Water

[albie]

On the day that a 7.5% increase in water rates has been announced.

Visiting professor at University of Greenwich Public Services International Research Unit (PSIRU) David Hall, in a recent analysis of the privatisation of water in the UK wrote:
"Privatisation of water was deeply unpopular and remains so. In July 1989, as the private companies took over, a poll showed 79 per cent of people opposed. In 2017, after more than a quarter of a century’s experience, 83 per cent wanted water returned to public ownership.

The economic rationale offered for privatisation was that private companies would finance the investments required by EU standards without the burden of public borrowing, bringing their own money and greater efficiency into the system.

But after 25 years, water prices had risen by 40 per cent above the general rate of inflation, and the amount of shareholder money in the companies has reduced in real terms.

Despite acquiring the companies debt-free, the owners have accumulated debt of more than £50 billion, effectively used to finance dividends of over £50 billion. The annual cost of these dividends and interest on the debt is £2.3 billion a year more expensive than it would be under public ownership."

Anyone still think that the monopoly supply of water should not be in public ownership?

[tyke1962]

Question is have we a Labour Party prepared to bring this sector back in to public ownership ?

[Sprotyrover]

Borrowing £50 to pay Dividends! Hmmm that makes sense!!!

[glosterred]

Question is have we a Labour Party prepared to bring this sector back in to public ownership ?

They had 13 years under Blair and Brown and didn’t, I can’t see Stammer bringing them back under public control

[albie]

If only it were £50, Sproty......it is over £50 billion!

At the same time, the number of prosecutions have been limited by the staff reductions at the Environment Agency, so dumping poisonous shit in watercourses is a low risk choice.

As Tyke says, Keith and Co are about as trustworthy on this as Bozo was.
Opposition to public ownership when the public are in favour is just bizarre.

[ncRover]

Have you ruled out that there aren’t certain parts of the industrial process / materials that have also increased in cost above the rate of inflation?

[idler]

Have you ruled out that there aren’t certain parts of the industrial process / materials that have also increased in cost above the rate of inflation?

So in that case dividends should be reduced or nonexistent.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Borrowing £50 to pay Dividends! Hmmm that makes sense!!!

I think every business I've worked for has done that, no big business will run without debt.

[SydneyRover]

I guess it's all about priorities and what can be done now to turn the country around, defeat recession. I wouldn't think the tories would be thinking of a buy back, but putting as much pressure on the nearest tory mp to consider it wouldn't go amiss.

Growth has only just been put on the table by this government after 100 days in office.

[tyke1962]

If only it were £50, Sproty......it is over £50 billion!

At the same time, the number of prosecutions have been limited by the staff reductions at the Environment Agency, so dumping poisonous shit in watercourses is a low risk choice.

As Tyke says, Keith and Co are about as trustworthy on this as Bozo was.
Opposition to public ownership when the public are in favour is just bizarre.

Keith Starmer " if you don't like my pledges , I have others " .

[albie]

Well Tyke, after giving a pledge to Labour supporters that key utilities would be brought into public ownership, starmer and Reeves have rowed back on previous commitments;
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/keir-starmer-sticks-plan-nationalise-27566893

Worst thing about that article is Reeves saying;
"I've set out fiscal rules that say all day-to-day spending will be funded by day-to-day tax revenues.
Within our fiscal rules, to be spending billions of pounds on nationalising things, that just doesn’t stack up against our fiscal rules."

These "fiscal rules" are just things she has made up, not derived from any clear economic theory.
If Reeves thinks nationalising involves vast expenditure, over and above that lost under the current arrangements, she is completely off the wall and should not be within a million miles of the UK Treasury.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

I'm intrigued Albie as to how that pays out to the electorate.

Funding day to day spending by tax revenues, without increasing tax whilst giving the public sector large pay rises feels a bit of a difficult task.  I'm struggling so far to see much difference between the policies of the two main parties.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Albie.

Day to day spending being funded by day to day taxes over an economic cycle is about as fundamental an economic principle as there is.

I know you are obsessive about decrying everything about the post-Corbyn Labour party, but pick your battles, eh?

[Sprotyrover]

I note from the Daily Mirror article that the Labour Party has reigned in its plans to re Nationalise the Utility companies, they are just sticking with the Railways, which is 80% complete in any case.
There is no traditional Tory nest egg to plunder. They clearly learnt from, the Blair Govt raid on the Pension schemes, destroyed the Mineworkers Pension Golden goose, and then sold off the Nations Gold reserves for the lowest price achievable!.
They will also have noted the world banking systems knee jerk reaction to Liz Trusses 'Experiment' and be acutely aware of the toxic poison chalice they will be taking on. I think we will not be seeing too much change, merely a hike in tax rates in an attempt to help out the public sector workers.
I did note some retired Army Cheif of staff countering on about the vast amount of money we spend on the Nuclear deterrent, I agree it is a lot of money but abandoning that would take us out of the G7.

[BobG]

I thought membership of the G7 is based on economic criteria. That not the case Sproty?

BobG

[ncRover]

It’s obviously got more expensive to supply water. Yes the water companies make profit but in life that is the motivation to provide a good service.

Anything publicly run becomes inefficient and has to increasingly be supported by the tax payer with increased funding when standards keep decreasing.

[Sprotyrover]

I thought membership of the G7 is based on economic criteria. That not the case Sproty?

BobG

What I was trying to say is that it would reduce our standing as a member of the top world nations.

[BobG]

That's a helluva lot of subsidy NC before it would cost more than the dividend inspired debt these sharks have incurred! If we have to pay that sort of money I know which service I'd prefer.

BobG

BobG

[normal rules]

I’ve often wondered why new builds do not encompass rainwater capture. This water then gets used for toilet flush and can, with very little filtration be used to supply washing machines. It’s soft water and can be used for laundry. And soft water is good for laundry.
It would save an absolute fortune across the country.
I’m blessed with an old well in the back garden. Built with the house post 2nd ww. It takes all the rainwater off the house. It has an overflow soak away. I use it for garden watering in the summer and to clean cars. It saves me a fortune. And I get a rebate on my water bill.

[scawsby steve]

It’s obviously got more expensive to supply water. Yes the water companies make profit but in life that is the motivation to provide a good service.

Anything publicly run becomes inefficient and has to increasingly be supported by the tax payer with increased funding when standards keep decreasing.

Inefficient? Are you seriously suggesting that the rail and water industries have performed better under private ownership?

[normal rules]

I have two ex colleagues who live in Cyprus.
Fresh water there is like gold.
Every single drop is from desalinisation.
And it’s bloody expensive.
There are some that say drinking water, in many many years. Will be like gold.

[Sprotyrover]

I have two ex colleagues who live in Cyprus.
Fresh water there is like gold.
Every single drop is from desalinisation.
And it’s bloody expensive.
There are some that say drinking water, in many many years. Will be like gold.

The locals do like to hose down their dust yards every day in a Summer.

[albie]

Explanation of why water needs to be in public ownership on QT last night;
https://twitter.com/novaramedia/status/1656924772616249345?cxt=HHwWgoCxtamTyv4tAAAA

The Labour spokesperson Debonnaire responded by drivelling it was unaffordable.

No consideration of using a bond issue to own 51% of stock....
No understanding that it would mean acquiring an income generating asset...
No consideration of how much was being taken out of the sector that could renew infrastructure....etc, etc.

All this apart from the fact that a large majority are in favour, from all parties.

[albie]

Taking the p1ss, again;
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/may/25/water-firm-to-pay-shareholders-300m-despite-anger-over-leaks-and-pollution

Good to see priorities are in order!

[albie]

Not too sure what this "day to day" spending is about....that is not relevant to bringing utilities into public ownership.
The idea that you would fund public ownership in this way is batshit crazy.

Decent article on the need for public sector control of water here;
https://leftfootforward.org/2023/05/heres-why-privatisation-of-the-water-industry-has-failed-and-why-public-ownership-is-needed/

[albie]

Thames Water on the brink, after paying out to shareholders and loading up with debt, knowing that the government will have to step in to bail them out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyUdTyljMQI

Others will take the same route, unless they are prevented from doing so.
Regulator Ofwat about as useful as a chocolate teapot!

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Not too sure what this "day to day" spending is about....that is not relevant to bringing utilities into public ownership.
The idea that you would fund public ownership in this way is batshit crazy.

Decent article on the need for public sector control of water here;
https://leftfootforward.org/2023/05/heres-why-privatisation-of-the-water-industry-has-failed-and-why-public-ownership-is-needed/

Thought this was an interesting twitter thread. Some interesting points that counter the public claim somewhat.

However I dont at all like the current system it makes no sense.  Private companies without competition is just a little pointless.

[albie]

George Monbiot on the disgrace that is the water industry;
https://media.mas.to/masto-public/cache/media_attachments/files/110/575/793/389/771/585/original/24a3f0dff071402c.mp4

Neo-liberal economics, eh!

[albie]

Looks like the water industry have got their guys on point to manage Labour attitudes towards the sector;
https://www.thecanary.co/global/world-analysis/2024/07/02/labour-water-industry-policy/

Always good to have a foot in the door with a new administration!

[Colemans Left Hook]

the FT has a headline in Wednesday's  Paper

"Water companies face legal challenges after landmark UK pollution ruling"