What do cigar smokers vote?

[Niela]

Firstly congrats on a very civil debate guys secondy, wish we had better leaders of our parties, how would nail there balls to a policy & stick to it. Don't think I'll surprise anyone as our token Daily Mail reader, that'll I be voting Tory as usual. Don't rate Cameron apart from the fact I'd rather have him representing us at international events than any of the alternatives. There is a dearth of quality politicians in our country, maybe paying more would attract a better standard but don't bet on it! I would give them ?120K but no expenses & that means travel, accommodation & hiring staff. Suddenly i think you'd find them travelling more frugally & actually mixing with the people who vote from them. Give them vouchers to stay in Premier Inn/ Holiday Express style hotels in London & let the Travelling MPs stay there, or let them pay out of their salary if they want to stay somewhere else.

I think David's track record in the world is rather something to be concerned about? His tactics in Europe rather alienated everybody than persuade other countries to ally with him? I don't see what he achieved in the last 5 years on an international plattform. I do agree with the austerity policy though. Overspending can't be the answer. But I wish the government would work closer with it's European allies to avoid companies like Amazon paying almost no taxes in Luxembourg. And if they can't find allies for that, then at least plug the loop holes on the Isle of Man, Jersey and Guernsey. (Though I have the feeling that too many people with influence have an interest in keeping those open.)

[Niela]

I do listen.... and then I totally ignore it.

If you think the NHS is about care and not money then I would disagree. The NHS is a cash cow for people at the top and for all the staff in positions that are hard to fill.

.

Also I unfortunately believe that the public transport issues in the UK run much deeper than it's owners.

Slightly cynical...

But in all earnest, lets say I agree with you on this point. What would a privatization really change then? You'd have private companies with people on the top making a lot of money from the tax payers and underpaying their staff to maximize their profits. From your description that is basically the same as we have now. I don't see an improvement in that.

[tippexx]

.... then, to clear the logjam a cull of bureaucracy starting at the top. Current achievements and record suggest these people are worth their weight in having. And an end to the practice of golden handshakes and pensions. A simple proposition. No reward for failure. That would deter the bullies, liar and opportunist who see the workplace as an arena for 'bunnyears' politics games rather than proper work.

The front line staff are sound .... the backroom needs a good clear out and kicking.

[ValeTudoGuy]

Slightly cynical...

But in all earnest, lets say I agree with you on this point. What would a privatization really change then? You'd have private companies with people on the top making a lot of money from the tax payers and underpaying their staff to maximize their profits. From your description that is basically the same as we have now. I don't see an improvement in that.

Funny how it didn't turn out that way in the water industry then. We get paid slightly above similar market rates for other industry.... But we are heavily targeted on customer satisfaction and are improving year on year... Way above where we were at as a wholly national owned industry.

The key is a good ombudsmen.

[tippexx]

The key is a good Dictionary .... so they might understand the meaning of the word 'honourable' before they get around to addressing each other as such.

[Niela]

Funny how it didn't turn out that way in the water industry then. We get paid slightly above similar market rates for other industry.... But we are heavily targeted on customer satisfaction and are improving year on year... Way above where we were at as a wholly national owned industry.

The key is a good ombudsmen.

I wouldn't say water is as complex as health care and there are plenty of examples out there in the world that showed a rather different picture. I don't have enough knowledge about the water industry though. But I do know that experiments in Germany with water privatization lead to rising prices and a neglect of infrastructure so after 10 years the government had to jump in and make the investments the industry simply didn't do. From what I understand in the UK, the water infrastructure is basically stuck in Victorian times. Does the private industry have an obligation to update this? I remember plenty of burst pipes that kept on wasting water for days before being fixed.

[ValeTudoGuy]

I wouldn't say water is as complex as health care and there are plenty of examples out there in the world that showed a rather different picture. I don't have enough knowledge about the water industry though. But I do know that experiments in Germany with water privatization lead to rising prices and a neglect of infrastructure so after 10 years the government had to jump in and make the investments the industry simply didn't do. From what I understand in the UK, the water infrastructure is basically stuck in Victorian times. Does the private industry have an obligation to update this? I remember plenty of burst pipes that kept on wasting water for days before being fixed.

We have to constantly maintain and update the entire infrastructure or lose our right to administer the network. Since 2011 that infrastructure almost doubled because we adopted the pipes up to most people's soil stack. Prices have not gone up (in my geographic area) in fact the ombudsmen is looking to cut bills across the country.

You say stuck in Victorian times like its a bad thing. Victorian sewers are unbelievable in their engineering. The problem sewers were usually built in the 50's or later IMO.

We deal with increasing demand on the network, increasing rainfall year on year along with huge housing developments with no requirement for the building companies who are set to make hundreds of millions of pounds to put anything towards improvement of the network. In addition we have huge amounts of abuse of the network due to people's inability to apreciate what should go down a sewer.

Everything that has to go down a combined or foul sewer needs stripping, cleaning and disposing and this for around ?250 a yearl or less.

for that ?250, if you get a problem we come out (usually within 4 hours) to fix it at no extra charge and if you were found to be materialy affected even if it was caused by your miss use of the sewer that we could never have foreseen then you get you years sewer charges refunded and we gain dissatisfaction points that can cost us around ?4k per incident.

And yet we are increasing productivity, customer satisfaction and lowering cost year on year on year.

Now go outside of your house and look at you local authority owned highway gully which you pay council tax to have cleaned. If yours is running its a miracle.... Even if it is I bet there's numerous examles of blocked ones on your street. When was the last time you saw the council cleaning them?

Im out and about near them every working day and I have never seen one being cleaned.

So from my experience I would say privatise the gullies and they will get maintained like our network does.... Because if they don't someone is accountable unlike the council who are the NHS of this analogy.

Only in the NHS it's not blocked gullies its hundreds of people dead at Stafford hospital.

National industry gets bloated and badly run all too often IMO.

[Niela]

You say stuck in Victorian times like its a bad thing. Victorian sewers are unbelievable in their engineering.

Thanks for the reply. That's very informative.

In regards to the Victorians, I share your sentiments and I have the utmost respect for their achievement. It shows that back then the Empire was doing a lot better and public spending on infrastructure must have been a lot higher as well. Nowadays you can't even build a fast train track anymore.

I also find your insights of the industry very interesting. You can only read that much, but personal experience is always good. And when it comes to water, I am quite happy with the service here in the UK as well, though it is more expensive compared to Germany. But only slightly, so that would be something I can live with. I am not one of those people that think it's the achievment of a decade when a government lowers the average yearly costs of something by ?30 per houshold. (Who cares about a fiver a month?)

And there is something to the fact that state run institutions are often inefficient and lacking. However, when it comes to health care we have plenty of examples in the world that show us how different systems work. And I would simply not trust an industry in a capitalist system to provide a fair and equal system to all citizens of a country. We can already see how the pharmaceutical industry is unwilling to provie cheaper drugs to poor countries and rather watches people suffer than cut down on profit margins. A burst pipe sucks but when you ahve a serious illness there is simply more at stake.

And I simply do not see how the privatization of the national rail system has improved it for the better. It's slow and more expensive than pretty much any other system in the EU. So we have one successful and one unsuccessful attempt to show. Not sure I want to risk another one.

[tippexx]

Vote?

This election is like being in a Kafkaesque nightmare. The train is hurtling towards the buffers, all the passengers know the train is hurtling towards the buffers, and no matter what ticket your holding the train will still crash into the buffers. We're fooked!

[Motormadj]

Vote?

This election is like being in a Kafkaesque nightmare. The train is hurtling towards the buffers, all the passengers know the train is hurtling towards the buffers, and no matter what ticket your holding the train will still crash into the buffers. We're fooked!

Lol. you might have a point.
Changes in government only has limited effect.

[Motormadj]

Does anyone know what the one 'other' vote was in the poll above? Which party i mean?

[tippexx]

Does anyone know what the one 'other' vote was in the poll above? Which party i mean?

I think it means anyone who might have dry palms and isn't too creepy for their own good. Someone who might actually be thinking about the Electorate rather than "will this suit look good on green leather".

[Motormadj]

Ha hah ha. Made me laugh out loud.