Lord Adonis to return to Rail & Infrastructure with new Goverment Body.

[fgwrich]

First of all, apologies if in the wrong section - I did think about putting this into the infrastructure section. But this may be of interest to some / most. I wonder if this could see Lord Adonis making recommendation for new Rail based schemes in the future again and what they will likely to produce / come as a result.

Blairite Quits Labour To Head Osborne Project

Lord Adonis appointment One of Labour's most senior and respected peers has decided to leave the party, in order to chair a new infrastructure commission.

Lord Adonis, a former transport secretary, is going to be tasked with leading an independent new body designed to "calmly and dispassionately work out what the country needs to build for its future".

He is the most high profile centrist figure to abandon Labour in the wake of Jeremy Corbyn's election as Labour leader.

On Monday, Chancellor George Osborne will announce Lord Adonis's appointment, which is part of a four-pronged scheme to overhaul the way major building projects are "planned, funded and delivered".

It follows criticism that the Davies Commission took three years to recommend a third runway at Heathrow after hearing submissions from hundreds of aviation experts, planning officials and environmentalists.

Mr Osborne will tell delegates in Manchester: "Where would we be if we had never built railways or runways, power stations or new homes? Where will be in the future if we stop building them now?

"We have to shake Britain out of its inertia on the projects that matter most."

More follows...

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknew...ad-osborne-project/ar-AAf5YtV?ocid=spartandhp

 

[cf111]

Is this the same Osborne who is paying the Chinese and French to build our new nuclear power stations?

To use an old Scottish phrase, if you didn't laugh you'd greet.

 

[ilkestonian]

I'm impressed by this initiative.

Lord Adonis knows his stuff and I doubt he'd accept this appointment without having received assurances that there is some substance to it

As the poster above suggested, there is much to do to persuade people that the government has an intention to build/rebuild its aging infrastructure, but I do feel this is a move in the right direction.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Is this the same Osborne who is paying the Chinese and French to build our new nuclear power stations?

To use an old Scottish phrase, if you didn't laugh you'd greet.

As Scotland and France are historical allies, I am surprised to hear that you use an old Scottish phrase to deprecate the French.

 

[asylumxl]

As Scotland and France are historical allies, I am surprised to hear that you use an old Scottish phrase to deprecate the French.

I don't think it's a dig at the French as such, but rather a dig at them being selected to build the power stations.

The reactors they will be providing are rather simple and conventional. Britain has produced several successful and more efficient designs, but as usual the governments of the times would not invest in them. As such they were never built in larger numbers, their production costs were high and the cycle repeated.

On the topic of Adonis, I'm quite disappointed by this. Various media outlets are reporting that he has left the Labour party to fill this role. If that is indeed the case, then he has sold out for a taste of power, in my opinion like Clegg did in 2010.

 

[WatcherZero]

Supposedly they will be announcing £5bn more infrastructure spending today paid for by forcing local council pension funds to invest in it and selling off government land. They will also be announcing paid maternity/paternity leave for grandparents but no climbdown on cutting working tax credits.

Presumably the maternity leave for grandparents is because they've now priced child care out of the reach of most people.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

On the topic of Adonis, I'm quite disappointed by this. Various media outlets are reporting that he has left the Labour party to fill this role. If that is indeed the case, then he has sold out for a taste of power, in my opinion like Clegg did in 2010.

Is it not the case that he can bring a certain amount of expertise to the role. If so, that is surely a good point and not a matter of blind political adherence.

I cannot reconcile your remark of "he has sold out for a taste of power" with the actuality of the situation as was he not in an office of high power in the Labour Party in past times and as such, "tasted power" previously.

 

[thenorthern]

I have never been a fan of Lord Adonis and I wasn't impressed with the way he handled the East Coast franchise issue in 2009.

I can't say I am impressed with his appointment and he has always struck me as someone who would struggle to be elected as an MP. I think this 2nd time he has moved parties as he was Lib Dem for a while.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I can't say I am impressed with his appointment and he has always struck me as someone who would struggle to be elected as an MP.

Is it not the case that as he holds the title that he does, he has no need to stand for election as a MP.

Giving my age of 70 away somewhat, one notable matter springs to mind in this respect that concerns Anthony Neil Wedgwood Benn who had been elected as an MP, but on the death of his father, the 2nd Viscount Stansfield, he inherited a hereditary peerage which at the time precluded his sitting as an MP, until the repeal of the Peerage Act 1963, when he renounced the title and was then free to continue sitting as an MP.

 

[bnm]

On the topic of Adonis, I'm quite disappointed by this. Various media outlets are reporting that he has left the Labour party to fill this role. If that is indeed the case, then he has sold out for a taste of power, in my opinion like Clegg did in 2010.

A man of few principles. He's been a LibDem councillor, Labour minister and now he's working for the Conservatives.

 

[Taunton]

Infrastructure body (rail, road, airport) reporting direct to the The Chancellor. Another nail in the coffin for the DfT.

 

[Railsigns]

On the topic of Adonis, I'm quite disappointed by this. Various media outlets are reporting that he has left the Labour party to fill this role. If that is indeed the case, then he has sold out for a taste of power, in my opinion like Clegg did in 2010.

While embarrassing for Labour he is resigning whip, Adonis to remain a Labour Party member - tricky but a long way from a defection

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/650802240886865920

 

[furnessvale]

A man of few principles. He's been a LibDem councillor, Labour minister and now he's working for the Conservatives.

The only principle I seem to recall is his support of railways.

This alone should be encouraging to members of this group rather than all this nonsense about which political party he happens to be a member of on any given day.

 

[Domh245]

Truthfully, I think this might be a good thing. If a cross-party transport infrastructure planning group (or something similar to that) were to be created, then we might be able to get longer-term planning without the need for plans to be dropped, and un-cancelled every 5 years. It would also mean less politics in transport, which may work out better for some areas (eg conservative strongholds!)

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

A man of few principles. He's been a LibDem councillor, Labour minister and now he's working for the Conservatives.

In other words, to use the name of the film.."A man for all seasons"...

 

[Camden]

Adonis "knowing his stuff" is something which gets repeated a lot but which also seems to be based on not much more than him liking trains and having become seen as a figurehead for them.

Adonis pioneered the deeply flawed HS2 project, which for something which is supposed to "rebalance the economy" blah blah has instead caused a lot of issues in the northern locations I work in. But now he will be in charge of spearheading to make sure they get infrastructure investment now too? I spy more of the same. A fixation on Manchester to the exclusion of all others. A yawn of an exercise this country will come to sorely regret.

Supposedly they will be announcing £5bn more infrastructure spending today paid for by forcing local council pension funds to invest in it and selling off government land. They will also be announcing paid maternity/paternity leave for grandparents but no climbdown on cutting working tax credits.

Presumably the maternity leave for grandparents is because they've now priced child care out of the reach of most people.

They can't force pension funds to invest in anything. Think about it.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Supposedly they will be announcing £5bn more infrastructure spending today paid for by forcing local council pension funds to invest in it and selling off government land. They will also be announcing paid maternity/paternity leave for grandparents but no climbdown on cutting working tax credits. Presumably the maternity leave for grandparents is because they've now priced child care out of the reach of most people.

Just think, if Labour had been viewed as far more acceptable by the electorate with a leader viewed as Prime Minister material, rather than how they were actually perceived at the time of the last General Election, all this could have been avoided. But there again, adherence to blind political dogma has nearly always been "the Labour way," except when Blair was at the helm.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Adonis pioneered the deeply flawed HS2 project.

Now here we have a somewhat "Corbyn-esque" statement that refers to a particular view of the HS2 project..:roll:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

A fixation on Manchester to the exclusion of all others. A yawn of an exercise this country will come to sorely regret.

Everyone knows that fixation on London is the norm...

 

[Camden]

But there again, adherence to blind political dogma has nearly always been "the Labour way," except when Blair was at the helm.

You have a different recollection of the Blair era than mine.

Everyone knows that fixation on London is the norm...

Replacing one fixation with another, or slightly widening the zone of favouritism, is no fix.

 

[47802]

A man of few principles. He's been a LibDem councillor, Labour minister and now he's working for the Conservatives.

If your somebody in the centre ground like myself then you can say there isn't a vast difference between Blairite Labour, Moderate Conservatism and the Lib Dems so I don't see much issue with him changing party.

Quite possibly I could have been a party member of Blairite Labour but there is no way I could be a member of Corbyn Labour.

I think its a good idea and good appointment.

 

[The Ham]

As I understand it he has become an independent pier to take on this role (which as I understand it is chairing an independent panel), which although is commissioned by the government (which is currently conservative) doesn't mean that he has to agree with anything that the conservatives think or even want.

Therefore I am going to be careful about thinking anything about his morals for taking up this role until the panel produce anything.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Didnt we used to have a body along similar lines to this before? A body who was supposed to have strategic planning for the future, specialised in railways, and had authority to govern.

A Strategic Rail Authority........

Or so was planned before it was panned under a rethink........

Mind if its going to be transport wide then maybe we will start seeing some sensible decisions regarding airport capacity and maybe the completion of the A1......

 

[kieron]

As I understand it he has become an independent pier to take on this role (which as I understand it is chairing an independent panel), which although is commissioned by the government (which is currently conservative) doesn't mean that he has to agree with anything that the conservatives think or even want.

The problem I see is that the question of what infrastructure the country needs is a political one. Should we invest (or encourage others to invest on our behalf) in schools, hospitals, roads, railways, ports, airports, power stations (coal, gas, nuclear, wind or whatever), reservoirs and various other things I've forgotten for the moment? We probably should, but you can't really expect any two politicians ever to agree on how much of anything we'll ever need when they can't agree on something simple like how much the economy is likely to grow over the next ten years.

The most I can see the government hoping to get out of this is an argument to bolster a case for a more Chinese-style planning process. I don't know why Andrew Adonis is doing this. Perhaps he isn't that busy at the moment.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Look at durham. Closing schools, closing factories, closing hospitals, closing town centres. building more houses for people to live in but no infrastructure to support them. Its all about the money!

 

[HH]

As I understand it he has become an independent pier

At least he should be good for support then...

 

[glbotu]

The problem I see is that the question of what infrastructure the country needs is a political one. Should we invest (or encourage others to invest on our behalf) in schools, hospitals, roads, railways, ports, airports, power stations (coal, gas, nuclear, wind or whatever), reservoirs and various other things I've forgotten for the moment? We probably should, but you can't really expect any two politicians ever to agree on how much of anything we'll ever need when they can't agree on something simple like how much the economy is likely to grow over the next ten years.

The most I can see the government hoping to get out of this is an argument to bolster a case for a more Chinese-style planning process. I don't know why Andrew Adonis is doing this. Perhaps he isn't that busy at the moment.

Personally, I think infrastructure planning should be taken out of government hands. It would

a) Allow for long term planning
b) Prevent politically motivated projects jumping to the front of the queue ahead of better value projects.

A greater amount of devolution would go a long way though. It would allow for all parts of the country to "fight" for what they want/need (or indeed part raise the capital to achieve it).

 

[Camden]

Personally, I think infrastructure planning should be taken out of government hands. It would

a) Allow for long term planning
b) Prevent politically motivated projects jumping to the front of the queue ahead of better value projects.

A greater amount of devolution would go a long way though. It would allow for all parts of the country to "fight" for what they want/need (or indeed part raise the capital to achieve it).

The latter part of your post belies the truth as to what will happen. What is sown is a recipe for politically motivated projects. Money will always gravitate towards politically stronger areas who will get what they want and grow even stronger and able to put ever more convincing "cases", while others, equally deserving, go begging. As happens presently under this government.

Politics and process should be a safeguard against all that, and of course those spending large sums of money should be accountable to the people putting the money in (that's the electorate). The task should be to strengthen correct governance for all the country, strengthen democratic oversight, not further entrench a "winner takes all" mentality.

 

[WatcherZero]

They can't force pension funds to invest in anything. Think about it.

Yes they can, legislation to require minimum share holding of something. Its been done before in Britain and been done abroad, also works both ways. California has just passed a law banning pension funds from investing in Coal.

 

[Camden]

Yes they can, legislation to require minimum share holding of something. Its been done before in Britain and been done abroad, also works both ways. California has just passed a law banning pension funds from investing in Coal.

They can also re-introduce the Draft. Is that likely?

If they insist pension funds have a minimum holding of anything, then who do you think is responsible if that sector tanks and leaves the fund in trouble?

And what do you think the reaction of a free market is going to be to those funds when it knows they have to have a minimum holding (note, you can look to what happens at various points to currencies with pegs)... give them an easy ride because they're full of public sector money?

Add on top that this is the Conservatives, and you're basically just talking random.

 

[LateThanNever]

As I understand it he has become an independent pier

At least he should be good for support then...

Surely it's more that he'll be chucked out in the sea and walked all over for other people's amusement?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

He is the most high profile centrist figure to abandon Labour in the wake of Jeremy Corbyn's election as Labour leader.
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews...cid=spartandhp

Pretty stupid spin to put on the story. He's not abandoning Labour at all. He's simply resigning the Labour whip (presumably for the duration of the appointment) because that's the convention for peers taking up this kind of appointment. In general I think it's very welcome when you see politicians cooperating across the political divide. Maybe if certain groups weren't so keen to always put a 'betraying your own party' spin on this kind of thing, then that kind of cooperation would happen more often.

Personally I'm inclined to think this is good news. We certainly need more infrastructure projects, but I tend to be very suspicious when Conservative politicians talk about infrastructure - because too often in the past, the Conservatives have tended to see infrastructure as simply meaning more motorways - which usually end up doing more harm than good. Hopefully the appointment of someone who is generally very pro-rail will mean that, at least on the transport side of things, that's less likely to happen this time.