you might say it’s one of his pledges to you as labour leader
Public control, not ownership. So not nationalised. …and what exactly does “control” mean? Overall control? Partial control? A small restriction on price rises?
We already have mechanisms of public control. Ofwat for water and Ofgem for electricity. The government don’t use them.
It’s a pointless and meaningless position.
Yet another labour politician that just wants to mess around at the edges of things, because they don’t see the fundamental problems.
His team really shouldn’t be so complacent about this by-election given that Reform and Restore are on the march
How are they being complacent? All the reporting I’ve heard about it is that pretty much the entire labour party is out campaigning in Makersfield.
It does feel like they’re not offering anything attention grabbing or substantial. Just vote for us because we’re Labour and not Kier Starmer and vibes
Fair. I just hope his planning for running the country isn’t seen as him assuming that he’s going to win the by-election. The by-election has to be won before anything else. But I guess you could say that if he lays out some good plans now, it would persuade more people in Makerfield to vote for him.
If it means tighter leash on prices and better regulation of sewage overflows then good! My water bill went up 66% in the last 5 years with no increase in usage. I wish I could say my wages did the same!
Yeah, that would be much better, but does it make up for continued abuse of immigrants and trans people and continued UK support for genocide in Gaza?
No, look, fuck “sources”.
He can say it himself, like he has a load of old bollocks about all the shit labour has done.
Why is he eager to be on the record personally over immigration but sources have to whisper how much he loves public ownership?
He’s said it a load of times before, see another Guardian article
This article is just about sources saying he will make it a major point in a leadership battle vs just a side issue.
