Using unpaid volunteers from UK and other country political parties is not new - it’s been going on for decades. It only becomes illegal if they are paid and, as far as I can ascertain, this is not happening.
Absolutely pathetic to justify leaving the water sector basically as is with a couple of tweaks. Colombia is the only other nation on earth with a water sector as privatised as ours. Not for profit should be the bare minimum of reform.
a) There's plenty of serious reform that can be enacted without full blown nationalisation and many a nation has some sort of hybrid arrangement. b) Many an opinion piece has been written over the last few years as to how it would be possible to de facto or actually nationalise without buying out the existing water companies. I don't know if they're right, but at least some of the authors have credentials that indicate they know what they're on about. Fundamentally, access to water is a human right and it's a resource of national importance. It simply cannot be held to ransom by predatory, exploitative private industry. If the legal framework doesn't currently support the ability to wrest ownership, then emergency legislation needs to be drafted, though I strongly suspect unwillingness to seize is more due to the absence of any sense of radicalism in the current Labour cabinet and a commitment to the neo-liberal economic consensus rather than a legal hurdle.
a) There's plenty of serious reform that can be enacted without full blown nationalisation and many a nation has some sort of hybrid arrangement. b) Many an opinion piece has been written over the last few years as to how it would be possible to de facto or actually nationalise without buying out the existing water companies. I don't know if they're right, but at least some of the authors have credentials that indicate they know what they're on about. Fundamentally, water is a human right and a resource of national importance. It simply cannot be held to ransom by predatory, exploitative private industry. If the legal framework doesn't currently support the ability to wrest ownership, then emergency legislation needs to be drafted, though I strongly suspect unwillingness to do so is more due to the absence of any sense of radicalism in the current Labour cabinet and a commitment to the neo-liberal economic consensus rather than a legal hurdle.
@@nickclarkuk a) There's plenty of serious reform that can be enacted without full blown nationalisation and many a nation has some sort of hybrid arrangement. b) Many an opinion piece has been written over the last few years as to how it would be possible to de facto or actually nationalise without buying out the existing water companies. I don't know if they're right, but at least some of the authors have credentials that indicate they know what they're on about. Fundamentally, water is a human right and a resource of national importance. It simply cannot be held to ransom by predatory, exploitative private industry. If the legal framework doesn't currently support the ability to wrest ownership, then emergency legislation needs to be drafted, though I strongly suspect unwillingness to do so is more due to the absence of any sense of radicalism in the current Labour cabinet and a commitment to the neo-liberal economic consensus rather than a legal hurdle.
@@nickclarkuk There's plenty of serious reform that can be enacted without full blown nationalisation and many a nation has some sort of hybrid arrangement. Many an opinion piece has been written over the last few years as to how it would be possible to de facto or actually nationalise without buying out the existing water companies. I don't know if they're right, but at least some of the authors have credentials that indicate they know what they're on about. Fundamentally, water is a human right and a resource of national importance. It simply cannot be held to ransom by predatory, exploitative private industry. If the legal framework doesn't currently support the ability to wrest ownership, then emergency legislation needs to be drafted, though I strongly suspect unwillingness to do so is more due to the absence of any sense of radicalism in the current Labour cabinet and a commitment to the neo-liberal economic consensus rather than a legal hurdle.
I feel like it's mostly because of the private school tax. High up media types send their kids there and they're furious at the possibility of having to pay more.
Just nationalise water already, to expect private companies that have handed reigonal monopolies to not hike prices, not invest in infrastructure and themselves huge dividends and salaries is ridiculous.
Sorry Emily, but why would you ask such a question, you know the answer and answering it will just put an even bigger strain on relations with the US if Donald Trump does become president
That man said ‘we need the sector to be investable’, so he won’t end profit. So why are the public about to be forced to pay double their current charge (Southern Water), to rectify the corruption and greed of the company? Surely by his logic the funds should be coming from an investor and not the public, who have already been forced to pay for a woeful service. What planet is he on?
Individuals are allowed to do what they want with their own free time and own money. The issue comes when they start being paid for it, as per farage, truss and may. It’s clear what side tends to cross the line here, on both sides of the Atlantic
This is simply ridiculous to give airtime to. Republican and democrats would come here during our elections and visa versa. Wouldn't surprise me that trump knew nothing about this occuring nor the vast majority of the American public
It is bizarre that for a country that completely idolises its military to ignore Trumps clear indifference to it and downright avoidance of it. His comments show his contempt and the Democrats show highlight this.
Johnson showed contempt for the queen & our parliament, he even slipped his own security to party with FSB (KGB), after attending a G7 meeting to discuss a Russian attack on British soil, but he still got re-elected with a huge majority by a plurality of Brits who no doubt would overwhelmingly claim to be monarchists, patriots, & value the sovereignty of parliament.
Trump's made his hatred of Labour abundantly clear from the start. Labour should have hit back long ago: it has nothing to lose in terms of a "special relationship" that only ever existed in the mind of craven UK atlanticists.
Guys, please try not to talk over one another - its unintelligible for listeners and you deny one another the ability to comple the point you’re making.
Goofs - The Coca-Cola can George drinks from while chatting with Lorna is a post-1968 design. Maniacal is a wonderful word. Sham poo. Wanna **** with me Trump? Trump. Ice Bucket challenge. Well done The Donald. Whatever your hair is made from it survived the challenge. He wants the power to pardon hisself. Is all. The rest is gravy and look at the confederacy of dunces lined up to do as they are told. Extreme Power. lol Those two 1950s Biblical Epics - The Robe and Demetrius and The Gladiators. - Well Jay Robinson actor (RIP) as an out of his mind Caligula.
@@mwd331 sentenced for the hush money trial. The drama he has caused the judge a outing his daughters name and address should see him go to prison if he loses the election.
Don't think it's a great idea for our politicians to travel to other countries during elections and start picking sides, they should just stay out of it and prepare to work with whoever gets elected, otherwise it's basically party over country?
Stay silent because he's a dangerous far-right loon? All the more reason to fight back. He's attacked Labour (and even non-Faragist Tories) from the start and made it clear that Britain will be hit by any anti-EU trade policies because of its post-brexit deal (such as it is), so it frankly doesn't make much difference.
@@dannyquinn9128 The headline says is Labour interfering in the US election? A senior Labour Party lady has admitted they have sent 150 activists to help Harris. Draw your own conclusion.
@@stephfoxwell4620 If you had actually listened, you'd know it's all above board and not funded, which is completely legal. Were you crying when Farage and Truss went to cheer for Trump? I'll wait for you to dodge the question, like you did yesterday.
I would say yes they are .wonder who is paying for them all.totally condescending..sure they can manage .as it we are doing so well here !..what a joke.
They are doing what is legal and has been done for decades. it's just that Trump uses his childish outburts and threats to intimidate and corrupt. Now that is more than disappointing and shabby.
The main problem as i see it, is if trump loses, then uk and the labour party will be party to giving him another excuse for losing. It was niave of labour to allow these people to go to usa bearing in mind 2020.
![Summer Walker - Heart Of A Woman [Official Lyric Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/SFddctbZzw8/mqdefault.jpg)
![Diggy Graves - Red Vineyard [Official Lyric Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/8Ro085T0mnQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Glad Farage has criticised this - he would never go over to support Trump...
...oh.
Did he sent 100 foot soldiers knocking on doors?
"Foot soldiers". Oh, have a day off, you numpty.
Both Faraga and these Labour actions are fine.
@@mansnotbot4160but when the Russians do it you’ll have a big cry 😢
Using unpaid volunteers from UK and other country political parties is not new - it’s been going on for decades. It only becomes illegal if they are paid and, as far as I can ascertain, this is not happening.
Absolutely pathetic to justify leaving the water sector basically as is with a couple of tweaks. Colombia is the only other nation on earth with a water sector as privatised as ours.
Not for profit should be the bare minimum of reform.
Maybe they don’t have the money to buy the water companies 🤷♂️
a) There's plenty of serious reform that can be enacted without full blown nationalisation and many a nation has some sort of hybrid arrangement.
b) Many an opinion piece has been written over the last few years as to how it would be possible to de facto or actually nationalise without buying out the existing water companies. I don't know if they're right, but at least some of the authors have credentials that indicate they know what they're on about.
Fundamentally, access to water is a human right and it's a resource of national importance. It simply cannot be held to ransom by predatory, exploitative private industry. If the legal framework doesn't currently support the ability to wrest ownership, then emergency legislation needs to be drafted, though I strongly suspect unwillingness to seize is more due to the absence of any sense of radicalism in the current Labour cabinet and a commitment to the neo-liberal economic consensus rather than a legal hurdle.
a) There's plenty of serious reform that can be enacted without full blown nationalisation and many a nation has some sort of hybrid arrangement.
b) Many an opinion piece has been written over the last few years as to how it would be possible to de facto or actually nationalise without buying out the existing water companies. I don't know if they're right, but at least some of the authors have credentials that indicate they know what they're on about.
Fundamentally, water is a human right and a resource of national importance. It simply cannot be held to ransom by predatory, exploitative private industry. If the legal framework doesn't currently support the ability to wrest ownership, then emergency legislation needs to be drafted, though I strongly suspect unwillingness to do so is more due to the absence of any sense of radicalism in the current Labour cabinet and a commitment to the neo-liberal economic consensus rather than a legal hurdle.
@@nickclarkuk
a) There's plenty of serious reform that can be enacted without full blown nationalisation and many a nation has some sort of hybrid arrangement.
b) Many an opinion piece has been written over the last few years as to how it would be possible to de facto or actually nationalise without buying out the existing water companies. I don't know if they're right, but at least some of the authors have credentials that indicate they know what they're on about.
Fundamentally, water is a human right and a resource of national importance. It simply cannot be held to ransom by predatory, exploitative private industry. If the legal framework doesn't currently support the ability to wrest ownership, then emergency legislation needs to be drafted, though I strongly suspect unwillingness to do so is more due to the absence of any sense of radicalism in the current Labour cabinet and a commitment to the neo-liberal economic consensus rather than a legal hurdle.
@@nickclarkuk
There's plenty of serious reform that can be enacted without full blown nationalisation and many a nation has some sort of hybrid arrangement.
Many an opinion piece has been written over the last few years as to how it would be possible to de facto or actually nationalise without buying out the existing water companies. I don't know if they're right, but at least some of the authors have credentials that indicate they know what they're on about.
Fundamentally, water is a human right and a resource of national importance. It simply cannot be held to ransom by predatory, exploitative private industry. If the legal framework doesn't currently support the ability to wrest ownership, then emergency legislation needs to be drafted, though I strongly suspect unwillingness to do so is more due to the absence of any sense of radicalism in the current Labour cabinet and a commitment to the neo-liberal economic consensus rather than a legal hurdle.
The bigger question is, why is our MSM determined to bring down Starmer?
What gives you that impression?
100%. It’s insane how much BS Keir and his team have had and continue to have to deal with.
British msm was hijacked by Murdoch years and years ago
I feel like it's mostly because of the private school tax. High up media types send their kids there and they're furious at the possibility of having to pay more.
I think you know why.
Just nationalise water already, to expect private companies that have handed reigonal monopolies to not hike prices, not invest in infrastructure and themselves huge dividends and salaries is ridiculous.
He's orange, John. Orange is a colour.
This conversation just shows Elon Musk and Trump interfering with our politics more than the other way around.
Garage farage is the obvious mole….trump before country !!!!
Talk about a none story all party’s have done this for decades
Reid remains unconvincing in his post.
Sorry Emily, but why would you ask such a question, you know the answer and answering it will just put an even bigger strain on relations with the US if Donald Trump does become president
A family living in small accommodation will still be using the same amount of water services if thry move to a bigger house
32:25 WEAK. It isn't a "special relationship" - were a dead country that imports the worst political tendencies of the US.
And Farage?
You’d think being MP for Clacton he’d be in parliament doing his full time job.
That man said ‘we need the sector to be investable’, so he won’t end profit. So why are the public about to be forced to pay double their current charge (Southern Water), to rectify the corruption and greed of the company? Surely by his logic the funds should be coming from an investor and not the public, who have already been forced to pay for a woeful service. What planet is he on?
Individuals are allowed to do what they want with their own free time and own money. The issue comes when they start being paid for it, as per farage, truss and may. It’s clear what side tends to cross the line here, on both sides of the Atlantic
This is simply ridiculous to give airtime to. Republican and democrats would come here during our elections and visa versa. Wouldn't surprise me that trump knew nothing about this occuring nor the vast majority of the American public
It is bizarre that for a country that completely idolises its military to ignore Trumps clear indifference to it and downright avoidance of it. His comments show his contempt and the Democrats show highlight this.
Johnson showed contempt for the queen & our parliament, he even slipped his own security to party with FSB (KGB), after attending a G7 meeting to discuss a Russian attack on British soil, but he still got re-elected with a huge majority by a plurality of Brits who no doubt would overwhelmingly claim to be monarchists, patriots, & value the sovereignty of parliament.
Also labour are in no way far left. As well as that Trump and musk are clutching at straws
The same as when Obama interfered in Brexit. Telling us how we would go to the back of the queue for a trade deal.
Parliament was clearly having a bit of fun teasing Rayner with this nonsense from Trump.
05:40 no mention of it in US media? 🤔 a narrow view of US media!
I do think this is concerning. What will happen if he wins?
I am surprised these politicians do this and are comfortable doing so tbh.
We'll have bigger problems to worry about if he wins anyway. It'll be Europe and Australia vs the world.
What is the word , Desperate .
Remember, trumpf has German heritage!!!!
So have the royal family
If Trump wins, how do you think this will reflect on US and UK relations? That is why UK political parties should remain neutral.
Trump's made his hatred of Labour abundantly clear from the start. Labour should have hit back long ago: it has nothing to lose in terms of a "special relationship" that only ever existed in the mind of craven UK atlanticists.
came here just to see the haircut
eminem had left the stage already (he introduced Obama)
Why are you even talking about this? Why?
It's interesting?
12:02 I know plenty of traditional labour people who want Trump to win. Try talking to some working class men once in a while
Guys, please try not to talk over one another - its unintelligible for listeners and you deny one another the ability to comple the point you’re making.
Goofs - The Coca-Cola can George drinks from while chatting with Lorna is a post-1968 design.
Maniacal is a wonderful word. Sham poo. Wanna **** with me Trump?
Trump. Ice Bucket challenge. Well done The Donald. Whatever your hair is made from it survived the challenge. He wants the power to pardon hisself. Is all. The rest is gravy and look at the confederacy of dunces lined up to do as they are told. Extreme Power. lol
Those two 1950s Biblical Epics - The Robe and Demetrius and The Gladiators. - Well Jay Robinson actor (RIP) as an out of his mind Caligula.
What are you on about?
@@dannyquinn9128 Haha! None of us know! I wish I'd had some though.
@@alana8863 It looks like the bot has gone haywire.
November 18th could be the day trump is silenced and sent to prison. I can't take no more.
What's happening on November 18th?
@@mwd331 sentenced for the hush money trial. The drama he has caused the judge a outing his daughters name and address should see him go to prison if he loses the election.
Don't think it's a great idea for our politicians to travel to other countries during elections and start picking sides, they should just stay out of it and prepare to work with whoever gets elected, otherwise it's basically party over country?
Instigator of Jan 6 is whinning again?
Labour members have volunteered in past US elections, but what were they thinking with Trump as the other candidate. Utterly foolish and naïve.
From my perspective?
Perfect opportunity to learn about election strategy during a US Presidential election.
@@jamesmeade9501 Or to put it another way, first, do no harm.
Stay silent because he's a dangerous far-right loon? All the more reason to fight back. He's attacked Labour (and even non-Faragist Tories) from the start and made it clear that Britain will be hit by any anti-EU trade policies because of its post-brexit deal (such as it is), so it frankly doesn't make much difference.
CrossNess. The Big Stink.
Why can't you type in full sentences?
Which bit of "we sent 150 Labour activists to campaign for Harris" did you not follow?
I "don't follow" what your point is.
@@dannyquinn9128 The headline says is Labour interfering in the US election?
A senior Labour Party lady has admitted they have sent 150 activists to help Harris.
Draw your own conclusion.
@@stephfoxwell4620 If you had actually listened, you'd know it's all above board and not funded, which is completely legal.
Were you crying when Farage and Truss went to cheer for Trump?
I'll wait for you to dodge the question, like you did yesterday.
@@dannyquinn9128 So if China send 2,000 activists here for our Elrction (all above board and funded) you'd be happy with that?
@@stephfoxwell4620They are unpaid volunteers and that is NOT against US law.
Possibly more significant than the 'we', is what does she mean by "I" at the start of the LinkedIn post, as in "I've got 100 volunteers...". Hmmm..
Why talk in riddles? Just spell out what you actually mean.
I would say yes they are .wonder who is paying for them all.totally condescending..sure they can manage .as it we are doing so well here !..what a joke.
What does that even mean? Would you like to try again in English?
They are paid by the Labour party, which comes from donations. It's a manufactured outrage.
@dan..no speako the engliiish😂.
@@tonkysue207 I can tell. Why not try posting your comment in your mother tongue? Then we can use the translate feature.
That labour twit…. Shame, this Labour Party is very disappointing and shabby
Surely, most MPs of any persuasion would want Harris over Trump.
After all, Loony Liz has disappeared from the scene now.
They are doing what is legal and has been done for decades. it's just that Trump uses his childish outburts and threats to intimidate and corrupt. Now that is more than disappointing and shabby.
The main problem as i see it, is if trump loses, then uk and the labour party will be party to giving him another excuse for losing. It was niave of labour to allow these people to go to usa bearing in mind 2020.