Options
Land Registry privatisation
Will the government now go ahead with the privatisation of the land registry .
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jul/11/land-registry-privatisation-vetoed-vince-cable
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jul/11/land-registry-privatisation-vetoed-vince-cable
0
Comments
There were no details of the subsequent complete top-down reorganisation of the NHS in the 2010 manifesto , so what does that prove?
Don't be daft, of course there were. 29 different action points on the NHS were listed in the Coalition agreement, itself a subset of the Conservative manifesto.
Not before Labour have taxed it, though.
Because that's what it's been called. If you want the full working title - The Coalition: Our Programme for Government.
But the Tories mates in the City aren't making a profit out of it - thats why most things get privatised, like the Post Office as that was making a profit but still got privatised although the taxpayer got screwed over and the city made a mint out of it, as the pensions weren't transfered over as well.
Read back: I said that the Coalition agreement was a subset of the Tory Manifesto. I use the former simply because the points on the NHS are listed as bullet points, that's not the case with the Tory Manifesto where it's just text.
Clearly I'm back down the rabbit hole again.
Remind me which party pledged higher taxes in both their 2010 and 2015 manifesto?
But then the agreement says Together,our ideas will bring an emphatic end to the bureaucracy, top-down control and centralisation that has so diminished our NHS. and We will stop the top-down reorganisations of the NHS that have got in the way of patient care. We are committed to reducing duplication and the resources spent on administration, and diverting these resources back to front-line care.
Oh, and the manifesto mentions itself "reorganisation" once.
Remind me which party are the only ones to have ever raised VAT?
Labour pledged higher taxes for those earning more than 150k and owning houses worth more than 2m, which is what... less than 5% of the population?
I don't remember them pledging any tax increases for anyone else?
The Tories/coalition pledged no tax increases, but broke their pledges by increasing VAT from 17.5% to 20% and increasing Class 1-4 NICs by 1% (which costs many taxpayers much more than the threshold increase saved them), and the Tories (Thatcher/Major administration) previously also introduced Class 4 NICs and Poll/Council tax.
As for the OP, yes, I wouldn't put it past them.
Though it would still need to go through a Commons/Lords vote, right?
If just 6(?) Tory MPs abstain or vote against, then they can be defeated..... heh.
I see that you are still bitter about the GE result.
Making a profit is the very thing that makes it ripe for privatisation
You expect the 75% of the electorate who didn't vote for the Tories to be happy?
Exactly, no ones going to buy a business that isn't making money. Just look at how they sold the east coast rail line when it was returning money to the taxpayer.
If it's making a profit, it'll likely be sold off, like everything else the Tories have since sold off.
Except that it wasn't really making money. It's easy to appear to make money when you're a subsidy junkie, are able change the franchise obligations to suit yourself, aren't expected to make serious investments in infrastructure or on train facilities, and charge the same high fares as the rest of the industry.
The reason why it was brought into state ownership in the first place was because it was unable to make money. I'm not sure why you feel the need to be partisan, Labour have had plenty of sell offs or attempted sell offs in their time.
Given that Labour raised in in January 2010 - no idea. And, as we all know now thanks to Alitair Darling, Labou would have raised in again if they had been elected in 2010.