Thames Water- Finished?
Discussion
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.
turbobloke said:
Yes, without a truly national water grid, that ^^
You would never have a truly national water grid as I understand it, it's too heavy to pump economically. You may have regional ones.Apologies if you mean national as in ownership vs national as geographically connected grid.
Edited by vaud on Wednesday 13th December 16:39
turbobloke said:
aeropilot said:
Murph7355 said:
Water should never have been privatised. There's no ability for genuine competition, and it's a critical resource.
^^This.Infrastructure of critical "stuff" should remain publicly owned, management of it can be privatized.
M.
Mortarboard said:
turbobloke said:
aeropilot said:
Murph7355 said:
Water should never have been privatised. There's no ability for genuine competition, and it's a critical resource.
^^This.Infrastructure of critical "stuff" should remain publicly owned, management of it can be privatized.
M.
If so, you might wish to take a few deep breaths.
Sure. Own the rails, let privately run firms operate the trains.
On infrastructure stuff there'll always be "commercially not viable" aspects to be addressed, but subsidies for those in contracts isn't unusual. (Bus routes for pensioners in the middle of nowhere, water and sewage supply to remote areas, etc)
I'm assuming "TOCs" means "train owning/operating companies" or some such
M.
On infrastructure stuff there'll always be "commercially not viable" aspects to be addressed, but subsidies for those in contracts isn't unusual. (Bus routes for pensioners in the middle of nowhere, water and sewage supply to remote areas, etc)
I'm assuming "TOCs" means "train owning/operating companies" or some such
M.
Whoozit said:
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.
Ha. I always wanted to be a fly on the wall when she had her meetings with Brown during the GFC. Psychotastic.Mortarboard said:
Sure. Own the rails, let privately run firms operate the trains.
On infrastructure stuff there'll always be "commercially not viable" aspects to be addressed, but subsidies for those in contracts isn't unusual. (Bus routes for pensioners in the middle of nowhere, water and sewage supply to remote areas, etc)
I'm assuming "TOCs" means "train owning/operating companies" or some such
M.
Yes operating.On infrastructure stuff there'll always be "commercially not viable" aspects to be addressed, but subsidies for those in contracts isn't unusual. (Bus routes for pensioners in the middle of nowhere, water and sewage supply to remote areas, etc)
I'm assuming "TOCs" means "train owning/operating companies" or some such
M.
S600BSB said:
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.
Interesting. We had letters the other month saying they were installing a water meter at our property within 2 weeks I think it was (everyone in the Thames Water region is being forced to have one)...but it's since gone quiet and nothing more said. I hope that means it won't happen now?
Timothy Bucktu said:
Interesting. We had letters the other month saying they were installing a water meter at our property within 2 weeks I think it was (everyone in the Thames Water region is being forced to have one)...but it's since gone quiet and nothing more said. I hope that means it won't happen now?
As they need to be granted legal powers to fit a water meter compulsorily rather than by recommendation/request , doing so for everyone looks OTT, presunably they've been granted the relevant authority, though if nothing has happened, perhaps not.turbobloke said:
Timothy Bucktu said:
Interesting. We had letters the other month saying they were installing a water meter at our property within 2 weeks I think it was (everyone in the Thames Water region is being forced to have one)...but it's since gone quiet and nothing more said. I hope that means it won't happen now?
As they need to be granted legal powers to fit a water meter compulsorily rather than by recommendation/request , doing so for everyone looks OTT, presunably they've been granted the relevant authority, though if nothing has happened, perhaps not.https://www.thameswater.co.uk/help/water-meters/co...
Timothy Bucktu said:
turbobloke said:
Timothy Bucktu said:
Interesting. We had letters the other month saying they were installing a water meter at our property within 2 weeks I think it was (everyone in the Thames Water region is being forced to have one)...but it's since gone quiet and nothing more said. I hope that means it won't happen now?
As they need to be granted legal powers to fit a water meter compulsorily rather than by recommendation/request , doing so for everyone looks OTT, presunably they've been granted the relevant authority, though if nothing has happened, perhaps not.https://www.thameswater.co.uk/help/water-meters/co...
smifffymoto said:
All infrastructure has been sold off for short term profit previous Governments.
Only now is it coming back to slap the tax payer in the face.
Most people with any common sense could see this scenario from a mile away.
But the government just reflects what voters want.Only now is it coming back to slap the tax payer in the face.
Most people with any common sense could see this scenario from a mile away.
Voters like short term wins.
Voters don't like tax increases now to forestall some far off future problem.
By privatising water, a huge infrastructure backlog/liability was lifted out of the taxpayer's intray, allowing the government to cut taxes.
I've worked in the public sector enough to know the mindset needed changing - I caught the tail end of the "old guard", and whilst there were some brilliant and dedicated public servants, there were a lot of dinosaurs.
The flip side is i know enough of the private sector which will grab a fast buck whenever they see a chance.
The Cameron/Osborne austerity era basically sacked the gamekeepers and trusted the poachers to "self regulate".
Lucky no major sectors of the economy were affected by that....
So we come full circle - how does a government gain enough support to stay in office whilst making the long term tough decisions?
God knows - educating voters I guess is the only way to spring the trap.
You can blame Macquarie Bank and regulators together for this.
Macquarie realised that the company had lots of unrealised profits, an was severely under leveraged.
To be fair (and i'm rarely fair to macquarie as they are a bunch of money grabbing snakes- only Glodmann are bigger egotistical a
holes) the bad rap they are getting now is overblown. The regulator bears the most complaint as macquarie wasn't making excessive profits compared to many many other transactions both then and now- what OfWat needed to do was step in and remind them that critical monopolistic infrastructure doesn't need the same leverage or generate the same 2.7 money multiple.
this is interesting: https://www.infrastructureinvestor.com/macquaries-...
Happy to explain the financial engineering if anyone's interested.
Macquarie realised that the company had lots of unrealised profits, an was severely under leveraged.
To be fair (and i'm rarely fair to macquarie as they are a bunch of money grabbing snakes- only Glodmann are bigger egotistical a
holes) the bad rap they are getting now is overblown. The regulator bears the most complaint as macquarie wasn't making excessive profits compared to many many other transactions both then and now- what OfWat needed to do was step in and remind them that critical monopolistic infrastructure doesn't need the same leverage or generate the same 2.7 money multiple. this is interesting: https://www.infrastructureinvestor.com/macquaries-...
Happy to explain the financial engineering if anyone's interested.
Of course, the regulator! The swines forced Macquarie to trough their way through billions. How very dare they. The masters of the universe made hay while the sun shone and griping about some adverse press after the fact is quite the brassneck. Timothy Bucktu said:
turbobloke said:
Timothy Bucktu said:
Interesting. We had letters the other month saying they were installing a water meter at our property within 2 weeks I think it was (everyone in the Thames Water region is being forced to have one)...but it's since gone quiet and nothing more said. I hope that means it won't happen now?
As they need to be granted legal powers to fit a water meter compulsorily rather than by recommendation/request , doing so for everyone looks OTT, presunably they've been granted the relevant authority, though if nothing has happened, perhaps not.https://www.thameswater.co.uk/help/water-meters/co...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff