|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Mar 31, 2024 12:12:11 GMT
Depends on the form of nationalisation. Run as a state-owned company, but without direct government management would stop different administrations manipulating and cutting funds whenever their popularity depended on cash injections into causes of more immediate concern to the public — I’m informed that’s what frequently happened to the railways, telephones, coal, etc. The old Cable & Wireless might be a model set up… This is a case in which the government should perhaps take a look at the Scottish and Welsh models. Scottish Water is a public company accountable to the Scottish government and Welsh Water, Glas Cymru, is run as a not for profit company. Yet Englands water is owned by companies from all over the world, Malaysia, China, Germany, UAE, Kuwait, Australia, JP Morgan, and no doubt others who's number one concern is obviously shareholders, not customers. Whether privatisation was the right way to go is a long argued over question, but that's the past. The question now is, should water which is not only a national asset but a strategic asset, be owned by foreign interests. Personally I think the time has come to renationalise. Welsh Water was a privatised company which went bust after choosing to ignore what it was there fore and expand into all sorts
The name was taken over by a bunch of shysters called united utilities
Their so called not for profit model is nothing of the sort
For water companies, i think the sort of renationalisation with zero compensation to all the scum who consider water a commodity for profit is the only way to go. Because having seen the ideology inside the monster, you quickly realise tere is only one answer
|
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Mar 31, 2024 12:13:52 GMT
Weren’t water and sewage charges separate at on time? I vaguely remember my Dad complaining about sewage charges being moved from where they were included — was that the old rates…? Water and sewerage charges are still separate items, at least round here, and you pay dfferent charges if your rainwater runoff does not go into the pulic sewers
|
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Mar 31, 2024 12:41:19 GMT
The reason that Thames has put £500 million of investment on hold is that OFWAT are refusing to allow them to raise prices. The private sector are not going to invest if there is no return. So you think arch Tory Moggy is wrong and that it is justifiable to raise prices by 40% to line the pockets of foreign investors who btw according to the telegraph So note all Tory comments not the grauniad or the left,any chance you might answer rather than blaming ofwat. |
|
|
|
Post by borchester on Mar 31, 2024 13:58:57 GMT
Nope.
I can remember when water was rationed and we had standpipes in the streets, because the Waterboard had not dug the reservoirs deep enough or some such. It did not worry the civil servants in charge. They just carried on doing the same old crappy job as before.
What we need is more privatisation and more boards, the same as we have with the power companies. I have just told Shell Energy to fuck off because, well, sod it, I felt like it. I doubt that the next lot will be any better, but it is unlikely that it will be any worse and I could never do that with the Metropolitan Waterboard of not overly fond memory
Borchy, the water industry was privatised in 1989. At that time plans for Carsington reservoir were advanced and the project was completed in 1991. That was the last reservoir built in England. In spite of hugely increased demand, the privatised water industry over the past 35 years have not built one single reservoir. But I'm willing to bet that foreign shareholders are more than happy with their dividends. I hope that the foreign shareholders are happy with their dividends. And if they spend it all on women and drink then good luck to them. And if they put a little aside to fund the kicking of all the snivelling bastards from Little Snoring then I will see that as an extra Easter treat. |
|
|
|
Post by om15 on Mar 31, 2024 15:06:02 GMT
I can't think of a nationalised industry that worked properly. The NHS being a prime example, if water was nationalised we might expect to see rainbow coloured water coming out of our taps.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Mar 31, 2024 16:02:14 GMT
The reason that Thames has put £500 million of investment on hold is that OFWAT are refusing to allow them to raise prices. The private sector are not going to invest if there is no return. So you think arch Tory Moggy is wrong and that it is justifiable to raise prices by 40% to line the pockets of foreign investors who btw according to the telegraph So note all Tory comments not the grauniad or the left,any chance you might answer rather than blaming ofwat. You seem a bit obsessed with what is in the Daily Mail and the Telegraph - perhaps you should treat their views (and the rest of the media) with a bit more circumspect rather than believing everything you read. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Mar 31, 2024 16:03:27 GMT
I can't think of a nationalised industry that worked properly. The NHS being a prime example, if water was nationalised we might expect to see rainbow coloured water coming out of our taps. I think water is rather like the Railways - it doesn't matter what the ownership structure is all the outcomes are basically the same. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Mar 31, 2024 16:10:49 GMT
So you think arch Tory Moggy is wrong and that it is justifiable to raise prices by 40% to line the pockets of foreign investors who btw according to the telegraph So note all Tory comments not the grauniad or the left,any chance you might answer rather than blaming ofwat. You seem a bit obsessed with what is in the Daily Mail and the Telegraph - perhaps you should treat their views (and the rest of the media) with a bit more circumspect rather than believing everything you read. Perhaps you’d be better not obsessed with shareholders best interests rather than what’s best for the people of this country and not trying to blame ofwat. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Mar 31, 2024 17:39:10 GMT
You seem a bit obsessed with what is in the Daily Mail and the Telegraph - perhaps you should treat their views (and the rest of the media) with a bit more circumspect rather than believing everything you read. Perhaps you’d be better not obsessed with shareholders best interests rather than what’s best for the people of this country and not trying to blame ofwat. How does the ownership structure affect what is best for the 'people'? Are you old enough to remember why the Water industry was privatised in the first place? |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Mar 31, 2024 18:24:25 GMT
Perhaps you’d be better not obsessed with shareholders best interests rather than what’s best for the people of this country and not trying to blame ofwat. How does the ownership structure affect what is best for the 'people'? Are you old enough to remember why the Water industry was privatised in the first place? At a tad short of 74 certainly was and in the north west had brilliant water from the Lake District. And why the water was privatised political dogma instead of investment,do you know why Thames water is so crap |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Mar 31, 2024 21:24:35 GMT
How does the ownership structure affect what is best for the 'people'? Are you old enough to remember why the Water industry was privatised in the first place? At a tad short of 74 certainly was and in the north west had brilliant water from the Lake District. And why the water was privatised political dogma instead of investment,do you know why Thames water is so crap Are you sure your memory is as good as you think? - water was privatised because after decades of under-funding by all governments it was desperate for money to renew the Victorian system it was operating. The government didnt have the money, so the only real option was the private sector. If the world was full of your unicorns and governments that thought that investing in upgrading the water system was better than boosting pensions or welfare payments (for short term popularity boosts) then privatisation may never have happened. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Mar 31, 2024 21:55:23 GMT
At a tad short of 74 certainly was and in the north west had brilliant water from the Lake District. And why the water was privatised political dogma instead of investment,do you know why Thames water is so crap Are you sure your memory is as good as you think? - water was privatised because after decades of under-funding by all governments it was desperate for money to renew the Victorian system it was operating. The government didnt have the money, so the only real option was the private sector. If the world was full of your unicorns and governments that thought that investing in upgrading the water system was better than boosting pensions or welfare payments (for short term popularity boosts) then privatisation may never have happened. My unicorns lol,no Pacifico if you looked more carefully I already stated many times in different posts about short termism by various and different administrations,try reading my signature the unicorns are all someone else's not mine. That politicians have engaged in such behaviour and you have only recently recognised this is you tending your one horned fantasies of the merits of privatisations of essential utilities and fattening the wallets with undeserved dividends to foreign investors who have no interest in this country or people.  |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Apr 1, 2024 9:26:54 GMT
I can't think of a nationalised industry that worked properly. The NHS being a prime example, if water was nationalised we might expect to see rainbow coloured water coming out of our taps. Welsh Water and Scottish Water seem to be working OK, could this be because they're not owned by foreign interests? |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Apr 1, 2024 9:31:32 GMT
This is a case in which the government should perhaps take a look at the Scottish and Welsh models. Scottish Water is a public company accountable to the Scottish government and Welsh Water, Glas Cymru, is run as a not for profit company. Yet Englands water is owned by companies from all over the world, Malaysia, China, Germany, UAE, Kuwait, Australia, JP Morgan, and no doubt others who's number one concern is obviously shareholders, not customers. Whether privatisation was the right way to go is a long argued over question, but that's the past. The question now is, should water which is not only a national asset but a strategic asset, be owned by foreign interests. Personally I think the time has come to renationalise. Welsh Water was a privatised company which went bust after choosing to ignore what it was there fore and expand into all sorts
The name was taken over by a bunch of shysters called united utilities
Their so called not for profit model is nothing of the sort
For water companies, i think the sort of renationalisation with zero compensation to all the scum who consider water a commodity for profit is the only way to go. Because having seen the ideology inside the monster, you quickly realise tere is only one answer
I was under the impression that Welsh Water or 'Glas Cymru' is run as a not-for-profit company? |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Apr 1, 2024 9:33:55 GMT
He is an accountant with 40 years experience and a professor at the university of Sheffield school of management. To write him off as just another accountant is, lets be generous and say, unfortunate. The attacks on power stations, could you elaborate? And yes there is no doubt about it that the private sector and private investors have benefited greatly from the privatisation of the water industry. Sadly as far as the consumer is concerned, privatisation has bought no benefits whatsoever... unless you consider higher bills, increased pollution and poor service as a benefit? No, of course you dont. I don't like it one bit yet lets make it clear unless A or B gets fixed within 18 months they lose their license. You mentioned attacks on power stations, could you elaborate?.. |
|
