I could forgive them a lot, but not this ….

very last blade of bloody grass is for sale to the highest bidder in this shitty country and I’ve just had enough of it

Bye, then.

Or instead of impotently shouting on a remote forum, get off your arse and be the change you want to see. Get yerself or an avatar elected and influence things.

Make a change. Make an effort.

Otherwise you are just shouting at rainclouds

Are you happy with foreign governments owning vital British industries

Vital – which ones are they?

I am struggling to think of any apart from possibly key defence and research. Certainly not one of many companies moving bits of paper and parcels around the country.

Since all the blame for privatisation of Royal Mail is apparently being placed on the Tories it might worth remembering that the minister responsible for the privatisation has never been a member of the Tory Party:

Vince Cable recalled by MPs over Royal Mail privatisation controversy

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/apr/07/vince-cable-recalled-mps-royal-mail-privatisation

Vince Cable has been recalled to give further evidence on the privatisation of Royal Mail following a damning National Audit Office report that found the government had cost taxpayers £750m in a single day by undervaluing the postal service.

The business secretary will be called before the business select committee on 29 April to answer claims that he botched the sale and allowed City traders to make instant profits at the expense of taxpayers.

Cable, who took the lead role in arranging the privatisation alongside business minister Michael Fallon, endured a bruising encounter with the select committee when he first appeared to explain the Royal Mail deal. 

So a botched privatisation led by a senior Liberal Democrat politician then. Still,  a few ‘liberal lefties” on here seem fairly comfortable with whole situation so maybe not quite as surprising as it might first appear.

For Margret Thatcher Royal Mail privatisation was a privatisation too far and she strongly opposed it, but for today’s centrists it’s a perfectly logical progression, despite massive voter opposition (you can be sure that the only reason Thatcher was opposed to RM privatisation was because she was smart enough to know that she would never be able to sell it to voters, today’s centrists don’t care because as far as they are concerned voters have no choice)

Which other first world country would allow directors of failing monopolies to draw huge bonuses whilst being fined for killing our waterways?

I would hazard a guess of; pretty much all of them. I don’t think the UK is alone is having groups of politicians of all stripes just making awful decisions (often as unintended consequences to be fair) about stuff they don’t pay enough attention to, don’t know enough about, and is mostly driven by ideological choices rather than necessity or fact that haven’t ever left a policy paper, and often fail when exposed to real life. [Insert Mike Tyson quote here]

Take my own industry, pretty much all GP practices are private for profit businesses that are given very regulated, very tightly drawn contracts that are pretty generous, and mostly (if we’re judging by the regulator) run reasonably well. Compared to the nationalised sector – Trusts, which generally do the same job, but do it less well. I’m not advocating for the privatisation of Trusts at all, but it comes with consequences, and choices.

And for democratically run politics – which for better or worse is partly a beauty contest, I can understand the desire to have one less avenue of criticism – and the fact that overall, parliament – the Government, have a  pretty bad record of running large national infrasture, both in the form of one-off projects and on going business, have a pretty bad record of making poor procurement choices, and often fail to agree on the long term aims of what they’re doing or trying to achieve.

So what? Just because you expect the  government to do what media moguls tell them doesn’t mean we agree, I think the attitude of appeasement to the media is a much much bigger problem to democracy than having the daily mail say nasty things. And with Musk now clearly spelling out that he is going to use twitter to disrupt democracy for the benefit of the few, to still keep parrating that the media should in any way dictate policy is becoming rather sad and pathetic.

I’m not saying they should, but since pretty much everything Labour will do will be negatively reported it’s best they pick their battles – remember, to win a war you don’t need to win every battle, just the right ones.

For Margret Thatcher Royal Mail privatisation was a privatisation too far and she strongly opposed it

Who gives a shit really. I mean, she was also opposed to BA taking the stylised flag off the tails of their planes, and famously draped a hanky over a model once. Thatcher wasn’t clear-minded and determined about what she could or couldn’t sell to the public, she was driven by her own internal logic, and ideology as much as the next politician. c.f. The poll tax.

The ’90’s round of privatisations is coming to and end, and as Engels points out, they’ll be changed in name, and the same groups of people will both profit from and avoid the consequences of their decisions, and will still be in control, and will likely as not re-privitise them again when the time comes around.

For Margret Thatcher Royal Mail privatisation was a privatisation too far and she strongly opposed

That was decades ago. We now live in a world that is totally unrecognisable from then on the communications front. It’s like advocating the nationalisation of candlestick makers as they are also an essential piece of public infrastructure

the Government, have a  pretty bad record of running large national infrasture, both in the form of one-off projects and on going business, have a pretty bad record of making poor procurement choices, and often fail to agree on the long term aims of what they’re doing or trying to achieve.

Business is no different, just they usually run out of money…

For Margret Thatcher Royal Mail privatisation was a privatisation too far and she strongly opposed

That was decades ago. We now live in a world that is totally unrecognisable from then on the communications front.

That is precisely my point!!

Thatcher claimed to be strongly opposed to the privatisation of Royal Mail but the reality is that she would have been very aware that British voters  would never buy the idea. And at that time both the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats were totally opposed to privatisation so it would likely have had electoral consequences.

Today the situation has utterly changed, both the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats are now enthusiastic supporters of privatisation, there are no electoral consequences if one of those parties is responsible for an unpopular privatisation, and Royal Mail privatisation has been unpopular from the very start.

The question decades ago was “do you want X privatised?” the question today is no longer asking voters if they want something privatised but whether they have a preference over who privatises it.

It’s like advocating the nationalisation of candlestick makers as they are also an essential piece of public infrastructure

No it isn’t, because candlestick makers are not also an essential piece of public infrastructure. And btw that sort of idiotic comparison is exactly the sort of comment that you might expect to hear from a right-wing Tory, today we are hearing it from someone who claims to be a Labour Party member. We have indeed gone a very long way.

Who was it who once said “the more they argue the more they sound the same”? That’s a rhetorical question btw.

Why does anybody care about the fact many previously state owned companies are now privatised – except of course for hard left wingers who think the means of production should be owned by the state?

Some don’t like “foreign governments owning vital British industries” – nobody’s defined what is a vital industry, but I can’t imagine one of the many companies delivering letters and parcels these days is somehow any more “vital” than say steel production.

And as for “foreign governments”, in the specific case of the Royal Mail it was a bloke from Czechia, not a “foreign government.”  It sounds to me like all this fuss about foreigners coming over and buying British companies is a bit Daily Mail “Little Englander”.  Ironic really.

I heard on the radio today that a reason for Thatcher not privatising Royal Mail was that it might upset the royal family!? But also the historical and technological context has moved on quite a bit since then…

Anyway, yes, renationalisation is ‘free’ at the point of acquisition (through economic sleight of hand), but from then on there is the small matter of its ongoing and perpetual operational cost and burden of risk and management. None of that is free, and it’s not like the government of the day is naturally equipped to run the industries in contention for silver bullet renationalisation. Public opinion might favour renationalisation, but is that just for the act of taking ownership itself and the brief relief and belief it provides, or for the full deal of taking on all the risk, operational cost, difficulties and complexities? I think the latter is less likely.

Oh, and i’m not a fan of privatisation at all, and it has been a mixed bag of disaster. But I am a pragmatist, and right now it’s about making the best of the hospital pass of a country we find ourselves in. Of the available solutions to many failing industries, I don’t think it’s the best solution on the table when looked at in the stark light of our present context and situation.

Why does anybody care about the fact many previously state owned companies are now privatised – except of course for hard left wingers who think the means of production should be owned by the state?

Well I guess you can pretend that it is only “hard left wingers” who want to renationalise the utilities but the claim is totally false, it has the support of even the majority of Tory voters, which unless you are a Trump supporter are not classed as hard left.

Large majorities of Britons now want to see water, energy, railway and bus companies nationalised

https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/50098-support-for-nationalising-utilities-and-public-transport-has-grown-significantly-in-last-seven-years

I heard on the radio today that a reason for Thatcher not privatising Royal Mail was that it might upset the royal family!?

I love it! Who dreams up stuff like that ?

Deal with the substantive point of this thread.  Why should anyone “giveashit” that The Royal Mail is being sold by is current private owner to a new foreign private owner? That is what seemed to upset the OP.

It’s not “vital” in any sense, it’s already privatised – the only thing that’s changed is it’s going to a foreigner.

As I originally said, of all the things wrong with the world, or in this country, this is right at the bottom of the heap.

Nothing I have heard in the discussion makes this register higher on my “giveashitometer” – in fact I care even less.

Rm was doing ok when it was both a parcel service and mail delivery. Following privatisation the parcel service which was profitable was spun out, and the PO’s chiefs were back to government cap in hand to ask for subsidy which had previously been provided by the parcel side of the business, which was now delivering handsomely for share holders. Darren Jones MP as chair of the business select committee last year, iirc, was pretty excoriating on it.

As to government’s ability to run business successfully I give you the east coast line. Twice taken back under governmental control and twice returned to profitability and reasonably high levels of customer satisfaction, only to be thrown out to contract again. ?

Nothing I have heard in the discussion makes this register higher on my “giveashitometer” – in fact I care even less.

With every new post of yours I can see that it is a complete non issue which you don’t give a shit about and have no interest at all in.

However according to a recent poll 75% of voters believe that RM should be renationalised and 15% believe that it shouldn’t be. Even with a large margin of error that is a very significant majority.

The poll doesn’t reveal how give a shit though. Perhaps they didn’t ask them the question?

‘What ‘Upsets the OP’ is the sheer amount of assets sold off to foreign investors (including state owned or partly state-owned ones).  I may be wrong, but I just can’t see other countries allowing it.  Let’s face it, if these companies weren’t attractive, they wouldn’t find a buyer, would they? We are constantly told how important and successful ‘Our’ financial sector is, how about they invest some of their vast profits in British Industry? I’m looking at you Jim Ratcliffe, you James Dyson and you John Bloor. As to private companies being more efficient than state owned ones, given a level playing field and with good salaries paid to good people, I don’t see why that should be the case.  A previous poster said that I should get off my arse and do something about it.  Maybe if I wasn’t nearly 70, I might (although I don’t know what except by entering politics).

I may be wrong, but I just can’t see other countries allowing it.

The UK company selling Royal Mail is keeping similar “assets” in Canada & Austria. So there’s two to start with.

I share your sentiment in general though, I felt the same when ARM was allowed to be sold to buyers outside the UK. I feel the same about monopoly operators like the water companies as well. But Royal Mail isn’t what it was, the Post Office counters work for any delivery company that will give them a slice, letter numbers are dwindling,  the landscape is completely different now, and even if RM was kept in UK ownership (or nationalised) it won’t survive without complete reregulation of the delivery and collection marketplace, which I don’t think the public would accept.