Friday
01Aug2008
WHEN NO NUKES DEAL IS GOOD NEWS!
Friday, August 1, 2008 at 01:04PM
Is it just me or has anyone else wondered why it is that the British Government was so keen to sell off the British nuclear industry to a company owned by the French government? Zut alors but ze deal has collapsed and now there is all this moaning about how the failure to flog off our nuclear industry is " a disaster". I don't see it like that at all, it's a good thing that this plan has collapsed since the UK should retain control of something as important as nuclear energy. Our lousy government was trying to get the French to invest in OUR future nuclear capacity since it lacks the resolve, vision and cash to do so itself.!
View Printer Friendly Version
Reader Comments (11)
It is NuLab policy to sell off all utilities and infrastructure. By so doing, it would mean that no British government would ever be able to pursue a national policy in any sector because there would be no national participation anywhere. This is because Nulab opposes the very existence of a nation and the abolition of a British national economy is their way of putting this belief into policy. It is effectively treason.
The French deal, fortunately, fell through. Their Nuclear Energy industry has a bad reputation with 2- leaks in the past month or so.
However, all is not lost. A reliable source indicates an extraordinarly wealthy American by the name of Charles Montgomery Burns is negotiating for the UK's power generatiors.
He already owns one in a place called Springfield in the USA.
Allan,
While I agree with your point, it isn't just nulabs fault.
Wasn't this all a part and parcel of Mrs Thatchers, and a continuation of Heath's grand scheme to privatise everything, irrespective of any long term consequences?
Wasn't she accused on many occasions, of 'selling off the family silver'.
I know the government should not generally interfere with private enterprise, - other than to provide a minimum regulatory 'overseeing' function, but surely major items of our infrastructure, such as the national power supply, should be kept under national control, if for no other reason than as a matter of security.
Now that most of our gas supply comes from Russia, via various European countries, it does make any sort of national security a virtual impossibility, likewise for our other energy supplies, and yes - I do realise the same applies to the supply of petrochemicals.
They now have the ability to 'turn off' the tap, or to raise the cost to such a level that we will be impoverished, - now that one sounds familiar!
Without control of vital items of our infrastructure, we may as well admit that we are no longer a viable national entity, and that we are just another cog in the euro machine.
Whether we vote yes or no on acceptance of the Euro constitution, it makes little difference, the damage has been done, we are part of it now. And the same goes for Ireland....
I love how the report states "The rejection is a major setback to the UK's plans to cut greenhouse gases by relying more on nuclear energy." with no explanation. Almost as if the reporter decided to follow the government's line with no thought of his own.
So the Middle East controls (most of) the oil, the Russians have the gas, and BlairBrown thought it would be a good idea to give the nukes to the French?
Can someone explain that to me? I think Allan has it right.
Ernest, the fact that we are importing gas at all is directly the consequence of Mrs Thatcher's ill-conceived 'dash for gas' by which this premium hydrocarbon is burnt in power stations. Just when Scargill was defeated and reliable miners were in the ascendancy, a shocking piece of vengeance closes the coal mines which supplied our power stations which, in turn, would have allowed the UK to nurture its gas reserves and protect us from the mess which we are in now.
Things worsened with the advent of the treasonous NuLab, which doesn't believe in any national energy policy because it doesn't believe that the nation of the UK should exist at all, hence the sell-off of everything - gold, steel, water, (remains of) industry, power, airports .....anything.
the UK should retain control of something as important as nuclear energy...
Agreed, but unfortunately most of UK electricity generation and water provision is already in foreign hands, thanks to the zeal of the Thtacherites for free markets uber alles. NuLabour is simply following the Thatcher agenda on this, as it has on so much else.
This is because Nulab opposes the very existence of a nation and the abolition of a British national economy is their way of putting this belief into policy. It is effectively treason.
NuLabour is simply following the Thatcher agenda on this, as it has on so much else.
Its the 'Washington Concensus'. It marches on regardless. Its successes are lauded from the rooftops and its failures are shoved under the carpet.
This is Wall Streets and the City of Londons world.
"Agreed, but unfortunately most of UK electricity generation and water provision is already in foreign hands, thanks to the zeal of the Thtacherites for free markets uber alles. NuLabour is simply following the Thatcher agenda on this, as it has on so much else."
Wrong and seriously so. When the utilities were first privatised, they were sold off to British people and institutions and remained therefore in British hands. The sale of utilities and the remnants of industry by NuLab is to foreign institutions in order that there can never again be a British national policy in any of these domains because NuLab does not believe in the existence of the nation-state.
NuLab does not believe in the existence of the nation-state
Rubbish. But you do point out the essential conflict between globalisation and the nation-state. The more globalisation advances, the less power national governments have to affect the lives of their citizens.
The process of privatisation inevitably led to foreign ownership, as the Thatcherites well-knew it would, because there was no restriction on British shareholders selling out to foreigners.
The sale of utilities and the remnants of industry by NuLab is to foreign institutions in order that there can never again be a British national policy in any of these domains because NuLab does not believe in the existence of the nation-state.
Neo-liberal globalist capitalism does not believe in the nation state. And the roots can be traced to the Reagan/Thatcher era. It trancends the political spectrum and continues unabated regardless of who is in office. If you think any of this will change in an Obama/Cameron era be prepared to be wildly disappointed.
Peter, NuLab actually does seek to remove all sovereign power from the UK which is why there is no referendum on the now-defunct Treaty of Lisbon. The fact that they are proceeding with it contrary to the EU's own rules shows that this is so. As you believe the opposite, please show some supporting evidence.