The issue is they make pmqs a circus because they can't give genuine honest answers. How refreshing would it be if someone stood at the box and spoke like Mr Lynch. Its not about being right all the time or boasting about what you have done. These clowns need to simply act like adults.

Here here👏👏👏

You mean selling the Brexit lies?

Except he's big brexiteer - so inwardly I groan whenever I see him pontificating on lesser issues.

​@@bbbf09 maybe he just knows more than you? Not a brexiter myself but if like Mick you are a socialist there's a lot not to like (obvs the Tory brexit is the worst of all worlds)

internet and telephone too

schools..

Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems to me that Thames water and Anglian water have been sucking every ounce of profit out of the UK to international shareholders. They have failed to invest any of the profits into sustaining/growing the company and now we have raw sewage in our water. We have no option but to pay as there are no alternatives, they literally have a monopoly!

@@-Eternal-Damnation- So what? Scottish water have the exact same problems and are publicly run. Infact they were the biggest per capita sewage dischargers two years running.

@@0w784g _'Between 1991 and 2020 private water companies in England paid out over £57 billion in dividends to their shareholders - money that could have been reinvested to protect our environment. In the last ten years, company directors’ pay has also soared. The earnings of the nine water companies’ highest-paid directors rose by 8.8% in 2019, to a total of £12.9m.'_ *If you you think this is the way to run a public service, we deserve the poo in our water*

15-20% of people will just go with their emotions and always vote for them, unfortunately

there still a few with no tv up north thinking borris is a national hero.

Worse... they've shat in our beds too :)

I don't think the north's the problem@@andydudley1775 - however, go to the midlands and the amount of flag shagging tories is truly terrifying.

​@@andydudley1775😂

Definitely. You should look into what is happening in that area as parties have proposals in that direction. Labour is planning on renationalising some of it.

I'm not feeling optimistic. Yes, we're pretty much guaranteed to have a Labour government, but will they keep to their promise? If I remember, the previous Labour government promised to nationalise the railways and it never happened...

Damn right. The water companies had zero debt when they were privatised. Now it's in the tens of billions. Where did all that money go?

I agree, everything that was privatised by Thatcher and the Tories since should all be renationalised, energy, water, BT, Royal mail, the Railways, bus services, education, the lot, lock , stock and barrel.

hear hear

Debt in itself is not the issue, a properly functioning company will use debt to make even greater profit. The issue is that those profits are paid for by charges to the customers, and by reducing maintainance costs. Meanwhile the management and shareholders pat themselves on the back because of increased profits. When companies are nationalised not only are profits paid directly back to the public purse, enabling tax cuts across the board but it provides funding for other sectors such as NHS.

privatisation is a scam

@@dougaltolan3017 If you have a decent and regular income, you can take out a mortgage to buy that house. Same thing for the water companies, regular and enforceable income from the users, allows the companies to get huge loans off the banks. Of course, absolutely no-one expected those loans to be used to pay shareholders massive dividends.

Having huge debt is intended to make re-nationalisation unattractive, and an excuse to demand additional subsidies. It should be unlawful for loss-making major strategically important or infrastructure industries to receive loans from anywhere other than the government, thus making them essentially publicly owned in the event of default or catastrophic insolvency. It should also be unlawful for loss making industries to pay bonuses or dividends to any senior management and shareholders.

Rubbish. Firstly you have to accept that the railways were never truly de-nationalised. The structure put in place was heavily regulated and many special conditions were set. This mean that no really entrepreneurial outfit could make any sort of bid. Plus the fixed infrastructure was owned by a single company again heavily controlled by government and bureaucrats. There was no actual de-nationalisation at all. As for Lynch he is talking nonsense. As ever.

Unless he is not talking about Europe!

@@tomtheeagle1 Well, yes, kind sir. But, no one is perfect and I think even Mick can see what a mess that is!

You mean the COMMUNIST

I wish he was my boyfriend

I wish he was the president of the planet!

I wish he was the president of this planet

@@spewter lol!

Apparently he would hate the position, don't blame him tbh.

Bar his view on brexit

Yep, a complete dreamer..........

@Toodyslexicforyou funny how no one mentions it - I think RMT was one of three unions to endorse Brexit. But this channel has a clear bias anyway

Not really. He is economically clueless.

@@stevef01 you sure m8 as Spain the country that INCREASED worker wages like what Lynch wants actually seen 2.5% growth yt we where just in a recession. Do you wanna know why? Aggregate demand

the Post Office postmasters would disagree. they got ignored by their union.

They bought this country to it's knees in the 70's, they made us the poor man of Europe and will so so again if Labour get in

tell us one Nationalised industry that HAS benefited from "Nationalisation." ? Steel ? Coal ? Cars ? Shipbuilding ?

@@user-eu4zy6rm3l All these were sold off to private companies and look how that turned out. Only foreign cars built here, only foreign steel built here, only foreign trains built here. Train companies being subsidised whilst paying dividends, how is that helping?

@@user-eu4zy6rm3lall those industries were BUILT by nationalisation in the aftermath of the Second World War and DESTROYED by free market fundamentalist privatisations.

Minister for transport maybe but letrs not forget he was a brexitter

Absolutely , prime minister of independent England.... we've had it the miscreant establishment of Westminster gangster arms dealers....

@@vincentvangogh8092 Lexiter

@@vincentvangogh8092 He's quite obviously a straight-up honest guy. I very much doubt the Brexit we have now is the one he would have wanted.

i think the only one might be telephony....arguably..... maybe

@@flamingotwist mmmmm, possibly. But the suppliers still rip off customers. So I'd have to disagree.

It wasn’t about improving service to the customer.

@@jgmediting7770 So, what was it all really about. ?

​@@keithgoodrick-meech3921The theory is that privatisation allows for private investment. The service companies could then raise capital from shareholders, instead of being paid for through taxation. Thats the capitalist theory, but as with most theories it dosent play out that way in the real world. The problems arise when management go the next step and increase shareholder dividends (essential in order to keep thier capital) by maximising charges and minimising investment.

When tha cxxx richard Madeley tried to tackle him 😅😅😅

He's not an impartial commentator! His loyalty is to his union

@@Naren25 but I still think he does a better job than a lot of politicians, whose incompetence and lack of any empathy for the people they're supposed to be working for (as opposed to who they do work for) is often plainly on display

@@jgbreezer You're not wrong!

Yes, considering he has a particular union axe to grind, he is a model of informed impartiality. Also, it's nice to hear more humanitarian and principled opinions expressed, again... Thanks, Mike.

Privatisation I don't think works in general. Competition doesn't work.

@@murphy7801it does in general but not for these kind of services like rail and utilities. These should be nationalised and performance rigorously monitored (which is not always easy in public sector). They’ll all be shambles but still better than what we have now

@@murphy7801 Competition works; look at Russia when it''s no competition. We need it to strive and be innvoative. The problem is the balance of the greed and the companies not doing anything to adhere to the structure which doesn't seem to be there like a certain water company and others being grossly incompetent. We should fine companies when they don't commit and fail to competency standards but the Tories don't want that as it's their mates.

tell us one Nationalised industry that HAS benefited from "Nationalisation." ? Steel ? Coal ? Cars ? Shipbuilding ?

@@user-eu4zy6rm3l Industries have been nationalized for several reasons, but more often than not it has been because the industry was strategically essential to defence or the larger economy or they were very large businesses employing many thousands of workers, or both of those. The "benefit" was that they could continue to keep people in gainful employment whilst ensuring they could continue to service other essential industries, for example defence manufacturing, (steel, coal, shipbuilding, aerospace). The NHS was begun as a Nationalized public service and the "benefit" was for the population to be given healthcare which was free at the point of use. Over the years many of those businesses and industries have been privatised. So the question could equally be "which industries have benefitted from privatisation?". (Energy, Steel making, telecommunications, railways, cars......)

@@philipcrossley1279 I dont question the motives. The problem we have is the Unions who see Nationalisation as a "free pass" to generous annual pay rises irrespective of how they are performing. Nationalisation breeds Entitlement.

@@user-eu4zy6rm3lIn the (quite distant) past, some Unions have unquestionably acted irresponsibly but that isn't true in the majority of cases. Most strikes were about improving poor working terms and conditions, the result of which have set the standard, both here and abroad for workplaces that we now have. The worst and most damaging industrial actions were almost always a result of government attempting to strongarm new contractual obligation into effect at the detriment of workers, or in response to poor management decisions or pay deprivation. Things had moved on since then and there has been a long period of comparatively strike-free cooperation. Until recent years, when workers have again been expected to shoulder the cost of government and management incompetence, and suffer rapidly devaluing pay. The railways have been private hands for years and no-one can possibly claim it has led to a better service, better value for money or better, more secure working conditions and remuneration.

They can , but they lack the political will and once inertia sets in the nationalisation process will be sidelined with more excuses

We have a thing called property rights. You start stripping companies it can happen too private individuals

@@matthewgubbins8515 there's a difference between public and limited liability I suggest you read up about it

@@matthewgubbins8515 Property rights didn't protect people from HS2 who had their land bought and houses sold by compulsory orders.. only for the government to ditch the project.. why not have the same for private companies that don't deliver services, but continue to pay shareholders millions?

What people seem to forget is that when the trains were under the government control we haemorrhaged even more money than we do as a private enterprise because public ownership is so inefficient

I wish he was my onions

tell us one Nationalised industry that HAS benefited from "Nationalisation." ? Steel ? Coal ? Cars ? Shipbuilding ?

@@user-eu4zy6rm3l Which countries have state-owned railways? Contents 1 Russia. 2 Argentina. 3 Canada. 4 France. 5 Germany. 6 India. 7 Ireland. 8 Italy. japan etc ... Wikipedia

@@tecmissle9256 you are missing the point. In the UK at any rate, Nationalisation of industry doesn't work for 2 reasons : govt has to spend money on other things like NHS, schools etc and Unions see it as a blank cheque to strike every year for double-digit pay rises, earned or not. Japan is a great example of how it CAN work, if people make a bit of effort.

Er, no, we don't want or need another Brexiteer.

@@hovefactually7505 Corbyn wanted to nationalise the railways and energy companies, this prat advised the workers to vote brexit and therefore vote for bojo! he stabbed Corbyn in the back. He doesn't fool me! Under tory starmer nationalisation will be a total disaster , he will probably appoint Paula Venells as CEO. or anyone other PO managers with dementia!

A brexiteer? No thanks.

That would be a better option than Keir!!

​@@Shood33Starmer won't reverse Brexit.

It will all be sorted when Labour are in !!!!!!!!!!!

Which one, the Tory named Blair?

Mick for Prime Minister

That’s because answering questions truthfully isn’t a threat to those he represents.

You can say anything when in opposition..

​@@jgmediting7770but it isn't untrue.

@@murphy7801 what isn’t untrue?

He never will. He has a very nice number and is virtually unassailable. Why put yourself in the bear pit of politics as a politician when you are embedded and very well paid where you are? He serves his members, not the public.

I keep a photo of him in my wallet. Should I send you a Mick pic?

@@spewter😂 naughty

Ooh, I like your big Mick

👍👏

Socialism has only murdered over 100 million souls, the most deadly of political ideologies. No thanks.

I wouldn’t trust a pledge from Starmer. He’s already broken ten He’ll say absolutely anything to attain power. And once he does, he’ll pander to Israel over taking care of our national interests.

No. He voted leave.

@@Believe-you-me- Even better.

'for' or 'the' ?

@@margaretgaskin4928 the troll is strong in this one.

Mick Lynch would make a great PM, He's British Rail through and through. Probably born in the caboose. Why wouldn't he want to keep railroad manufacturing jobs in England? Why does everyone have to fall into the category of "leave" or don't leave?

No, they _fear_ him because he highlights their incompetence and BS.

Whatever Blairs ideological issues under him we've never been better off. The NHS was No.1 in the world for healthcare AND for value for money.

@@henryburton6529 It was indeed - had Blair not structured the PFI funnel, it might have had a chance of remaining so (leastways, until the next privateer came along)

@@henryburton6529 He set the path for this shit, he was effective at what he did but not just uniformly good because of this.

Either way, it has to be stopped?!

​@@alphasword5541 He didn't set the path. This is Tory policy. What Blair did was successful and good for the country. What Tories have done was unsuccessful and bad for the country. Don't let anyone tell you this is Labour's fault. Its not.

Tory red in power,yeah,that'll fix it.

👏👍

They don’t want to move the needle from the right.

Our biggest problem is the W.E.F and Zionists, of which Starmer is one. We need who we didn't realise was destroyed by the government and press, for a reason. Jeremy Corbyn.

First you need to flush the blairites out, otherwise all you have is another tory party wearing red.

Ohh that might be too left wing for the electorate. Not for me I hasten to add I agree.. But maybe just maybe a positive change is about to happen. But the tories need to be out for a decade and then kept out by electoral reform. We can but hope. Starmer I do think will be more radical post election

and you do? Estimated cost of nationalising the railways £10 billion.

Capitalism cannot be made to work in the interest of workers. Mick clearly understands what's taking place, workers have never needed a boss, workers left to their own devices will naturally organise it effectively. Syndicalism is natural. Capitalism requires perpetual growth on a planet of finite resources, both cannot survive.

@@denzel270 Your point? The companies currently running the railways sucked far more than that out in profits. They allowed them to deteriorate because hey - maintenance costs money and that means less profit. They flogged the staff to the breaking point and now they cannot squeeze out any more profit and performance is unacceptable - they want to hand the responsibility back to the taxpayer. This needs to be remembered - otherwise 50 years down the line, when the infrastructure has been revitalised, some profiteer will say 'we need to privatise the railways'.

@@denzel270 We're paying billions in at the moment, while foreign nations are skimming profits...We could take those profits.

speak with other parents and organise a payment boycott.

Parents need to take legal action. Academy school equivalents in Spain have tried this kind of thing and legal action when taken shuts it down very quickly.

We would have the work shy railway workers back to work and our trains running for a start! This ridiculous strike thats being going on for 2 years is a greedy one for more money that no one can afford!

"bald truth" lol. You really didn't need to do our boy Mick that dirty.

@@Triv1umxxx lol he’s streamlined for maximum truth-telling

Thing is, A lot of people were hoodwinked and conned by the Tories into leaving the EU (£350M into the NHS, Better deals for farmers and fisherman etc). It was hard to turn those promises down at the time because we were in the midst of austerity. I was one of those persons who voted to leave, but i'm now ashamed to admit I was wrong. I think Mick would probably say the same thing too.

@@mra3149I wish that more people shared your perspective on feeling “ashamed” (to quote yourself) at voting for Brexit. As Mark Twain put it: it’s easier to fool people, than to convince them that they’ve been fooled. Since Brexit, it’s become a political hot potato and no one wants to even mention the word. Understandable, to an extent… but if it’s never mentioned, how do we have any chance of admitting that the public were largely hoodwinked into voting for something they didn’t truly understand, with falsified promises tied up in a ribbon… and without mentioning it, how do we have any hope of trying to fix it?

Margret Thatcher privatised ancillary railway services and engineering, John Major finished the privatisation.

Except he voted Leave...

hopefully you can find 50 - 100 billion plus then

Very good point, which I hadn’t thought about. It’s back to that ridiculous idea of the economy being like a household budget, ‘maxing out the credit card’ and all that nonsense. Labour doesn’t challenge this.

@@stshnie Yes. Unfortunately Reeves is a traditional Bank of England economist and Labour should grow some cajones, after listening to Prof Bill Mitchell or Prof Richard Murphy. Their political dilemma is resistance from banks, who would cede some power to government and be in danger of getting back to offering a service, rather than being the controllers.

Agree the off balance sheet wheeze was nonsense, but I still believe that the overall benefits of tying in government spending for long term building maintenance was worth the cost. You just need to look at the state of our non - pfi school infrastructure to see what happens when politicians decide they don't need to replace the roof on a 30 year old school.

@@MG-df8mw Yes. We needed the building but the method of finance cost us more by putting a chain around our necks because of the out-of-date method of defining national debt (which I understand the world bank disagrees with).

Ticket prices won’t go down

@@krob2327funny how they did nothing but go up since privatisation though isn’t it?

@@maxpowerii7368 absolutely agree. They will continue to rise under these new plans though

Absolutely 100%.

Free movement from the European Union was a wetdream for big business and the oil 🛢 for the Gig Economy , the old left know this

Who cares what neoliberals think about Brexit? they are Tories through and through whether they are members of the party or not.

💯 so many people are going to wake up once they realise their hope in Labour was misjudged. Both main parties really bad.

And yet even when they were it was still so much better and more competent then this Tory shower of shit

Pick one

Your argument is as dead as the Conservative Party.

under Labour can't be has bad has it now under tories in it for themselves only

Blairs boy Starmer - who wants that guy? 🤢🤮

Hmm, yes socialism does make total sense. Welcome

@@sp4rtavus244 No, it does not. Mick, however, always does...

@@johnstilljohn3181 Isnt Mick a Socialist?