|
|
Post by Dogburger on Sept 23, 2024 11:10:04 GMT
Of course if its nationalised the PM /MP's are held to account through the ballot box . They would soon make sure everything worked if their jobs depended on it Hmmm.... I don't recall a single election prior to water privatisation where the performance of the Water Companies was ever an issue. The worst water pollution incident in UK history occurred in Cornwall in 1988 before privatisation - that incident was never mentioned in the subsequent election. Thats all true enough but nobody is going to get all political about the odd incident . What we are seeing now is a breakdown of our infrastructure , regular deliberate sewage spills ,enforced water metering and hosepipe bans as soon as the sun comes out . The growing population puts more strain on services across the board and they need modernising for future needs . Having a functioning water industry is essential for the well being of the country and allowing it to fall into disrepair while dividends and bonuses are paid out borders on criminality by them and a dereliction of duty from the government . The government therefore needs to either regulate the water industry efficiently or take it back under state control .Either way its the governments responsibility . And if its not working I'm not voting for whoever is in power |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Sept 23, 2024 17:04:43 GMT
Hmmm.... I don't recall a single election prior to water privatisation where the performance of the Water Companies was ever an issue. The worst water pollution incident in UK history occurred in Cornwall in 1988 before privatisation - that incident was never mentioned in the subsequent election. Thats all true enough but nobody is going to get all political about the odd incident . What we are seeing now is a breakdown of our infrastructure , regular deliberate sewage spills ,enforced water metering and hosepipe bans as soon as the sun comes out . The growing population puts more strain on services across the board and they need modernising for future needs .
Having a functioning water industry is essential for the well being of the country and allowing it to fall into disrepair while dividends and bonuses are paid out borders on criminality by them and a dereliction of duty from the government . The government therefore needs to either regulate the water industry efficiently or take it back under state control .Either way its the governments responsibility . And if its not working I'm not voting for whoever is in power Well that is all true - but that would apply whoever owned the system. What is needed in planning rules eased so as to allow infrastructure projects to go ahead (and that is not just applicable to water) but also more money for investment. As the Government is unlikely to put more taxpayers money in (they didnt when they were last in charge) then that just leaves the customer who has to face higher bills. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Sept 23, 2024 17:21:12 GMT
Thats all true enough but nobody is going to get all political about the odd incident . What we are seeing now is a breakdown of our infrastructure , regular deliberate sewage spills ,enforced water metering and hosepipe bans as soon as the sun comes out . The growing population puts more strain on services across the board and they need modernising for future needs .
Having a functioning water industry is essential for the well being of the country and allowing it to fall into disrepair while dividends and bonuses are paid out borders on criminality by them and a dereliction of duty from the government . The government therefore needs to either regulate the water industry efficiently or take it back under state control .Either way its the governments responsibility . And if its not working I'm not voting for whoever is in power Well that is all true - but that would apply whoever owned the system. What is needed in planning rules eased so as to allow infrastructure projects to go ahead (and that is not just applicable to water) but also more money for investment. As the Government is unlikely to put more taxpayers money in (they didnt when they were last in charge) then that just leaves the customer who has to face higher bills. Labours unachievable ambition of new builds will just add a far higher burden on our already overburdened infrastructure. Labour are good at using figures with no thoughts of reality it is estimated that a new home would have to be completed every 2 hours to acheive their target.. |
|
|
|
Post by Dogburger on Sept 23, 2024 18:19:48 GMT
Thats all true enough but nobody is going to get all political about the odd incident . What we are seeing now is a breakdown of our infrastructure , regular deliberate sewage spills ,enforced water metering and hosepipe bans as soon as the sun comes out . The growing population puts more strain on services across the board and they need modernising for future needs .
Having a functioning water industry is essential for the well being of the country and allowing it to fall into disrepair while dividends and bonuses are paid out borders on criminality by them and a dereliction of duty from the government . The government therefore needs to either regulate the water industry efficiently or take it back under state control .Either way its the governments responsibility . And if its not working I'm not voting for whoever is in power Well that is all true - but that would apply whoever owned the system. What is needed in planning rules eased so as to allow infrastructure projects to go ahead (and that is not just applicable to water) but also more money for investment. As the Government is unlikely to put more taxpayers money in (they didnt when they were last in charge) then that just leaves the customer who has to face higher bills. The growing population along with an increase in homes means more people are paying into the pot so though bills would naturally grow with inflation I don't see any justification for the numbers they are coming up with (Thames at 44% though OFWAT have said they will only allow half that ) . |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Sept 23, 2024 21:32:24 GMT
Well that is all true - but that would apply whoever owned the system. What is needed in planning rules eased so as to allow infrastructure projects to go ahead (and that is not just applicable to water) but also more money for investment. As the Government is unlikely to put more taxpayers money in (they didnt when they were last in charge) then that just leaves the customer who has to face higher bills. The growing population along with an increase in homes means more people are paying into the pot so though bills would naturally grow with inflation I don't see any justification for the numbers they are coming up with (Thames at 44% though OFWAT have said they will only allow half that ) . Well Thames are a long way behind the most expensive water companies when it comes to charges - if Thames needs more investment then customers need to pay more - as they already do in much of the country. |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Oct 18, 2024 6:18:22 GMT
'The government will need to negotiate a suitable price to bring it into public ownership'Being the key point - if they want it they will have to pay for it. ..and then what?. At the end of the day you have the same company with the same issues but loaded with more debt that it has to repay. Chuck another £50 on bills and its job done, you don't need to mess around with the ownership. At some point the customer will have to pay what it costs to deliver water. If that is more then so be it. The problem with 'chucking another £50 on the bill and it's done' is Yiu are once again rewarding the scum who shat upon the customers. Perhaps if we had a public hanging, and a selling of their kids into slavery in Saudi Arabia, as a warning to the next lot wat the price of failure in the same fashion entails, I might be inclined to agree with you, but I'm the absence of any visible retribution, it is your idea that is the terrible one. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Oct 18, 2024 6:55:20 GMT
Water is a massively regulated industry - OFWAT sets how much can be invested in infrastructiure or paid out to shareholders. If the argument is that Government oversight and regulation is not working (and I would agree with you) then I fail to see how putting mid-level civil servants in charge of the whole shebang is going to improve matters.
|
|
