown Mail and Post Offices, which shall be a corner shop and postal courier company operating in the United Kingdom.
(a) Crown Mail shall be mandated to provide full postal service across the entire United Kingdom.
(b) A series of Letter Boxes shall be established and maintained by Crown Mail. These boxes should be blue in colour.
(c) As necessary the Minister shall make provisions for Compulsory Purchase Orders to secure the required initial infrastructure for Crown Mail should none be forthcoming.
(d) Any branch of the Post Office is permitted to be loss making provided:
i. The business as a whole makes money;
ii. The branch in question is determined to be contributing to the social good of the community; and,
iii. The shop cannot be reasonably relocated or have its services provided by an external party.
iv. The Post Office shall provide services relating to other mail firms and not exclusively rely on Crown Mail.

7. There shall exist a body corporate called Crown Telecommunications, which shall be a mobile telecommunications and broadband company operating in the United Kingdom.

8. There shall exist a body corporate called Crown Health, which shall be a Mental and Physical health care provider operating in the United Kingdom.

9. There shall exist a body corporate called Crown Construction, which shall be a Construction company in the United Kingdom.





PART IV
HER MAJESTY’S ESSENTIAL SERVICE PROVIDER



Article 7: Establishment
1. There shall exist a body corporate called Her Majesty’s Essential Service Provider (HMESP);

2. HMESP shall be entirely owned by the Crown; and,

3. HMESP shall operate on a not-for-profit basis.

4. All Companies operated by HMESP shall be companies of last resort.

5. There shall exist a board of HMESP, comprising of:
(a) The Chief Operating Officer;
(b) The Secretary of State;
(c) The Director for Royal Trains;
(d) The Director for Royal Buses;
(e) The Director for Royal Trams and Metros;
(f) The Director for Royal Constructions; and,
(g) The Director for Royal Health Trusts.

6. All members of the Board, other than the Secretary of State, will be subject to approval by parliament.


Article 8: Subsidiaries of HMESP
1. There shall exist a body corporate called Royal Trains, which shall be a rail company operating in the United Kingdom.

2. There shall exist a body corporate called Royal Buses, which shall be a bus company operating in the United Kingdom.

3. There shall exist a body corporate called Royal Trams and Metros, which shall be a tram and metro company operating in the United Kingdom.

4. There shall exist a body corporate called Royal Health Trusts, which shall be a Mental and Physical health care provider operating in the United Kingdom.

5. There shall exist a body corporate called Royal Construction, which shall be a Construction company operating in the United Kingdom.





PART V
ADDITIONAL AND GENERAL PROVISIONS



Article 9: General provisions for utilities markets
1. Utilities markets shall have a single infrastructure provider responsible for maintaining infrastructure across the country.

2. Customers will buy products from third party suppliers who will buy pay infrastructure providers for their services and may also be involved with supplying infrastructure providers with services.

Article 10: General provisions for the transport market
1. The transport market shall operate on a two-tier system. Services which are considered essential shall be operated on a franchise system where service providers bid to operate the franchise. Companies may then add additional services, provided appropriate infrastructure, which are not subject to franchise.

Article 11: Specific provisions for rail companies
1. There shall be the following rail franchises:
(a) Caledonian Sleeper;
(b) Chiltern;
(c) East Midlands;
(d) East Anglia;
(e) Essex Thameside;
(f) Greater Western;
(g) InterCity East Coast;
(h) InterCity West Coast;
(i) New CrossCountry;
(j) Northern;
(k) ScotRail;
(l) South Eastern;
(m) South Western;
(n) Thameslink, Southern & Great Northern;
(o) TransPennine Express;
(p) Wales and Borders; and,
(q) West Midlands.

2. The Minister may, from time to time, add a rail franchise to this list by order in council.

3. All Mainline franchises shall have two franchisees.

4. A franchisee is responsible for supplying and maintaining their own rolling stock.

5. Where there is available infrastructure and a reasonable business case the NR Board shall allow a open-access line to run provided it is suitably different to existing train operations.

6. When there is not adequate infrastructure, a potential operator may pay to build the necessary infrastructure for their line to run. If this is the case the operator shall be exempt from all NR fees related to that line for a period of 25 years and shall have sole use of said infrastructure, save for emergencies, for a period of 100 years.

Article 12: Specific provisions for bus, tram and metro companies
1. Any Local Authority may establish a bus, tram or metro route or series of routes within its authority for franchise.

2. Any such metro route which uses part of a Network Rail operated track shall be treated as an open-access rail route as per Article

3. The franchise process shall be the responsibility of the local authority, pursuant to any act of parliament.

4. A franchise established by this act may not last for a period of more than ten years before it must be re-franchised.

5. It shall be at the councils digression whether it includes maintenance of tracks and stock as part of franchise agreements in the case of Tram and Metro routes.

6. Any bus company may establish a bus route other than a franchised one as long as they:
(a) Have agreement from the relevant local authority;
(b) Can fulfil any requirements the local authority chooses to reasonably impose; and,
(c) Can demonstrate there is a need for the route to exist.

7. No local authority may establish a bus route for franchise which is distinctly similar to an existing open-access route, save for if the local authority can demonstrate the current operators are not providing an adequate service.

Article 13: Short Title, Extent and Enactment
1. This Act may be cited as the Public Services, Infrastructure and State Competition Act 2019;

2. Shall extend to the whole of the United Kingdom; and,

3. Shall come into force one year after royal assent.


Notes This bills aim is two-fold, first this fulfils my manifesto pledge of introducing full franchising to the NHS, something I have wanted to do for a while, and indeed full franchising to the entire public sector where franchising is appropriate. This provides better value for money for the tax payer and it allows private companies to compete to be more efficiant whilst maintaining free at the point of service ideals.

Secondly this create for-profit state owned companies who compete against private companies on a level playing field, meaning that profits from these companies can be invested into the state and bring down the need for taxes, reducing the burden on individuals whilst introducing more competition to the market.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#2
Report 3 weeks ago
#2
As expected, a crappy bill that utilises a fetish for pointless use of parts for a bill that does not require them.

Would the author like to tell us what an "article" is in legislation, this is a bill and not a treaty

HMIC strikes me as an extra level of bureaucracy within DfT

It also appears to be taking a load of pre-existing bodies, some Quangos and some private sector bodies, and rebranding them in the public sector with Parliament taking an undue role in them

And beyond the excessive bureaucracy with absolutely bizarre leadership structures this seems to ultimately amount to mass nationalisation.
0
Aph
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#3
Report 3 weeks ago
#3
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
As expected, a crappy bill that utilises a fetish for pointless use of parts for a bill that does not require them.

Would the author like to tell us what an "article" is in legislation, this is a bill and not a treaty

HMIC strikes me as an extra level of bureaucracy within DfT

It also appears to be taking a load of pre-existing bodies, some Quangos and some private sector bodies, and rebranding them in the public sector with Parliament taking an undue role in them

And beyond the excessive bureaucracy with absolutely bizarre leadership structures this seems to ultimately amount to mass nationalisation.
I’ll ignore your style points as that is nearly preference.

I see the point of HMIC to be ensuring a joined up approach to infrastructure, ensuring that bodies are talking to each other and it should be a body which is somewhat independent of politics.

This is absolutely not mass nationalisation, if anything it’s the opposite. This invites private companies into the NHS for example. The bill simply ensures that there is competition whilst also taking franchise decisions away from political masters.
0
Connor27
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#4
Report 3 weeks ago
#4
In amongst Aph’s excessive verbosity and grandiose fluff; this bill is, as Jammy says, an unprecedented level of nationalisation and state planning that would lead us on the road to serfdom. Nay.
0
Aph
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#5
Report 3 weeks ago
#5
(Original post by Connor27)
In amongst Aph’s excessive verbosity and grandiose fluff; this bill is, as Jammy says, an unprecedented level of nationalisation and state planning that would lead us on the road to serfdom. Nay.
Except there is literally no nationalism and no state planned economy.
0
barnetlad
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#6
Report 3 weeks ago
#6
I can never accept franchising of the NHS and so a Nay to this Bill on those grounds alone (and no doubt many others were I to go through the detail of the Bill).
0
04MR17
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#7
Report 3 weeks ago
#7
Alternative fonts seem to be popular this week. :beard:
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#8
Report 3 weeks ago
#8
(Original post by Aph)
I’ll ignore your style points as that is nearly preference.

I see the point of HMIC to be ensuring a joined up approach to infrastructure, ensuring that bodies are talking to each other and it should be a body which is somewhat independent of politics.

This is absolutely not mass nationalisation, if anything it’s the opposite. This invites private companies into the NHS for example. The bill simply ensures that there is competition whilst also taking franchise decisions away from political masters.
It really isn't though gioven legislation has a pretty specific structure (even if in game there is absurd amounts of flexibility such that you could label it in any way you could imagine), this is neither treaty, nor Order (whether that be in council, or by a SoS) and as such has Parts (should never be necessary in the MHoC), made up of sections, in turn composed of subsections, which may themselves consist of paragraphs.

Do you know what ensures a joined up approach? The Department for Transport, it is literally their job to coordinate national infrastructure development and if it is so incompetent that it cannot do this in a joined up way then HMIC will not solve the problem. Depending on exactly what these bodies are to do it could become less coordinated as competencies of DfT get devolved to bodies ultimately controlled by Parliament.

If there is not mass nationalisation then a lot of these bodies serve no function. Why, for instance, does there need to be a public sector equivalent of the National Grid if the aforementioned entity is to continue maintaining the grid? Likewise for the water infrastructure? Or am I completely misreading it and you're simply rebranding, among other quangos, ofgem and ofwat, ofcom etc?

It's also ironic that you say the decisions are taken away from political masters when it is still politicians appointing the masters via Parliament.
0
SoggyCabbages
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#9
Report 3 weeks ago
#9
For someone who once stressed that he was definitely a Libertarian, there seems to be a lot of government intervention here.

Also, why no costings?
0
The Mogg
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#10
Report 3 weeks ago
#10
Against government intervention in most cases, so Nay. Also, I truly cannot be arsed reading the Bible of Infrastructure, maybe make future items a little smaller next time, for those with little energy to read such a long item. You're welcome.

(Original post by 04MR17)
Alternative fonts seem to be popular this week. :beard:
Yes, let's keep it that way! Or even better, introduce an amendment which makes it compulsory for each new item to have a different font.
0
Aph
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#11
Report 3 weeks ago
#11
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
It really isn't though gioven legislation has a pretty specific structure (even if in game there is absurd amounts of flexibility such that you could label it in any way you could imagine), this is neither treaty, nor Order (whether that be in council, or by a SoS) and as such has Parts (should never be necessary in the MHoC), made up of sections, in turn composed of subsections, which may themselves consist of paragraphs.

Do you know what ensures a joined up approach? The Department for Transport, it is literally their job to coordinate national infrastructure development and if it is so incompetent that it cannot do this in a joined up way then HMIC will not solve the problem. Depending on exactly what these bodies are to do it could become less coordinated as competencies of DfT get devolved to bodies ultimately controlled by Parliament.

If there is not mass nationalisation then a lot of these bodies serve no function. Why, for instance, does there need to be a public sector equivalent of the National Grid if the aforementioned entity is to continue maintaining the grid? Likewise for the water infrastructure? Or am I completely misreading it and you're simply rebranding, among other quangos, ofgem and ofwat, ofcom etc?

It's also ironic that you say the decisions are taken away from political masters when it is still politicians appointing the masters via Parliament.
The point is that this is non-political and actually is looking at how gas, electricity, water and telecommunications networks can work with transportation networks. This is clearly different to DfT as it takes a broader brush approach.

The National Grid is being nationalised yes, it is a private company which has a monopoly and as such is anti-competitive so it should be under state control. As for water this bill again ends the regional monopolies, where there cannot be competition having industry owned by the private sector is not in the public interest, but it introduces competition into the water market for domestic supply, something that already exists for commercial uses.

A step away is still away, just not necessarily removed because parliament is sovereign.
0
Aph
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#12
Report 3 weeks ago
#12
(Original post by The Mogg)
Against government intervention in most cases, so Nay. Also, I truly cannot be arsed reading the Bible of Infrastructure, maybe make future items a little smaller next time, for those with little energy to read such a long item. You're welcome.


Yes, let's keep it that way! Or even better, introduce an amendment which makes it compulsory for each new item to have a different font.
As explained above this is not government intervention into the markets. This bill actually creates new markets and new opportunities for businesses whilst retaining an option for the state to act as a fallback. It also removes the current state endorsed, private monopolies that exist in the U.K. which are anti-competitive and bad for the consumer.


Also, this has been made much shorter than from when I first drafted it. Indeed it is about 1/4 the size.
0
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#13
Report 3 weeks ago
#13
Didn't get very far through it before I realised that arms-length bodies serving England only get to sit on a board with responsibility for the whole UK.

As a result, no.
0
Aph
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#14
Report 3 weeks ago
#14
(Original post by Saracen's Fez)
Didn't get very far through it before I realised that arms-length bodies serving England only get to sit on a board with responsibility for the whole UK.

As a result, no.
Can you give examples? I was trying to respect devolved institutions in writing this bill, nothing anglocentric about it so am happy to discuss how this could be improved.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#15
Report 3 weeks ago
#15
(Original post by Aph)
The point is that this is non-political and actually is looking at how gas, electricity, water and telecommunications networks can work with transportation networks. This is clearly different to DfT as it takes a broader brush approach.

The National Grid is being nationalised yes, it is a private company which has a monopoly and as such is anti-competitive so it should be under state control. As for water this bill again ends the regional monopolies, where there cannot be competition having industry owned by the private sector is not in the public interest, but it introduces competition into the water market for domestic supply, something that already exists for commercial uses.

A step away is still away, just not necessarily removed because parliament is sovereign.
Is it, in reality, any less political than keeping it all directly under DfT (and other departments as appropriate) when those running these quangos will want to do whatever parliament wants so as to keep their jobs, you simply change the political masters away from the executive and over to the legislature (and we've all seen what happens when the legislature tries to run the show). They are also fundamentally two areas that do not need to overlap, in fact the optimal distribution of masts for telecommunications probably shares next to nothing in common with the transport networks given you are looking for a network to give a base level of coverage over the entire country (I'd like to see you have the two intertwined in rural areas) with a higher level of coverage in urban areas (where you're more interested in crossing over with buildings rather than roads and rail). The only overlap is the likes of between road and rail which is already dealt with by, you guessed it, the Department for Transport.

So you're looking at the biggest nationalisation program since at least the 70s with, ignoring overseas operations, the nationalisation of National Grid plc being £30bn, this rises even further when you throw in water you have £160bn for the regulatory asset value, competition in supply does not require nationalisation of distribution as demonstrated by the energy market.

It isn't even a step away, it is a step sideways at best.
0
Aph
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#16
Report 3 weeks ago
#16
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Is it, in reality, any less political than keeping it all directly under DfT (and other departments as appropriate) when those running these quangos will want to do whatever parliament wants so as to keep their jobs, you simply change the political masters away from the executive and over to the legislature (and we've all seen what happens when the legislature tries to run the show). They are also fundamentally two areas that do not need to overlap, in fact the optimal distribution of masts for telecommunications probably shares next to nothing in common with the transport networks given you are looking for a network to give a base level of coverage over the entire country (I'd like to see you have the two intertwined in rural areas) with a higher level of coverage in urban areas (where you're more interested in crossing over with buildings rather than roads and rail). The only overlap is the likes of between road and rail which is already dealt with by, you guessed it, the Department for Transport.

So you're looking at the biggest nationalisation program since at least the 70s with, ignoring overseas operations, the nationalisation of National Grid plc being £30bn, this rises even further when you throw in water you have £160bn for the regulatory asset value, competition in supply does not require nationalisation of distribution as demonstrated by the energy market.

It isn't even a step away, it is a step sideways at best.
There is absolutely overlap with telecoms and road, road and health, telecoms and health, health and rail etc. If all of these people are talking to each other and planning together you unlock synergies that you wouldn’t have otherwise and get more effective, efficient infrastructure.

I’m not claiming it does, I’m claiming that private monopolies are bad and I’m fundamentally opposed to the existence of any private monopoly.
0
04MR17
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#17
Report 3 weeks ago
#17
(Original post by The Mogg)
Yes, let's keep it that way! Or even better, introduce an amendment which makes it compulsory for each new item to have a different font.
No. It's not great for the visually impaired.
0
Aph
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#18
Report 3 weeks ago
#18
(Original post by barnetlad)
I can never accept franchising of the NHS and so a Nay to this Bill on those grounds alone (and no doubt many others were I to go through the detail of the Bill).
I’m disappointed that the Honourable member is willing to put ideology above the needs of the people.
0
SoggyCabbages
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#19
Report 3 weeks ago
#19
(Original post by Aph)
I’m disappointed that the Honourable member is willing to put ideology above the needs of the people.
Aren't you also doing this by denying the EU referendum result lol.
0
The Mogg
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#20
Report 3 weeks ago
#20
That doesn't count! duuuuh.
(Original post by SoggyCabbages)
Aren't you also doing this by denying the EU referendum result lol.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How has the start of this academic year been for you?

Loving it - gonna be a great year (114)
17.7%
It's just nice to be back! (177)
27.48%
Not great so far... (229)
35.56%
I want to drop out! (124)
19.25%

Watched Threads

View All