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

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

G. Housley replied on

It's not just a worthy enterprise it's common sense. We need to act against an arrogant government that thinks getting about a quarter of the votes at a general election gives them a mandate to do what they want

Christine Picke... replied on

We own it is representative. Public authorities can offer a very good quality service but, currently that is at a much higher rate than private companies. Part of this reason is that public authorities have to pay overtime rates and officers wages are inflated. The only option in times of budget cuts is therefore tendering out services but those private services are impersonal and profit driven using workers who are low paid and unable to speak up. We Own It needs to be arguing for public authorities to find a third out of this quagmire so their services can be cheaper if not as cheap as private enterprise.

Vincent replied on

You campaign on a vital issue that is otherwise lost in the long round of single issue campaigns and little fights

Darren Woodiwiss replied on

You seem to be the only non partisan voice making this argument, the Greens are but they are political

Jimmy Barrie replied on

This should be the future for Britain , for the common tax paying Brit , not the crooked self centred out for what they can get MP'S . Keep them BRITISH . SAVE THE FAMILY SILVER

Dave Wilson replied on

I like We Own It's agenda to return public services and utilities to public ownership. These services should never have been sold off, and certainly not for the undervalued pittances they have been.

John Milne replied on

I draw your attention to the petition launched by Scottish Labour to keep the ferries serving the Western Isles of Scotland in public hands (scottishlabour.org.uk).

See also Brian Wilson's article in The Scotsman (28 November) Time for SNP to U-turn on ferries scotsman.com

Grace replied on

This government was elected by 24% of those eligible to vote, by 37% of those who did vote. That means that 63% of those who voted tried to get someone else in. Yet they think that they have a mandate to do whatever they want. They must be able to hear the protests, the cries to keep corporatocracy at bay, and yet we constantly hear of how they are hastening us down that slippery slope. There will be no coming back, if they have their way. We will be sold out to the highest bidder, and paying the prices for huge fat-cat salaries for greedy executives. The old ethic where business is about providing jobs, paying decent wages, and enhancing society for the people is long gone. They line their own pockets by keeping the poor poor. They cut jobs and cut corners, throw people on the scrap-heap and call it progress. The government sells off public assets, and negotiates trade agreements that will further drive us into a corporate nightmare, without hearing the public outcry. This is no longer Democracy. It is Megalomockracy.

Lesley Walton replied on

I am SO ANGRY! This bunch of crooks lied and lied and lied and lied in order to get elected and that is the ONLY reason they are in power. Their persistent lies convinced people that 'better the devil you know' and the 'economy is safe in our hands' What a sick joke! What they are proposing to do with regards to Royal Mail and RBS etc is nothing short of criminal - they are basically 'stealing' our money.

Rant over, now to a practical suggestion. Whilst probably most of the big companies, mainly the ones that award themselves obscene bonuses even - are perfectly satisfied (and relieved I expect) that the Tories are in power, I suspect that there may be some who might actually agree with our stance. Not too sure how you would find these out but it would certainly give us vital clout. And maybe if we can also identify some Tories who dont support these sell offs, especially at knock down prices.

Paul Dilon replied on

I am sure there has been some good public to private acquisitions but the way Europe's economy has gone for the last 10 years and with current social inequalities and climate change to think privatization is a fix it all, is not looking at the bigger picture. It maybe a cause of a many of our current problems.

When a politician talks of sustainability they should consider how unregulated profit gains affect this so called desire for sustainability. Setting time periods on contracts to Private contractors runs counter to the concept of long term sustainability. Politicians before blowing the trumpet for privatization should consider how has privatization affected unemployment rates, the national debt, employment laws, inflation and the disparities in property ownership of it's citizens.

The other problem with privatization is it´s ability to change the definition of those necessary elements for life into a monetary system. You thought water rates are bad, when water and air are traded on the stock market you know you have a serious problem waiting ahead of you.

Actually the more evident our resources diminish and the onslaught of climate change approaches it is understandable for some commentators to see privatization as a greed explosion before the great collapse. To assert change a fundamental revaluation of community, citizenship and government must be made that establishes a none monetary system that is self sustainable for the basic needs of the people and their environment. The private sector could have all the rest.

Pages

Add new comment