Were any of the injured scottish? If not why would Douglas bother visiting?
March 1, 2007 at 10:35 AM
Anonymous
said...
Umm. I wonder whether the reason might be that the responsibility for this crash is likely to be down to HMG; now that they have re-nationalised the track and track maintenance which appears to have been to blame. I seem to remember that the DPM used to set about the independent rail companies on these occasions.
The coverage by the BBC seems to have losts its edge too; they have not been able demand an interview with a CEO and try to humiliate him on air.
The policy seems to be to shut down the story ASAP.
However, it could be that he is too busy and just does not care, and my prejudice is getting the better of me.
March 1, 2007 at 10:40 AM
Anonymous
said...
Central Office has issued instructions for all Lab politicos to avoid (car/train) crash sites due to negative PR implications, perhaps?
March 1, 2007 at 10:44 AM
Anonymous
said...
@Hadrian's wall: yes, the one person killed in the accident was Scottish.
What of it?
March 1, 2007 at 10:48 AM
Anonymous
said...
Only one dead and she was Scottish, as were the injured. Alexander is an English minister so no votes there then. Anyway it was wet and windy and remote so why bother. AND, Railtrack/Network Rail is government owned, so could be some awkward questions about the finance of maintenance......should have sent Gordo to explain it all.
If Dougie wishes to avoid train wrecks I suggest he leave Scotland before voting starts on May 3 and stay away for a fortnight.
March 1, 2007 at 11:05 AM
Anonymous
said...
I am sorry but a Ministerial visit - particularly by the current bunch of complete tossers and spongers - just gets in the way of those people trying to do a proper job and sort out the mess.
What on earth are Network Rail, a state owned company, doing making any kind of political donations/payments?
March 1, 2007 at 11:16 AM
Anonymous
said...
Easy does it. Something's clearly gone terribly wrong but the Minister can't fix every detail from faulty traffic lights to dodgy points. He could visit the site but what good will it do?
On the broader scale, Labour's transport policy is weak and lacking policies, vision and funding. That's where you should be questioning Douglas Alexander.
Don't companies now require share-holder approval to make political donations?
In which case HMG has agreed to donate £6k to the labour party?...
Or is Network Rail's ownership in a no-mans's land run by cronies by appointment? I forget.
March 1, 2007 at 11:27 AM
Anonymous
said...
He couldn't open the door on that bus. About his level of ability.
March 1, 2007 at 11:28 AM
Anonymous
said...
Funny how the BBC changes its angle when there are no evil profit-making companies neglecting maintenance. When it's the government which is neglecting maintenance, well, that's just not a story!
Slighty off track but....the BBC World Service (Oxfam / Greenpeace broadcasting as they are known to my colleagues.....)recently reported a fire on a Japanese Whaling ship, the second line informing us of the potential environmental risk. NO MENTION of the danger to the CREW. Imagine a fire on a passenger vessel, would the BBC use the same priorities?
...and anyway, don't Labour have their own train crash, the wreckage of which we witness more evry day...
March 1, 2007 at 11:34 AM
Anonymous
said...
Why are scottish labour elligible for a bung from Network Rail, but not ferinstance the BNP ? Does a party simply write in and say they like railways, please send some cash, or do you have to offer something in return, like good industrial relations , or jobs for the boys on quangos ?
March 1, 2007 at 11:34 AM
Anonymous
said...
My earlier link didn't work according to plan (a bit like rail privatisation) but what a search of the Electoral Commission's register reveals is a donation from Network Rail to Scottish Labour of £5,000 on 28 Feb 2006 and £6,000 on 31 December 2006.
I wonder if the head of the Scottish Labour campaign has a conflict of interest over whether to order an enquiry into a donor to the Scottish Labour campaign?
March 1, 2007 at 11:37 AM
Anonymous
said...
1. Alexander is both Transport Secretary and Scottish Secretary and represents a Scottish constituency.
2. It is extraordinary that he hasn't been to the site as all previous ministers have done. It does suggest either that Labour are now asking ministers not to be asociated with bad news or that he lacks political nous.
3. The donation from what is effectively a nationalised company to the Scottish Labour Party should be investigated immediately.
March 1, 2007 at 11:49 AM
Anonymous
said...
Petition NO 10, requesting the toe rag to do the right thing.
If nothing else it might wake up Nick Robinson to cover the story.
BRING BACK GILLIGAN.....A REAL MAN.
March 1, 2007 at 11:51 AM
Anonymous
said...
From the Network Rail website http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/713.aspx
"Our purpose is to deliver a safe, reliable and efficient railway for Britain. As a company limited by guarantee, we are a private company operating as a commercial business. We are directly accountable to our members [=includes the Transport Secretary] and regulated by the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR)[=appointed by the Transport Secretary]."
March 1, 2007 at 11:56 AM
Anonymous
said...
That pic of Douggie is a sort of updated HMV advert.....you know with Nipper listening to His Master's Voice
It's a fnny old world. A company created by the Labour government from the ripping off of thousands of investors in Railtrack, whose shares are owned by the labour government and whose loans are guaranteed by the Labour government, are actually donating cash to the Governing party. At least the board seem to know what side their bread is buttered. Arise, Lord Fat Controller of Grayriggs!
March 1, 2007 at 12:19 PM
Anonymous
said...
Some of the organisations that are 'members' of Network Rail (that is, control it)...
Department of Transport Local Government Association Transport 2000 Welsh Assembly Government
... and so have responsibility for donating £11,000 to Scottish Labour.
I thoughtwhen it was set up, the idea was that Network Rail would be politically neutral, just like the BBC...
Don't know what difference this might make but wasn't there a Labour peer's daughter on the train not unconnected with the BBC.
March 1, 2007 at 12:23 PM
Anonymous
said...
Maybe Alexander was right and all the others were wrong in not going to the crash site - how would anyone without any engineering knowledge prancing around in a field in the Lake District help address the problem!
I suspect that the amounts received from Network Rail were for the sponsorship of events/payment for stands at Conference which are donations under the Act - and the Commission in its wisdom doesn't allow to be distinguished from normal cash donations - the Tories of course avoid such disclsure by not having their own conference (or using a front organisation to run it for them)
It would appear there are some very murky waters concerning the use of "our" monies to support a political party. I dont suppose they have made donations to any other political parties? Looks like the good Inspector Yates might be opening another case file. Or is this a case for the Transport Police? As for Dumphy Alexander's conduct, more worried about his place on the gravy train than for his "travelling stakeholders"!
March 1, 2007 at 12:32 PM
Anonymous
said...
Obviously Network Rail is so much more efficient than Railtrack and it pays its surplus to the labour party and the directors rather than the shareholders. We all know now where Railtrack went wrong.
As to Mr Alexander. Professor Starkey provided a brilliant analysis of the retinue that followed James 1 and 6 to England. It seems nothing changes. Obviously the wisest fool in the land still needs the company of boot boys.
Finally, it should be remembered the last time the Scots ruled England, there was a civil war.
how would anyone without any engineering knowledge prancing around in a field in the Lake District help address the problem!
That's not the point - the Transport Secretary should have been there to provide moral support for the affected people. Why else would Prezza make a run for any train wreck when he was "responsible"?
Why are NR "sponsoring" events at the Labour conferences anyway? Grannies lost their blouses in the creation of this monster, I expect they are mightily impressed that the new company are giving "their" money to the people that stole it from them.
March 1, 2007 at 12:35 PM
Anonymous
said...
I thought that the tale of Network Rail donating to a political party could not possibly be true.Has any other party benefitted?This company has no shareholders and is effectively a state monopoly.I worked for a nationalised industry years ago and there was a "civil service" ethos (old style) towards political parties then.Certainly no one would have dreamt of funding them.What is going on?
March 1, 2007 at 12:38 PM
Anonymous
said...
What's the going rate for a team of navvies to check a set of points on a railway line? About £11,000?
March 1, 2007 at 12:38 PM
Anonymous
said...
Finally, it should be remembered the last time the Scots ruled England, there was a civil war.
Actually, the last Scot to "rule England" was Sir Alex Douglas Home, Tory Prime Minister in the 1960s.
And the "British" Royal Family is about 50% German, 50% Scottish. The last truly "English" king was Richard III; there was a civil war....
March 1, 2007 at 12:52 PM
Anonymous
said...
Makes you wonder which idiot privatised a national rail system for ideological reasons rather than practical transport considerations.
This created a series of local monopolies that get more subsidy from the British tax payer than they received when the British tax payer actually owned the railways.
It has also led to a collapse of rail safety standards, which means privatisation = public subsidy for private companies and more deaths on the railways.
Wasn't Adam Smith Wealth of Nations a condemnation of the state protecting private monopolies?
March 1, 2007 at 12:55 PM
Anonymous
said...
Anonymous 12:26 - my company's paid a good £11-12k to the Labour Party for stands at conferences over the past couple of years; I don't see that appearing on our balance sheets as a political donation, mainly because it isn't: it's payment for goods and services.
The point I am making is not the numbers of people, but the fact that they are in fact people. (Whaling ships have fairly sizeable crews)
AND...the Beeb ignored in this story the human factor (endangered crew) and went straight to one of their fav trot outs - the environment.
Duh yourself (so to speak)
March 1, 2007 at 1:01 PM
Anonymous
said...
Network Rail hosted a reception at the Tory Pary conference (see link below) - if the Tories did not hide such "doantions" through the front company it uses for its Conference then it would have had to report a donation from Network Rail. Network Rail probably believes that it is important to speak to politicians of all parties hence its sponsorship of such events - do you really want a situation where major companies do not speak to political parties? Or would you prefer to make cheap incorrect political points
Time for the railway subsidies to end and for a truly free market in rail travel to be created. Then we'll see just how much the public really wants to pay towards the railways.
March 1, 2007 at 1:03 PM
Anonymous
said...
Off topic, but could the dodgy petrol story be a brilliant ploy to take the heat of the Sith? If so, nice one Max.
March 1, 2007 at 1:08 PM
Anonymous
said...
zastrozzi
Amounts for conference stands below an amount specified by the Commission are exempted from the definition of donations - other amounts are sponsorship and hence reportable donations - the Commission has issued a detailed guidance document on this if you are interested - but the Tories ignore it because they do not have their own conference!
March 1, 2007 at 1:10 PM
Anonymous
said...
No visit to the crash site from wee Dougie Alexander and I may have missed it but I haven't heard the Dear Leader comment on the rail crash either. Bet if Railtrack had still been in charge they'd have been much in evidence, milking the event for all it's worth and blaming the Tories.
March 1, 2007 at 1:24 PM
Anonymous
said...
You'll have to get those bullet points sorted Guido. It's a bit unreadable.
Well done on exposing where their real priorities lie.
March 1, 2007 at 1:40 PM
Anonymous
said...
Anyone else wondering what a public body is doing, giving money to the Labour Party?
March 1, 2007 at 2:20 PM
Anonymous
said...
In a "Quick history of recent train crashes" this one now comes second from the bottom. NuLabour - more schools, more hospitals, more train crashes.
March 1, 2007 at 2:27 PM
Anonymous
said...
Finally2
Wasn't Sir Alex "captain of pop" at Eton. He certainly didn't sound Scottish.
Was Dave in "pop" Perhaps he is Scottish and really a fan of Gay Gordo.
What about the other 13 etonians in the shadow cabinet.. are they Scottish, were they in "pop"
Shouldn't we be told
March 1, 2007 at 2:28 PM
Anonymous
said...
Anon 11.24 AM: 'Easy does it. Something's clearly gone terribly wrong but the Minister can't fix every detail from faulty traffic lights to dodgy points. He could visit the site but what good will it do?'
Well it might show all and sundry that he actually gives a toss. It might help him to understand part of his job. It might also provide a decent piece of PR (and God knows, they desperately need that!).
Or maybe we should just expect them to sit in their luxurious offices pulling levers.
It's about time these people saw the harsh realities of life and death. They are far too well insulated - and paid.
First of all, what the fuck was the CEO of a public corporation (John Armitt) doing fully admitting legal liability for the rail crash within a few hours? Had he been told perhaps to admit to everything in the hope that (as happened with Potters Bar) if you fully admit liability then you won't be prosecuted for corporate manslaughter? The imbecile, presumably believing that since only one person had died in the crash that he wouldn't be losing very much, now seems to have opened himself up to a comprehensive lawsuit by Virgin Trains over the Grayrigg derailment.
Someow I think its going to take a lot more than a few thousand quid dropped into Prescott's begging bowl to sort that one out.
March 1, 2007 at 2:48 PM
Anonymous
said...
Network Rail has no business donating money to any political party whatsoever. It's a disgrace.
Rail privatisation was a success (sort of) as after this passenger numbers have risen consistently and significantly while prior toit passenger numbers had been falling for decades
Perhaps Richard Bransonshouldn't be too concerned by a change of government. You never know, Cameron may privatise the Beeb and sell it to Virgin Media! Now's there's an idea.
March 1, 2007 at 7:08 PM
Anonymous
said...
It can not be smart or right for Party political donations to come from companies that directly benifit from government contracts. Such as running trains.
In my business this is, apropiately called giving "BROWN envelopes" and is HIGHLY HIGHLY ilegal.
What makes Dick B's New Labour donations so dangerous is that he is also a media magnate, who is getting vast and ever increasing amounts of government advertising money and public sector subsidies.
A new dictionary word for when private business and government get in to bed with each other and make mad passionate love, could be.
When the system has Bransonised. Or their is a process of Cohenisation going on.
This would be good because nobody seems to know what a FASCIST system of government is anymore.
Alegidly.
March 1, 2007 at 7:09 PM
Anonymous
said...
UPDATE : Scottish Labour took a £6,000 donation from Network Rail Limited three months ago.
UPDATE II : Scottish Labour had a total of £11,000 from Network Rail Limited last year.
I thought Network Rail was publicly owned? If this is the case why is it giving money to any political party?
March 1, 2007 at 7:12 PM
Anonymous
said...
Geezer Now that is an idear. If you know Camerons phone number tell him NOW.
Only thing is that such a deal must not involve any public money whatsoever, and must operate in a deregulated enviroment..
March 1, 2007 at 7:14 PM
Anonymous
said...
Geezer Now that is an idear. If you know Camerons phone number tell him NOW.
Only thing is that such a deal must not involve any public money whatsoever, and must operate in a deregulated enviroment..
garypowell said... "Geezer Now that is an idear. If you know Camerons phone number tell him NOW."
Bit tricky with the restraining order and stuff.
March 1, 2007 at 7:28 PM
Anonymous
said...
It probably isn't a donation in the normal sense of the word - probably represents the cost of holding an event at a Party Conference. Network Rail does exactly the same at Tory conferences and possibly others.
Under the Act such sponsorship counts as a donation - the Labour Party reports it - the Tories don't because they have a front company which receives the sponsorship.
Companies sponsoring events at Party conferences (of all persuasions) is nothing new it has being going on for years.
March 1, 2007 at 8:02 PM
Anonymous
said...
"Two jobs" Alexander is Secretary of State for Scotland and easily acquires English taxpayers' money from fellow Scot Gordon Brown to subsidise Scotland. This is why every Scot receives more than £1300 per year in public spending than each person in England. Alexander is also Transport Minister for England (not Scotland where his constituency is). He cancels transport projects in England due to lack of money, which he diverts to Scotland. There is an obvious conflict of interest here and England (as always) is paying for it.
March 2, 2007 at 11:12 AM
Anonymous
said...
At 10:53 AM, Penfold said... Only one dead and she was Scottish, as were the injured. Alexander is an English minister so no votes there then. ====
Douglas Alexander represents a Scottish constituency. He is the Scottish First Minister.
Where you are confused, is that he was given the position of English Transport Minister. There are no votes to be had in England for him, which is why he lied to me when I asked him if he would insist that England be allowed the same level of funding as his own country. He said there was a case for it, but has done nothing about it since. That's OK, though. No one in England can hold him to account.
March 2, 2007 at 11:15 AM
Anonymous
said...
the rebuild hadrians wall party if the entire train was full of scots alexander would not bother his arse labour have no interest in anyone in the uk especialy scots they even hate the fact that they sound remotely like any scot they have an abject hatred of anything scottish bile vitrol and boiling poison towards anything scottish is the default norm
March 4, 2007 at 12:21 PM
Anonymous
said...
I have spoken to Network Rail ... they were paying Scottish Labour for services (stand and event at conferences and events). This is, it seems to me, not a donation at all, but a payment for services. I think that the Labour Party in Scotland need to review their entries on their return to the Electoral Commission.
66 comments:
Were any of the injured scottish? If not why would Douglas bother visiting?
Umm. I wonder whether the reason might be that the responsibility for this crash is likely to be down to HMG; now that they have re-nationalised the track and track maintenance which appears to have been to blame. I seem to remember that the DPM used to set about the independent rail companies on these occasions.
The coverage by the BBC seems to have losts its edge too; they have not been able demand an interview with a CEO and try to humiliate him on air.
The policy seems to be to shut down the story ASAP.
However, it could be that he is too busy and just does not care, and my prejudice is getting the better of me.
Central Office has issued instructions for all Lab politicos to avoid (car/train) crash sites due to negative PR implications, perhaps?
@Hadrian's wall: yes, the one person killed in the accident was Scottish.
What of it?
Only one dead and she was Scottish, as were the injured.
Alexander is an English minister so no votes there then.
Anyway it was wet and windy and remote so why bother.
AND, Railtrack/Network Rail is government owned, so could be some awkward questions about the finance of maintenance......should have sent Gordo to explain it all.
The passengers were too white British .
If Dougie wishes to avoid train wrecks I suggest he leave Scotland before voting starts on May 3 and stay away for a fortnight.
I am sorry but a Ministerial visit - particularly by the current bunch of complete tossers and spongers - just gets in the way of those people trying to do a proper job and sort out the mess.
How do some ministers stay looking so young? Either the job isn't hard enought work or they have got some expensive moisturiser.
What on earth are Network Rail, a state owned company, doing making any kind of political donations/payments?
Easy does it. Something's clearly gone terribly wrong but the Minister can't fix every detail from faulty traffic lights to dodgy points. He could visit the site but what good will it do?
On the broader scale, Labour's transport policy is weak and lacking policies, vision and funding. That's where you should be questioning Douglas Alexander.
Don't companies now require share-holder approval to make political donations?
In which case HMG has agreed to donate £6k to the labour party?...
Or is Network Rail's ownership in a no-mans's land run by cronies by appointment? I forget.
He couldn't open the door on that bus. About his level of ability.
Funny how the BBC changes its angle when there are no evil profit-making companies neglecting maintenance. When it's the government which is neglecting maintenance, well, that's just not a story!
Network Rail seem to be running a regular service for Scotch Labour
Network Rail has Treasury-guaranteed debt and its Management seem to be apopinted by the Transport Secretary
Network Rail, a private company limited by guarantee,
The Board runs Network Rail to the standards required of a publicly listed company (PLC).
http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/725.aspx
Slighty off track but....the BBC World Service (Oxfam / Greenpeace broadcasting as they are known to my colleagues.....)recently reported a fire on a Japanese Whaling ship, the second line informing us of the potential environmental risk. NO MENTION of the danger to the CREW. Imagine a fire on a passenger vessel, would the BBC use the same priorities?
...and anyway, don't Labour have their own train crash, the wreckage of which we witness more evry day...
Why are scottish labour elligible for a bung from Network Rail, but not ferinstance the BNP ? Does a party simply write in and say they like railways, please send some cash, or do you have to offer something in return, like good industrial relations , or jobs for the boys on quangos ?
My earlier link didn't work according to plan (a bit like rail privatisation) but what a search of the Electoral Commission's register reveals is a donation from Network Rail to Scottish Labour of £5,000 on 28 Feb 2006 and £6,000 on 31 December 2006.
I wonder if the head of the Scottish Labour campaign has a conflict of interest over whether to order an enquiry into a donor to the Scottish Labour campaign?
1. Alexander is both Transport Secretary and Scottish Secretary and represents a Scottish constituency.
2. It is extraordinary that he hasn't been to the site as all previous ministers have done. It does suggest either that Labour are now asking ministers not to be asociated with bad news or that he lacks political nous.
3. The donation from what is effectively a nationalised company to the Scottish Labour Party should be investigated immediately.
Petition NO 10, requesting the toe rag to do the right thing.
If nothing else it might wake up Nick Robinson to cover the story.
BRING BACK GILLIGAN.....A REAL MAN.
From the Network Rail website http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/713.aspx
"Our purpose is to deliver a safe, reliable and efficient railway for Britain. As a company limited by guarantee, we are a private company operating as a commercial business. We are directly accountable to our members [=includes the Transport Secretary] and regulated by the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR)[=appointed by the Transport Secretary]."
That pic of Douggie is a sort of updated HMV advert.....you know with Nipper listening to His Master's Voice
Anon at 1040:
the BBC seems to have losts its edge too; they have not been able demand an interview with a CEO and try to humiliate him on air.
The CEO of Network Rail volunteered to come on air and humiliate himself, saying he was terribly sorry it appeared to be all his fault.
Minekiller:
Imagine a fire on a passenger vessel, would the BBC use the same priorities?
No, because there are far more people on your average passenger vessel than on your average whaling craft.
Duh!
It's a fnny old world. A company created by the Labour government from the ripping off of thousands of investors in Railtrack, whose shares are owned by the labour government and whose loans are guaranteed by the Labour government, are actually donating cash to the Governing party. At least the board seem to know what side their bread is buttered. Arise, Lord Fat Controller of Grayriggs!
Some of the organisations that are 'members' of Network Rail (that is, control it)...
Department of Transport
Local Government Association
Transport 2000
Welsh Assembly Government
... and so have responsibility for donating £11,000 to Scottish Labour.
I thoughtwhen it was set up, the idea was that Network Rail would be politically neutral, just like the BBC...
... oh, wait a minute...
Don't know what difference this might make but wasn't there a Labour peer's daughter on the train not unconnected with the BBC.
Maybe Alexander was right and all the others were wrong in not going to the crash site - how would anyone without any engineering knowledge prancing around in a field in the Lake District help address the problem!
I suspect that the amounts received from Network Rail were for the sponsorship of events/payment for stands at Conference which are donations under the Act - and the Commission in its wisdom doesn't allow to be distinguished from normal cash donations - the Tories of course avoid such disclsure by not having their own conference (or using a front organisation to run it for them)
I thought wee Dougie was a train crash.
It would appear there are some very murky waters concerning the use of "our" monies to support a political party.
I dont suppose they have made donations to any other political parties?
Looks like the good Inspector Yates might be opening another case file. Or is this a case for the Transport Police?
As for Dumphy Alexander's conduct, more worried about his place on the gravy train than for his "travelling stakeholders"!
Obviously Network Rail is so much more efficient than Railtrack and it pays its surplus to the labour party and the directors rather than the shareholders. We all know now where Railtrack went wrong.
As to Mr Alexander. Professor Starkey provided a brilliant analysis of the retinue that followed James 1 and 6 to England.
It seems nothing changes. Obviously the wisest fool in the land still needs the company of boot boys.
Finally, it should be remembered the last time the Scots ruled England, there was a civil war.
how would anyone without any engineering knowledge prancing around in a field in the Lake District help address the problem!
That's not the point - the Transport Secretary should have been there to provide moral support for the affected people. Why else would Prezza make a run for any train wreck when he was "responsible"?
Why are NR "sponsoring" events at the Labour conferences anyway? Grannies lost their blouses in the creation of this monster, I expect they are mightily impressed that the new company are giving "their" money to the people that stole it from them.
I thought that the tale of Network Rail donating to a political party could not possibly be true.Has any other party benefitted?This company has no shareholders and is effectively a state monopoly.I worked for a nationalised industry years ago and there was a "civil service" ethos (old style) towards political parties then.Certainly no one would have dreamt of funding them.What is going on?
What's the going rate for a team of navvies to check a set of points on a railway line? About £11,000?
Finally, it should be remembered the last time the Scots ruled England, there was a civil war.
Actually, the last Scot to "rule England" was Sir Alex Douglas Home, Tory Prime Minister in the 1960s.
And the "British" Royal Family is about 50% German, 50% Scottish. The last truly "English" king was Richard III; there was a civil war....
Makes you wonder which idiot privatised a national rail system for ideological reasons rather than practical transport considerations.
This created a series of local monopolies that get more subsidy from the British tax payer than they received when the British tax payer actually owned the railways.
It has also led to a collapse of rail safety standards, which means privatisation = public subsidy for private companies and more deaths on the railways.
Wasn't Adam Smith Wealth of Nations a condemnation of the state protecting private monopolies?
Anonymous 12:26 - my company's paid a good £11-12k to the Labour Party for stands at conferences over the past couple of years; I don't see that appearing on our balance sheets as a political donation, mainly because it isn't: it's payment for goods and services.
bj...
The point I am making is not the numbers of people, but the fact that they are in fact people. (Whaling ships have fairly sizeable crews)
AND...the Beeb ignored in this story the human factor (endangered crew) and went straight to one of their fav trot outs - the environment.
Duh yourself (so to speak)
Network Rail hosted a reception at the Tory Pary conference (see link below) - if the Tories did not hide such "doantions" through the front company it uses for its Conference then it would have had to report a donation from Network Rail. Network Rail probably believes that it is important to speak to politicians of all parties hence its sponsorship of such events - do you really want a situation where major companies do not speak to political parties? Or would you prefer to make cheap incorrect political points
http://www.conservatives.com/pdf/conference2004.pdf
Time for the railway subsidies to end and for a truly free market in rail travel to be created. Then we'll see just how much the public really wants to pay towards the railways.
Off topic, but could the dodgy petrol story be a brilliant ploy to take the heat of the Sith? If so, nice one Max.
zastrozzi
Amounts for conference stands below an amount specified by the Commission are exempted from the definition of donations - other amounts are sponsorship and hence reportable donations - the Commission has issued a detailed guidance document on this if you are interested - but the Tories ignore it because they do not have their own conference!
No visit to the crash site from wee Dougie Alexander and I may have missed it but I haven't heard the Dear Leader comment on the rail crash either. Bet if Railtrack had still been in charge they'd have been much in evidence, milking the event for all it's worth and blaming the Tories.
You'll have to get those bullet points sorted Guido. It's a bit unreadable.
Well done on exposing where their real priorities lie.
Anyone else wondering what a public body is doing, giving money to the Labour Party?
In a "Quick history of recent train crashes" this one now comes second from the bottom.
NuLabour - more schools, more hospitals, more train crashes.
Finally2
Wasn't Sir Alex "captain of pop" at Eton. He certainly didn't sound Scottish.
Was Dave in "pop" Perhaps he is Scottish and really a fan of Gay Gordo.
What about the other 13 etonians
in the shadow cabinet.. are they Scottish, were they in "pop"
Shouldn't we be told
Anon 11.24 AM:
'Easy does it. Something's clearly gone terribly wrong but the Minister can't fix every detail from faulty traffic lights to dodgy points. He could visit the site but what good will it do?'
Well it might show all and sundry that he actually gives a toss. It might help him to understand part of his job. It might also provide a decent piece of PR (and God knows, they desperately need that!).
Or maybe we should just expect them to sit in their luxurious offices pulling levers.
It's about time these people saw the harsh realities of life and death. They are far too well insulated - and paid.
First of all, what the fuck was the CEO of a public corporation (John Armitt) doing fully admitting legal liability for the rail crash within a few hours? Had he been told perhaps to admit to everything in the hope that (as happened with Potters Bar) if you fully admit liability then you won't be prosecuted for corporate manslaughter? The imbecile, presumably believing that since only one person had died in the crash that he wouldn't be losing very much, now seems to have opened himself up to a comprehensive lawsuit by Virgin Trains over the Grayrigg derailment.
Someow I think its going to take a lot more than a few thousand quid dropped into Prescott's begging bowl to sort that one out.
Network Rail has no business donating money to any political party whatsoever. It's a disgrace.
"Returning to a Scottish constituency could have taken him through Cumbria." - more likely over Cumbria at 30 thousand feet.
I bet he flies up and down to Scotland.
Watch Richard Branson he is more worried about a change of government then all of New Labour MPs in Scotland are. Alegidly.
So he should be, he is making more money from the government or should I say the TAX payer then Ron Cohen. Alegidly.
Rail privatisation was a success (sort of) as after this passenger numbers have risen consistently and significantly while prior toit passenger numbers had been falling for decades
Perhaps Richard Bransonshouldn't be too concerned by a change of government. You never know, Cameron may privatise the Beeb and sell it to Virgin Media! Now's there's an idea.
It can not be smart or right for Party political donations to come from companies that directly benifit from government contracts. Such as running trains.
In my business this is, apropiately called giving "BROWN envelopes" and is HIGHLY HIGHLY ilegal.
What makes Dick B's New Labour donations so dangerous is that he is also a media magnate, who is getting vast and ever increasing amounts of government advertising money and public sector subsidies.
A new dictionary word for when private business and government get in to bed with each other and make mad passionate love, could be.
When the system has Bransonised. Or their is a process of Cohenisation going on.
This would be good because nobody seems to know what a FASCIST system of government is anymore.
Alegidly.
UPDATE : Scottish Labour took a £6,000 donation from Network Rail Limited three months ago.
UPDATE II : Scottish Labour had a total of £11,000 from Network Rail Limited last year.
I thought Network Rail was publicly owned? If this is the case why is it giving money to any political party?
Geezer
Now that is an idear. If you know Camerons phone number tell him NOW.
Only thing is that such a deal must not involve any public money whatsoever, and must operate in a deregulated enviroment..
Geezer
Now that is an idear. If you know Camerons phone number tell him NOW.
Only thing is that such a deal must not involve any public money whatsoever, and must operate in a deregulated enviroment..
garypowell said...
"Geezer
Now that is an idear. If you know Camerons phone number tell him NOW."
Bit tricky with the restraining order and stuff.
It probably isn't a donation in the normal sense of the word - probably represents the cost of holding an event at a Party Conference. Network Rail does exactly the same at Tory conferences and possibly others.
Under the Act such sponsorship counts as a donation - the Labour Party reports it - the Tories don't because they have a front company which receives the sponsorship.
Companies sponsoring events at Party conferences (of all persuasions) is nothing new it has being going on for years.
"Two jobs" Alexander is Secretary of State for Scotland and easily acquires English taxpayers' money from fellow Scot Gordon Brown to subsidise Scotland. This is why every Scot receives more than £1300 per year in public spending than each person in England.
Alexander is also Transport Minister for England (not Scotland where his constituency is). He cancels transport projects in England due to lack of money, which he diverts to Scotland.
There is an obvious conflict of interest here and England (as always) is paying for it.
At 10:53 AM, Penfold said...
Only one dead and she was Scottish, as were the injured.
Alexander is an English minister so no votes there then.
====
Douglas Alexander represents a Scottish constituency. He is the Scottish First Minister.
Where you are confused, is that he was given the position of English Transport Minister. There are no votes to be had in England for him, which is why he lied to me when I asked him if he would insist that England be allowed the same level of funding as his own country. He said there was a case for it, but has done nothing about it since. That's OK, though. No one in England can hold him to account.
the rebuild hadrians wall party
if the entire train was full of scots alexander would not bother his arse labour have no interest in anyone in the uk especialy scots they even hate the fact that they sound remotely like any scot they have an abject hatred of anything scottish bile vitrol and boiling poison towards anything scottish is the default norm
I have spoken to Network Rail ... they were paying Scottish Labour for services (stand and event at conferences and events). This is, it seems to me, not a donation at all, but a payment for services. I think that the Labour Party in Scotland need to review their entries on their return to the Electoral Commission.