Tell us what you think

Woman with megaphone in a crowd

Why do you want to see public services run for people not profit? Tell us here.

We'll use your comments to help make the case for public ownership - look out for your thoughts on our homepage!

Thanks for telling us what you think.

Photo used under Creative Commons licensing, thanks to anw.fr.

Comments

Emma Randle-Caprez replied on

I don't want to go back to a time when we have to pay to visit Hyde Park and it's wrong to make prisons or social care services a business. Keep up your great work and thank you for doing it.

Nanette Gregory replied on

A public service should be exactly that. Any profits should be put back into the community to improve facilities.

Carol Russell replied on

The companies or organisations who take over public services are in it to make a profit, lets make no mistake about it, and this is wrong and creates more problems than it solves.

Yvonne replied on

Privatisation of public services has just meant profit for a few and bad services for the public.

Nicholas Humby replied on

Privatisation is not in the public interest and fragments public services and often involves taxpayer subsidies to companies

Den Carter replied on

We lose at every stage - and we own it! It is theft and piracy and is morally and socially wrong and it has to be reversed.

Shirley Carter replied on

I would like to live in a caring society, where people are more important than profit, but I feel we are going the opposite way, encouraged by successive governments.

Trumpkin the dwarf replied on

I think you should be going for private schools as well as academies because the most well off children get much more spent on their education. In our local area most children have a choice of 1 school (their catchment school) whereas those with money have a choice of their local school plus four others. The top state schools do better at A level than the top private schools and state educated pupils do better at university. But private school children get the best jobs due to the old boy network and having more resources on their education. Thus there is a loss of talent in the top jobs and a completely divided country which has led to Brexit. We need the children of the best off families to be responsible and send their children to local schools so they are not seen as unreachable elite. Private school supporters argue that people should be able to spend the money they have earned as they wish. However they have only earned the money because they have been paid more than necessary if they have enough money to spare for private education. Our taxes, food bills, utility bills, sky tv, bbc licence are all more expensive because we are in fact paying for some people's children to have an education which negatively affects the life chances of most children in this country. To be able to afford the fees there will be pressure on people to do dodgy deals, vote for governments that cut taxes and stay with abusive partners.

Anna Zimmerman replied on

This is the organisation that the UK - and the whole world, by extension - desperately needs; one to counter the unfortunate myth of the greater 'efficiency' of the private sector, and the need for high-quality, fully-accountable public services. I mention the whole world because this facile and dangerous cancer has spread out from the US and UK and damaged the lives of ordinary people everywhere.

I believe that the pendulum of anti-public sector rhetoric is slowly starting to swing back, and We Own It has a vital role to play in that.

David Hard replied on

It is great to see the emergence of an all-in-one campaign group.

The NHS is politically controlled and it has become fragmented to such an extent that members of the public and their children are now more at risk than ever of dying unnecessarily.

The land upon which NHS hospitals are standing are publicly owned and should not be eyed-up as gifts to developers because we own it.

Far too many ordinary members of the public are now seriously ill and they need an NHS that is not facing extinction.

www.a-new-shape.co.uk

2j3sr

Natalie Murphy ... replied on

Recently I went on a trip across many countries from Sydney, Australia, Manila, Hong Kong, Beijing, Busan, Nagasaki, Osaka, Honolulu, San Fransisco, San Diego and even some of the Caribbean islands one things was common, cheap publicly owned transport systems. Not only that, many had tram systems, and San Fransisco had older trams from across the world including Blackpool. Several had tram, streetcar and trollybuses, hybrid buses and two of them had all electric road vehicles. San Diego's system was partly run by First and Stagecoach and also TDG had the biggest part of the share. Yet prices were lower than the UK. Everywhere I went I could all day tickets for a really reasonable price, Honolulu was $2.50 and travel for 6 hours on any bus, and the same kind of price structure in San Fransisco too. All the public transport systems were clean and efficient, the Hong Kong tube system was sardine tin rides though, always packed yet the trains were run like clockwork and appeared to be endless. Sydney's urban and underground trains were double deck and very smart, and China had bullet trains running at nearly 200 Mph and cost a mere £10 from Tianjin to Beijing. The craziness of the UK's privatisation policy allowing the companies who own the bus and train operations have made billions, and those companies have been able to spread across the world with the profits they make here supplying cheap public transport to other countries. Maybe 'We Own It' might like to use that in their campaigning.

Marion Garner-Patel replied on

The privatisation of amenities has proved disastrous. it serves not the ordinary citizen but the elite and rich. it also means that the power for change is more difficult as one has to deal with loads of small private companies instead of the public ones for change. Water and energy are examples. They do not improve services. Electric sub stations are now neglected with falling fences. I could continue. It is all about a wrong ideology and as someone has pointed out, NO majority mandate.

Trevor Sykes replied on

Privatisation in & of itself is not necessarily wrong but the way in which it has been enforced in a compliant U.K. is completely against the interests of anyone who has to rely on such services. It is vital that some voice is given to those who have been robbed by successive oligarchies masquerading as democratic governments.

Peter Collins replied on

It is pushing people power to the forefront of governing bodies so they feel less powerful and less likely to "go-it-alone" to suit their own personal preferences, rather than acting for the people of this country

Colette Smith replied on

Simply relieved someone is finally doing something about privatisation!

Ann Quinn replied on

You are making people think.

Patrick Hulme replied on

Helps to counteract, the pro-corporate media. Public service has been demonised, but in reality privatisation has led to less efficient more fragmented services.

Gerhard Lohmann-Bond replied on

You keep me up-to-date with important developments

david pike replied on

Time for Energy Democracy and Ownership! - There is a way of making this happen now, of giving ownership of the energy to the people of the UK. It is our future – it is our energy, and at Ourenergy we are passionate about making is possible for everyone to own it!

Our energy is a new gas and electricity supplier that gives back 75% of the profits to the customers in the form of a yearly rebate.

We also give ownership to customers, in the first instance through domecracy and influence – you are encouraged to get involved in decision making and be part of the board. We also want to transfer ownership to customers – Ourenergy is a supplier that is built for you and influenced by you. We only see ourselves as stewards of your energy. It is your company. You will own a share of it!

Honesty and transparency in big businesses and in the energy sector are sorely lacking. We are an open organisation that will ‘bare it all’, including financial information and salaries

Our mission is to move the power, dominance and control away from the big six suppliers and put power in your hands – nothing short of a social revolution!

www.ourenergy.com

David MacMaster replied on

The selling of publicly owned assets whether in the form of publicly owned land, natural resources or services, at low prices and without taking into account the net effect on the national economy of undermining public infrastructure, for short term, limited, temporary financial gains to the treasury, for private profit of private enterprise, is not only an affront to the greater good but is also a form of corruption from which those in government, both national and local, and their business associates, may profit from personally. This is unacceptable.

J Wilson replied on

You need to tell the People & the Government that these are Human Rights issues, which the UK has been party to since 1945 through its membership of the UN. However, despite that, and a UK Labour Government having 'Ratified' The International Bill of Human Rights in 1976, no successive UK Government has ever fully complied with it. #TIBOHR now and support the 2 campaigns to demand these Rights once and for all time.

As for State vs Private ownership.

The UN has also said in 1962 in its General Assembly Resolution 1803 (XVII)that "Recalling its resolutions 523 (VI) of 12 January 1952 and 626 (VII) of 21 December 1952. Bearing in mind its resolution 1314 (XIII) of 12 December 1958, by which it established the Commission on Permanent Sovereignty over Natural Resources " and later "Bearing in mind its resolution 1515 (XV) of 15 December 1960, in which it recommended that the sovereign right of every State to dispose of its wealth and its natural resources should be respected," that it declared in Article 1 of this resolution that:-

"1. The right of peoples and nations to permanent sovereignty over their natural wealth and resources must be exercised in the interest of their national development and of the well-being of the people of the State concerned."

So when and how have the people ever been truly consulted about the sell off of anything that their taxes have acquired or invested in, as the UN has also said in other documents that taxation is part of a Nations resources? And of course our 'Natural Resources' have been sold off willy-nilly to private individuals and Companies for decades without any thought for "the well being of the people" or respect for all of our Human Rights.

We don't even have Equality before the Courts in the UK, so how can they claim to comply with inalienable and inviolable human rights themselves, or be fit to judge when the State has complied with them in everything it has done too? Real people should form a Jury and set 'Legal Precedent', not the lackeys of the State.

Robina Bruno replied on

You keep the democratic deficit and moral bankruptcy of this government in the spotlight, keeping the questions over the legitimacy of free market capitalism alive.

Russell Dunkeld replied on

None of the political parties have the courage to even discuss this principle. We, the people, will have to show them unmistakably what we want. That is surely what democracy ought to be about. We Own It offers an opportunity to demonstrate this clearly

Alan Milne replied on

I like We Own It because it gives ordinary old pensioners like me a voice which politicians and business leaders ignore at their peril

Chris Cumberpatch replied on

The current political system, stitched up by the party machines, leaves no room for people to make their voices heard - particularly if one lives in a 'one-party state' as I do (Sheffield). Organisations like We Own It give us a voice

Alistair McKenzie replied on

You reflect what the vast majority of people believe.

Nicola Wellington replied on

I like your determination in the face of the Tory obsession with profit and devaluing of local government and public transport.

Andrew McTaggart replied on

You have the energy to campaign for fair and just causes

Julie Beverly replied on

With the kind of government we have today (and a 5 year fixed term) and a very biased media it is really important that there should be opportunities for the public to make their views known.

John Mulcahy replied on

You are fighting for the ordinary person on the street who do not have a voice.

Julia Daly replied on

You bring to my attention things that might not make the news, or flash once and are never mentioned again, and also provide access to more global issues as well as the local items that should concern us all.

Jim Dingnan replied on

We Own It is the only organisation I know that campaigns single-mindedly on this one very important issue, so it is able to concentrate its fire-power without diluting it across a range of campaigns.

Jenni Jackson replied on

It's good to have a pressure group dedicated to the maintenance of public services

David Holmes replied on

The name We Own It says it all. Since the late forties the taxpayer invested huge amounts of money buying the railways and putting them back on a good footing, along come foreign firms charge us more than they charge in their own country per mile, and invest the profits to improve their transport system. Bonkers

David Kirby replied on

I like We Own It, because it draws attention to what the neoliberal revolution is trying to take away from us, and it invites discussion as to what it means to 'own' an enterprise. In my view, shareholders do not really 'own' corporations, in the sense that they do not and cannot make themselves responsible for what the enterprise does, which is obviously particularly important in public service: they are really thieves and parasites, and making profits out of other peoples' basic needs whilst also exploiting a workforce and robbing them of control over their work really is disgusting and yes, definitely a moral issue. The staff should control their workplace and be fully accountable to users and to funders.

Tom Nisbet replied on

We Own It are promoting a subject in the interests of the country as a whole and not the interests of a powerful profit driven group.

Michael Burnett replied on

We Own It is a sensible organisation which puts across a view which, ironically, is supported across the political divide since a majority of all voters do not want the country sold out to the Bransons and Sercos of this world

David Henshaw replied on

A nice clear campaign, without any obvious political agenda

Simon Holdsworth replied on

You give a voice to all similar thinkers who need to join up to be heard

Tom Kenny replied on

Great mission! I really like the website - especially the evidence section, and the public opinion infographic. I also think the campaigns are interesting, especially the top trumps

John Hallett replied on

Because public services are what they say - they should be accountable to the public.Since they are run for the benefit us all; the taxes which fund then come from us all. We are all shareholders.

There should not be secrecy about the accounts and financial decisions.

The quality of a nations life is seen in the treatment of its poorest members.

Julie Harrison replied on

You are doing a job that no-one else seems to be doing - the subject of public ownership simply disappeared thanks to Blair.

Andrew Ward replied on

We Own It provides a good platform and voice for the many people who believe in this cause; serves as a good reminder to both media and politicians that a lot of us DO care about things more than profits for shareholders.

Frank Sowerby replied on

I am in complete support of your aims and objectives. Someone needs to speak out and alert the public to what this Government is doing particularly to the NHS

David Hard replied on

The Tories are in the process of destroying the NHS. All of us will need the service someday.

Sally Smith replied on

I like your approach-ability and clear language. I tell people about the campaign whenever possible. It's amazing how even people in social care don't see what the problem is with privatisation. This campaign is forever!

Ian Thom replied on

You are fighting injustice, whether it be because we built these services and now have lost them and their benefits or because corporations now have the ability to squeeze us for profit.

They were built by the people for the people and nobody else should have control, as far as i am concerned the gov't has committed a crime under common law.

Pete replied on

You support a very important part of any successful society and community - the protection and promotion of good public services.

Andrew Morley replied on

I don't believe public services should be run for profit, Putting profit first means quality goes down, We need more say over our services, Once we privatise services, it's hard to get them back, We all paid to set up these services for the public benefit not for private enterprise to profit, so selling them is a dereliction of public trust

Ed Marks replied on

We need campaigning groups such as this to challenge the governments plans which always seem to go against the public interest and attack the most vulnerable in society

Pages

Add new comment