Nationalisation of British Industries
I've been trying to figure out how previous governments were able to 'nationalize' - ie, take into public ownership - industries, such as coal, that were privately owned at the time.
I've always presumed that this would entail buying up all available shares -assuming the companies were publicly quoted, but even then I don't see how it would be feasible.
I'm sure I read somewhere that it required an act of parliament to gain the authority to do so, but it strikes me as decidedly undemocratic to nick a private company from its owners/shareholders at the say-so of the govt.
Re: Nationalisation of British Industries
Why is it undemocratic?
Critics have called various nationalisations 'unfair', 'inefficient', or leading to 'no or inadequate compensation'. They would wouldn't they.
But undemocratic it isn't. Elected government, through Act of Parliament, taking major utilities or vital industries into public ownership must be the definition of democratic.
Re: Nationalisation of British Industries
There is a term that is readily bandied about when it suits the elite, and that is in the interests of 'National Security'.
I can't think of a better way to cripple a country than to switch off it's utilities, food supply, healthcare, rail and roads. For that reason alone, I believe that it is paramount that these main industries should NEVER be a vehicle for shareholder / corporate profits.
Governments are consistently hypocritical, but none moreso than those which refuse to nationalise said industries, yet farm them out to foreign Government ownership. The whole thing stinks, and it makes me sick.
Re: Nationalisation of British Industries
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jon1959
Why is it undemocratic?
Critics have called various nationalisations 'unfair', 'inefficient', or leading to 'no or inadequate compensation'. They would wouldn't they.
But undemocratic it isn't. Elected government, through Act of Parliament, taking major utilities or vital industries into public ownership must be the definition of democratic.
Depends on how you view democracy. Very few parties secure the popular majority although they may have a majority of seats.
Not all industries need be nationalised. In fact I would say none should be nationalised at all but some, such as trains, need a new economical model that takes the best of public and private. Total public ownership can lead to lack of productivity and total private ownership can lead to lack of investment. There has to be an optimum middle ground
Re: Nationalisation of British Industries
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Arfur Europe
There is a term that is readily bandied about when it suits the elite, and that is in the interests of 'National Security'.
I can't think of a better way to cripple a country than to switch off it's utilities, food supply, healthcare, rail and roads. For that reason alone, I believe that it is paramount that these main industries should NEVER be a vehicle for shareholder / corporate profits.
Governments are consistently hypocritical, but none moreso than those which refuse to nationalise said industries, yet farm them out to foreign Government ownership. The whole thing stinks, and it makes me sick.
I agree with you 100%, some things should always in 'publicly ownership', though that's a misnomer in itself. I think the phrase you're looking for is 'in the National interest', which means they can do anything , literally, that they want.
I'm still trying to get an answer to my question however. I wasn't making a political comment ..
Re: Nationalisation of British Industries
Quote:
Originally Posted by
A Quiet Monkfish
I've been trying to figure out how previous governments were able to 'nationalize' - ie, take into public ownership - industries, such as coal, that were privately owned at the time.
I've always presumed that this would entail buying up all available shares -assuming the companies were publicly quoted, but even then I don't see how it would be feasible.
I'm sure I read somewhere that it required an act of parliament to gain the authority to do so, but it strikes me as decidedly undemocratic to nick a private company from its owners/shareholders at the say-so of the govt.
It required an Act of Parliament, for example the Transport Act 1947 brought nearly all road and rail services under public ownership. There would have been compensation. It is no different to when the council decide to knock your house down to build a road. This happens in all countries no matter how free these countries claim to be. In the USA under "eminent domain" anyone can take your property if they can prove they can make better use of it than you.
Re: Nationalisation of British Industries
Doubt it if this was typical of the Nationalisation process, but here's an example of one that was carried out a long time after the wave of post war takeovers by the state.
http://www.ccmb.co.uk/showthread.php...ish-Industries
Re: Nationalisation of British Industries
Quote:
Originally Posted by
David Vincent
It required an Act of Parliament, for example the Transport Act 1947 brought nearly all road and rail services under public ownership. There would have been compensation. It is no different to when the council decide to knock your house down to build a road. This happens in all countries no matter how free these countries claim to be. In the USA under "eminent domain" anyone can take your property if they can prove they can make better use of it than you.
Thanks
Re: Nationalisation of British Industries
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TISS
Depends on how you view democracy. Very few parties secure the popular majority although they may have a majority of seats.
Not all industries need be nationalised. In fact I would say none should be nationalised at all but some, such as trains, need a new economical model that takes the best of public and private. Total public ownership can lead to lack of productivity and total private ownership can lead to lack of investment. There has to be an optimum middle ground
The odd thing with the rails is that deutsche bahn run it, which is owned by the German public. It seems the government don't mind our rails being under state control, as long as it's not our state.
Re: Nationalisation of British Industries
Quote:
Originally Posted by
tommy31
The odd thing with the rails is that deutsche bahn run it, which is owned by the German public. It seems the government don't mind our rails being under state control, as long as it's not our state.
Yes, it's gratifying to think that our fares are helping to pay for public services in Germany. Why don't we consider the same - state owned transport bidding for work and profits elsewhere? (Probably impossible after Brexit, but that's a different thing)
Re: Nationalisation of British Industries
Quote:
Originally Posted by
tommy31
The odd thing with the rails is that deutsche bahn run it, which is owned by the German public. It seems the government don't mind our rails being under state control, as long as it's not our state.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Eric the Half a Bee
Yes, it's gratifying to think that our fares are helping to pay for public services in Germany. Why don't we consider the same - state owned transport bidding for work and profits elsewhere? (Probably impossible after Brexit, but that's a different thing)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Arfur Europe
Governments are consistently hypocritical, but none moreso than those which refuse to nationalise said industries, yet farm them out to foreign Government ownership. The whole thing stinks, and it makes me sick.
:sherlock:
Re: Nationalisation of British Industries
Quote:
Originally Posted by
tommy31
The odd thing with the rails is that deutsche bahn run it, which is owned by the German public. It seems the government don't mind our rails being under state control, as long as it's not our state.
DB is run as a private profit making enterprise and not as a state subsidised nationalised industry. It is irrelevant whether the single shareholder is the BRD as it's aim is to operate under commercial principles.
