Thames Water- Finished?
Discussion
S600BSB said:
Sadly yet another example of Tory failure.
Nationalisation where there was competition wasn't a bad idea (domestic power, telco).Bad idea when no competitiion (water) and when made too complex (rail)
Labour had what, 13 years to make some corrections but clearly they thought it was all super?
Derek Smith said:
vaud said:
Labour had what, 13 years to make some corrections but clearly they thought it was all super?
A presumption of course. Perhaps it had something to do with none failing?sugerbear said:
BT had a monopoly. Technology and competition
I still think openreach should be nationalised as that is infrastructure and they have no competition. Its just taken 12 days to have a phone installed at a property someone i know has moved into.
That doesn't sound too terrible to me.I still think openreach should be nationalised as that is infrastructure and they have no competition. Its just taken 12 days to have a phone installed at a property someone i know has moved into.
vaud said:
S600BSB said:
Sadly yet another example of Tory failure.
Nationalisation where there was competition wasn't a bad idea (domestic power, telco).Bad idea when no competitiion (water) and when made too complex (rail)
Labour had what, 13 years to make some corrections but clearly they thought it was all super?
wiggy001 said:
sugerbear said:
BT had a monopoly. Technology and competition
I still think openreach should be nationalised as that is infrastructure and they have no competition. Its just taken 12 days to have a phone installed at a property someone i know has moved into.
That doesn't sound too terrible to me.I still think openreach should be nationalised as that is infrastructure and they have no competition. Its just taken 12 days to have a phone installed at a property someone i know has moved into.
No idea why people are wibbling on about BT it has nothing to do with water, water is fundamental to life the most important substance on the planet it should not be given to private businesses as play thing that they can load up with debt under invest and then throw in the bin for the tax payer to clean up.
One thing the government should be responsible for is the provision of clean water and the safe treatment of waste water, rather than flooding the sea with untreated sewage every time it rains. Enough is enough as they say, £7bn in dividends, £18bn in debt and a broken water system...what a joke and that's just one of the regional companies.
Wills2 said:
No idea why people are wibbling on about BT it has nothing to do with water, water is fundamental to life the most important substance on the planet it should not be given to private businesses as play thing that they can load up with debt under invest and then throw in the bin for the tax payer to clean up.
One thing the government should be responsible for is the provision of clean water and the safe treatment of waste water, rather than flooding the sea with untreated sewage every time it rains. Enough is enough as they say, £7bn in dividends, £18bn in debt and a broken water system...what a joke and that's just one of the regional companies.
You are not wrong.One thing the government should be responsible for is the provision of clean water and the safe treatment of waste water, rather than flooding the sea with untreated sewage every time it rains. Enough is enough as they say, £7bn in dividends, £18bn in debt and a broken water system...what a joke and that's just one of the regional companies.
Not as expensive as the potential consequences of its own failure though. Thames Water borrowed heavily to fund infrastrucure improvements becoming highly dependent on interest rates in the process. After 2008, OFWAT regularly misjudged those rates, meaning water bills were higher than they needed to be. Instead of paying down that debt or heaven forbid, lowering customer bills, TW funnelled massive dividends to shareholders & not making much in the way of renewal. Now interest rates have rocketed & TW's revenue is effectively fixed by OFWAT, they're in existential trouble.
Add to that Macquarie buying them & funding more dividends from more debt & the jig is up. But effective regulation is expensive & incompatible with small government, so hey ho.
Add to that Macquarie buying them & funding more dividends from more debt & the jig is up. But effective regulation is expensive & incompatible with small government, so hey ho.
Astacus said:
wiggy001 said:
sugerbear said:
BT had a monopoly. Technology and competition
I still think openreach should be nationalised as that is infrastructure and they have no competition. Its just taken 12 days to have a phone installed at a property someone i know has moved into.
That doesn't sound too terrible to me.I still think openreach should be nationalised as that is infrastructure and they have no competition. Its just taken 12 days to have a phone installed at a property someone i know has moved into.
Even applying for things that take time like settlement or security clearance are pretty quick to apply for and straightforward. It just takes a while for processing/checks.
Not sure what your point is. When it comes to government services the UK does pretty damn well..
captain_cynic said:
Most of the interactions I have with government departments are relatively quick and painless. The DVLA will tax my car in seconds and send me a cheque for unused tax pretty quick.
Even applying for things that take time like settlement or security clearance are pretty quick to apply for and straightforward. It just takes a while for processing/checks.
Not sure what your point is. When it comes to government services the UK does pretty damn well..
Agree. I think the gov.uk site is fantastic. Even applying for things that take time like settlement or security clearance are pretty quick to apply for and straightforward. It just takes a while for processing/checks.
Not sure what your point is. When it comes to government services the UK does pretty damn well..
I agree that water was a privatisation too far. As were possibly the railways and the national grid.
What was the point of splitting up the rail network into separate companies, was it just to give billionaires like Branson lots of life-sized train sets to play with?
What was the point of splitting up the rail network into separate companies, was it just to give billionaires like Branson lots of life-sized train sets to play with?
Edited by king arthur on Wednesday 13th December 11:34
king arthur said:
I agree that water was a nationalisation too far. As were possibly the railways and the national grid.
What was the point of splitting up the rail network into separate companies, was it just to give billionaires like Branson lots of life-sized train sets to play with?
I was marginally involved in the Railtrack IPO in 1996. Out of interest, I re-read the Labour opposition statement, which was a full intention to reverse the privatisation of the whole rail sector ASAP. Didn't happen of course. What was the point of splitting up the rail network into separate companies, was it just to give billionaires like Branson lots of life-sized train sets to play with?
Prospectus here if anyone is interested. Page 101.
As an aside, this is when I briefly met Shriti Vadera as she was running the order taking system between the investment banks. I say "running". She came into the training session, glared at everyone, and promptly left.
borcy said:
What's the going rate for nationalisation if it comes to that?
My smooth brain would have said you wait for them to go into administration and then make a derisory offer to take over. I’m sure the bunch of clowns we have in charge now will endeavour to make sure lenders are made whole at the expense of the taxpayers.
KarlMac said:
borcy said:
What's the going rate for nationalisation if it comes to that?
My smooth brain would have said you wait for them to go into administration and then make a derisory offer to take over. I’m sure the bunch of clowns we have in charge now will endeavour to make sure lenders are made whole at the expense of the taxpayers.
Murph7355 said:
Meanwhile, much better regulation is required to stop companies paying out billions in dividends when they are racking up more billions in debt.
In effect it would be easier if the government kept a large share of ownership or structure it in a way where the management is private but the infrastructure is publicly owned e.g. TOCs instead of train companies.vaud said:
Derek Smith said:
vaud said:
Labour had what, 13 years to make some corrections but clearly they thought it was all super?
A presumption of course. Perhaps it had something to do with none failing?The reason we are in the s
t right now is that the Tory and coalition governments have defunded the regulators and private industry has responded exactly as one would expect it to. The old nationalised water industry was showing the sins to which nationalised industries are prone if not properly funded and controlled, and the privatised water industry is showing those to which unregulated private enterprise is prone if not regulated. The desired outcome can be had in either situation if government is competent and gives a st. fido said:
Murph7355 said:
Meanwhile, much better regulation is required to stop companies paying out billions in dividends when they are racking up more billions in debt.
In effect it would be easier if the government kept a large share of ownership or structure it in a way where the management is private but the infrastructure is publicly owned e.g. TOCs instead of train companies.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff