|
|
Post by Orac on Feb 6, 2024 8:22:34 GMT
I dont necessarily disagree but the problem comes in deciding what industries are better in public hands or private hands. Take water which you discussed - the UK has 3 different ownership models. State owned and run (scotland) private (england) and not for profit (wales). Out of the 3 systems non perform markedly better than any other and by many measures the English system performs the best. Yet there is a widespread belief among the public that state run would deliver the best outcomes - which is far from being proven. I do not think the issue so much is how it is run it is how it is controlled and regulated. Any model would seem to work if it is effectively regulated. The idea of the profit motive is to encourage efficiencies an excellent idea when it works a bit of a bummer when it does not but then that would apply in all models. Poor delivery implies in some way poor regulation or at least ineffective regulation.Or no competition. For instance, I wonder how private water companies actually compete with each other on service. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 6, 2024 8:39:39 GMT
I do not think the issue so much is how it is run it is how it is controlled and regulated. Any model would seem to work if it is effectively regulated. The idea of the profit motive is to encourage efficiencies an excellent idea when it works a bit of a bummer when it does not but then that would apply in all models. Poor delivery implies in some way poor regulation or at least ineffective regulation.Or no competition. For instance, I wonder how private water companies actually compete with each other on service. They dont have to. The water network was created in the first place by a myriad of different companies, many of whom were private. When I lived in the South East my water was delivered by a company that always was private and had never been nationalised - the water still came out of the tap like everyone else. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 6, 2024 8:57:19 GMT
After reading and studying about the 2005 Bill, which came into force in 2008, there are several points which are important, firstly that water for domestic use in Scotland is state owned and run. There was never any plans to break up Scottish Water or to privatise it. This isn't true. Before the labour party came to power in scotland under devolution , Scottish water , and its previous regional incarnations , were nationalised wholly. In 2005 , the labour government in scotland , at the direction of the leadership in London , brought in the Scottish water services act , which effectively privatised water provision for non domestic Scottish users when it went live in 2008. Its inarguable new labour part privatised Scottish water , and would have went further had they not been kicked out. Here's Tony Blairs former advisor , and former right hand man of Scottish labour leader Jim Murphy , the reprehensible John McTernan , on labour plans to sell off Scottish water....
There's a good case for disposing of government assets. Scottish Water is the prime example. It would give a massive capital receipt - potentially billions - and there would be hundreds of millions of pounds saved by eliminating the annual subsidy from taxpayers.archive.ph/Mruok |
|
