Thank You Gary Filmon

In fairness, the thread title should also thank Messrs. Doer and Selinger for not figuring out how to re-nationalize MTS over a 16-year period.

Apparently, it's an ironclad law of economics. Public property can be privatized, but private property can't be nationalized.

Left Turn wrote:

Unionist wrote:

In fairness, the thread title should also thank Messrs. Doer and Selinger for not figuring out how to re-nationalize MTS over a 16-year period.

Apparently, it's an ironclad law of economics. Public property can be privatized, but private property can't be nationalized.

Liberal/Conservative logic is that nationalisations = bad economic policy.

NDP logic is that nationalisations = gov't going bankrupt from a lawsuit under chapter 11 of NAFTA.

Orthodox economic logic, adhered to by all three parties, also holds that reapealing NAFTA = economic collapse.

Correct.

When in opposition, the NDP should declare:

"If this government sells off any public assets, we pledge to re-nationalize them as soon as we're back in power".

At worst, that should drastically reduce the price that private sharks will be prepared to pay (because the thing about capitalists is, they can never be sure that the NDP won't, someday, actually keep a promise). That would have the dual benefit of: 1. Making a sell-off less likely. 2. Making a future compensated re-nationalization cheaper.

Horwath and her "let's out-right the right!" ONDP should have made that pledge in respect of Ontario Hydro. They still should. But that would require a visit to an alternate universe.

It's 16.5 years too late for the Manitoba NDP to make that promise in respect of MTS. But what about Manitoba Hydro? Etc.

Does anyone in the Manitoba NDP actually care about privatization? I'm not talking about the cowardly leaders. I'm talking about the vast majority of members and supporters. If they do, they will pressure their party to make this solemn pledge - now.

swallow wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

[url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/ndp-mp-niki-ashton-asks-federal-l... more reason why Niki Ashton rocks:[/url]

Quote:

Ashton wants the Liberals to look at the deal first.

"Canadians already pay some of the highest wireless prices in the world. Greater competition in Manitoba means that we paid lower prices than other parts of the country, but the proposed takeover of MTS by Bell could erase this advantage," she said during Question Period Wednesday.

The same day the takeover was announced, MTS issued service bulletins for its residential and business customers saying prices would increase for a variety of services effective July 2016.

Will the Liberals commit to a public study of this potential takeover? Or will they rubber stamp this deal and stand with well-connected business interests instead of standing up for Manitoba jobs and Manitoba consumers?" Ashton asked.

Canada's minister responsible for economic development, Liberal MP Navdeep Bains, said ensuring competition for Manitobans was their "number one concern."

Well said, but it's interesting how no one can make the case for public ownership of common goods any more - only use the langauge of neo-linberalism to defend consumers. Which is worth doing, of course, but not especially socialist. 

Sorry, just noticed this linked article...

How pathetic. Defending "Manitoba jobs and Manitoba customers". By pushing for increased competition between private companies. Which she calls an "advantage". In a sector that used to be a publicly-owned monopoly.

Could someone email Niki Ashton a copy of the Regina Manifesto?

Or, never mind that old-fashioned communistic propaganda. How about the much more moderate Winnipeg Declaration of 1956?

Quote:

The CCF has always recognized public ownership as the most effective means of breaking the stranglehold of private monopolies on the life of the nation and of facilitating the social planning necessary for economic security and advance. The CCF will, therefore, extend public ownership wherever it is necessary for the achievement of these objectives.

Or the even more "moderate" current policy book:

Quote:

1.10 The public sector

New Democrats believe in:

a Promoting innovation and improving services and management within crown corporations and government agencies.

b Protecting crown corporations against privatization.

c Improving the public sector’s role as a wealth creator and a major provider of jobs.

d Halting public private partnerships (PPP) which are wasteful and inefficient models for delivering public services.

e Opposing all forms of privatization and in [sic] supporting the delivery of all public services by public sector workers.

Oddly enough, the glories of "competition" appear nowhere in the policy book - you know, the book which is passed by convention - which is, like, you know, the supreme policy-making body of the party. Supposedly.

If Ashton is the best we've got, a merger with the Liberals is clearly indicated, fast, before our share price drops even further.

Parables of privatization: A cautionary tale of two telcos

At a time when the Ontario Liberal government is planning to privatize Hydro One and other provincial governments are also planning significant privatizations, it's instructive to look back and see what the impact of earlier privatizations has been.

There's an excellent example right here in Canada of two neighbouring jurisdictions of a similar size, one of which privatized a utility and the other that kept its similar utility under public ownership. It should be seen as a cautionary tale and an indication of what is likely to happen with other privatizations.

That example is the telecom companies of Manitoba and Saskatchewan. These provinces have relatively similar populations -- 1.29 million in Manitoba and 1.13 million in Saskatchewan. Both provinces established publicly owned telephone companies at about the same time over a century ago.

The government of Manitoba bought Bell Canada's Manitoba operations in 1908 and formed it into a publicly owned Crown corporation that eventually became Manitoba Telephone System (MTS). Saskatchewan followed a year later in 1909 by buying the operations of Bell Canada and other private telephone companies in the province into a publicly owned operation that became SaskTel. Both eventually bought up all the private telephone operators in their provinces.Both provinces operated successful parallel publicly owned telephone systems in their respective provinces for almost 90 years until 1997. That was the year former Manitoba Progressive Conservative Premier Gary Filmon broke previous promises and privatized MTS, claiming that a private company would be more innovative. (Some of the sordid details that led to the privatization of MTS was detailed in an article in Canadian Dimension by Errol Black and Paula Mallea at that time). Meanwhile next door, SaskTel has remained the only government-owned telecommunications company, even after eight years of provincial rule under the conservative Saskatchewan Party.

laine lowe wrote:

I am more concerned with what the NDP provincially and federally is going to say about Pallister's changes to Manitoba Hydro. Ashton would be better served to call out an alarm or warning on this front.

As for lack of competition, the Bell purchase is not in essence limiting choices in Manitoba since Bell never operated here. In fact, part of the deal is to release 1/3 of cell phone customers to Telus, making that a new entry in the cell phone market (although I don't fully understand their connection to Rogers). Supposedly Virgin Mobility offers services here too.

Thanks for the reality check, laine.

Likewise, epaulo!