I highly doubt that the only answer to fixing the fibre issue is through nationalisation. Do any other countries even run a similar scheme?
Well, the current situation is that the broadband roll-out and advancement in this country has been woeful because the providers are not that interested in doing it. Why waste money with providing broadband to rural areas? Without the Government paying for it, I just don't see it happening. Nationalisation might not be the only answer, but it is an answer. If someone wants to suggest better options, I am all ears. I find it odd to criticise something that will certainly be a massive improvement on the current state of things though.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Interesting threads. I found this with some of Labour’s policies in 2017, notably the building of social housing. It’s not their aims were bad, or that their plans were without merit. But the plans they offered were often superficial and when you dug into the little detail available there were either unintended consequences or even potential dealbreakers that seemingly hadn’t been considered (based on the interviews with the people presenting the policies). Keen supporters of Labour, naturally, just assume that Labour have what it takes to sort out these problems and thus the details don’t really matter to them. But of course if you aren’t a keen Labour supporter you probably don’t have that faith, and so it’s kind of frustrating because it’s not just that the full impact analysis hasn’t been shared, it appears not to have been done at all. Which doesn’t really give you the faith you’re currently lacking in the policy.
Guardian said:
Now, about that £100k+ of public money you gave her Boris...
It's not about his private life. It's about giving tax payers money, public funds to close friends, breaking codes of conduct.
I understand that, I just don’t think it’ll cut through. Time will tell though
It won’t, he has surely done more than enough in his like 4 months as PM where in any normal political time he’d surely need to step down?
It's just a lack of quality journalism. Or a lack of desire to drive the point home. Most media owners are extremely wealthy and would benefit from a dodgy Boris led government.
Lack of impartial media means no public outcry. No public outcry means no judgement. It’s a bit like the law of diminishing returns, as the offences keep
It's defo not just the media. Visiting my mother and her partner last week (both 70+ massive Brexiteers), they just said 'well all politicians lie...' and deflected anything.
'Delivers Brexit'...
Surely it makes more sense to increase the grants and force the companies to use that money in the areas it is intended for? There's already a grant to do exactly this although its not currently enough and increasing it would be far cheaper than nationalising the entire industry. There would have to be proper checks on the areas the money was being used and conditions on the time it takes for it to work properly though.
Well that's grim.
They are absolutely right.
God knows. Not sure whether Brexit or the fact we're about to hand Johnson a massive majority is the more remarkable feat of stupidity.
Both are highly likely to have a bad outcome.
Observer said:
Yeah same, my mothers the same, as is most in that age group in this area.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Well you've partially understood at least, planning is a vital, but so too are many other factors, which do not seem to be in place at this time, or in some cases even evidenced at all, which would be required to deem Corbyn's version of Free Broadband for everyone, is potentially achievable. You could apply the same principles to Brexit, the remain view that has been long argued is that the 'Leavers' version of a Unicorn laden Brexit is not potentially achievable and they have been proved right... no unicorns insight in Boris's plan!
Because Murdoch. It's third on the ST homepage but with a traffic killer of a headline- Revealed: the Russia report.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Don't forget the 'aspirational' bit.
Hull is a bit of a weird one with Hull East, Prescott's old seat, only around three miles from my mum in David Davis's Haltemprice and Howden constituency, which is super-Tory.
What do you think influenced their opinion? If not the media, then what? Bearing in mind it's been a concerted media effort over a long period of time.
To be fair, that's YouGov.
Not surprised, we knew there were a lot of lies told during the referendum. But to have the additional connections to Russia in black and white should raise serious questions.
Along with the peerage offers, misuse of public funds and lying to the Queen. It's amazing because without a doubt just a single of one them would have destroyed Labour's election chances. But, alas, we live in the age of post truth.
