National News Cost of Living Crisis

[SteMerritt]

have just lost their CEO, who managed to be awarded a massive bonus despite it all.

To be fair, according to BBC News this morning she turned down the bonus.

 

[RyanioBirdio]

See the water companies want to put bills up by 40% to cover the investment they are being asked to make to stop leaks/dumping raw sewage (cumulatively there were 301091 "emergency" raw sewage discharges into rivers and the sea last year - 825 a day). This is despite the cumulative average of £1.8billion/year taken out in dividends to shareholders, and all the while loading the companies with debt (cumulatively £54billion).
Thames Water are apparently on the verge of collapse (the government are making plans for the aftermath). They are £14billion in debt, have record leaks, record sewage discharges, record bad in everything service related - have just lost their CEO, who managed to be awarded a massive bonus despite it all.

Imagine being stupid enough to ever think it was a good idea to sell off the literal building blocks of life, and to not even properly monitor it after doing so until the entire country is literally filling with s**t.

I’m just surprised that Maggie didn’t find a way to sell off the air.

 

[OUFCGav]

To be fair, according to BBC News this morning she turned down the bonus.

Only when everything kicked off.
It's like the Post Office CEO who got a 6 figure bonus because “all required evidence and information supplied on time” to the legal enquiry into the miscarriages of justice linked to the Horizon computer system in Post Offices. A) complying with a legal responsibility shouldn't be bonus-worthy, and B) the Post Office actually failed to do so, meaning he shouldn't have got it anyway. The company apologised for the "mistake" only after things kicked off in public.

 

[Marked Ox]

See the water companies want to put bills up by 40% to cover the investment they are being asked to make to stop leaks/dumping raw sewage (cumulatively there were 301091 "emergency" raw sewage discharges into rivers and the sea last year - 825 a day). This is despite the cumulative average of £1.8billion/year taken out in dividends to shareholders, and all the while loading the companies with debt (cumulatively £54billion).
Thames Water are apparently on the verge of collapse (the government are making plans for the aftermath). They are £14billion in debt, have record leaks, record sewage discharges, record bad in everything service related - have just lost their CEO, who managed to be awarded a massive bonus despite it all.

Tory MP (Isle of Wight I think) Bob Seely was basically defending the water companies earlier on Politics Live whilst ignoring the profit taken out and lack of investment in infrastructure.

It was cringeworthy and when challenged, it was what are Labour going to do, nationalise it rubbish from him. He had nothing. It was pointed out by the Labour MP and one of the other guests that Labour are not looking at nationalisation but rather mutualisation.

Hopefully though, if Thames Water does go kaput, this is properly nationalised as the Govt can get the assets on the cheap.

 

[Peterdev]

At one time I thought privatisation of the utilities was a good idea.
I don’t now. What has happened with water companies is nothing has been invested in the infrastructure. As a result the shareholders and senior executives have lined their pockets. In the meantime we have to put up with blocked drains and water leaks along with hosepipe bans. I can’t see why water hasn’t been stored underground as it is in Spain and much of Europe.
Taken a stage further, the electricity companies and gas companies have been taken over by French and German companies. These should have stayed under the control of the U.K. I’d love to see whoever is in charge nationalise all the utility companies.
Government control of transport might actually do something for the climate as well as Co-ordinating it properly for the benefit of the consumer.
.

 

[Essexyellows]

Those of us old enough to remember know that things had to change within "nationalised/state industries". Inherent issues with striking, work ethic etc etc.

Some folk thought privatisation was the way to do it.

They didn`t see how the private businesses would/might get raped for lots of ££££`s.

Water, electric, gas & transport should be nationalised but run with private sector T`s & C`s for the staff so its not a gravy train.

 

[m]

Those of us old enough to remember know that things had to change within "nationalised/state industries". Inherent issues with striking, work ethic etc etc.

Some folk thought privatisation was the way to do it.

They didn`t see how the private businesses would/might get raped for lots of ££££`s.

Water, electric, gas & transport should be nationalised but run with private sector T`s & C`s for the staff so its not a gravy train.

Or, more likely, they didn't care.

It's a tough one. You'd want the above infrastructure to be nationalised so that 100% of profits could be re-invested in said infrastructure. But it's not just a cliche to say that public ownership often leads to inefficiency...

 

[QR]

At one time I thought privatisation of the utilities was a good idea.
I don’t now. What has happened with water companies is nothing has been invested in the infrastructure. As a result the shareholders and senior executives have lined their pockets. In the meantime we have to put up with blocked drains and water leaks along with hosepipe bans. I can’t see why water hasn’t been stored underground as it is in Spain and much of Europe.
Taken a stage further, the electricity companies and gas companies have been taken over by French and German companies. These should have stayed under the control of the U.K. I’d love to see whoever is in charge nationalise all the utility companies.
Government control of transport might actually do something for the climate as well as Co-ordinating it properly for the benefit of the consumer.
.

I don't understand anyone who ever thought it was a good idea.

Bit like Brexit really. One dimensional thinkers.

 

[Essexyellows]

Or, more likely, they didn't care.

It's a tough one. You'd want the above infrastructure to be nationalised so that 100% of profits could be re-invested in said infrastructure. But it's not just a cliche to say that public ownership often leads to inefficiency...

Probably thought that the owners would only take a small slice of the pie whereas they ate the pie and only left the foil dish.

Public ownership did lead to gross inefficiency but it seems private ownership just led to gross profiteering and organisational collapse.

Maybe someone could come up with a public/private arrangement a bit like John Lewis` original model where staff benefit rather than the boardroom?

 

[Essexyellows]

I don't understand anyone who ever thought it was a good idea.

Bit like Brexit really. One dimensional thinkers.

Hoisted by ones own petard....

Publicly owned "services" were renowned for lack of productivity and a lethargic/militant/obstructive work force that were in a "job for life" with the oft-quoted gold plated pension at the end of it.

Privatisation was seen as the "fix all" , but nobody foresaw the downside of losing core control of the business and the money.

Should have written in clauses that HMG retained overall control and had the power to rein in any excess but nobody fancied that.

 

[holdsteady]

Hoisted by ones own petard....

Publicly owned "services" were renowned for lack of productivity and a lethargic/militant/obstructive work force that were in a "job for life" with the oft-quoted gold plated pension at the end of it.

Privatisation was seen as the "fix all" , but nobody foresaw the downside of losing core control of the business and the money.

Should have written in clauses that HMG retained overall control and had the power to rein in any excess but nobody fancied that.

No country should completely hand over control of its water supply and dealing with sewage, we got too complacent with how vitally important and fundamental that is to a functioning society, literally a benchmark of a developed country.

I hate bringing her up as she is gone and her time was ages ago and it’s boring, but Thatcher was short term gain and it’s becoming obvious now long term pain, her policies were designed to keep her in power with not even half an eye on the future, that era was good for those who got rich during it but it sold off anything and everything, undervalued it all (who the f**k sells off water, the building block of life for relative peanuts?) and put no real controls in place.

You will come back with that what went before was inefficient but that’s an easier problem to fix than the absolute mess than those get rich quick policies have left us in.

 

[QR]

Hoisted by ones own petard....

Publicly owned "services" were renowned for lack of productivity and a lethargic/militant/obstructive work force that were in a "job for life" with the oft-quoted gold plated pension at the end of it.

Privatisation was seen as the "fix all" , but nobody foresaw the downside of losing core control of the business and the money.

Should have written in clauses that HMG retained overall control and had the power to rein in any excess but nobody fancied that.

Other than they weren't. That was just the lie spread (al la Brexit) to con the electorate. eg British Rail continuously lambasted for inefficiency but actually poorly invested in and in fact a v good outcome v financial imput compared to most other railways at the time. See The Great Railway Disaster on the C4 player from 25 minutes.

 

[QR]

I hate bringing her up as she is gone and her time was ages ago and it’s boring, but Thatcher was short term gain and it’s becoming obvious now long term pain, her policies were designed to keep her in power with not even half an eye on the future,

And this was 100% pointed out at the time, but we were told the socialist (it was pre woke, pre anti growth alliance, etc simpler times old boy) didn't know what they were talking about.

The truth is this was pure greed. Greed of the big investors who were sold the assets of monopolies dirt cheap and greed of your common folk who bought their share for £100 on day one and sold them for £200 on day two AND DIDN'T THINK THAT WAS ODD OR WOULD HAVE ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES.

 

[OUFCGav]

Probably thought that the owners would only take a small slice of the pie whereas they ate the pie and only left the foil dish.

Public ownership did lead to gross inefficiency but it seems private ownership just led to gross profiteering and organisational collapse.

Maybe someone could come up with a public/private arrangement a bit like John Lewis` original model where staff benefit rather than the boardroom?

Well technically, ate the pie, and then borrowed several more pies and ate them too. This sort of loading companies with debt to finance dividend payouts could only happen in UK post 80s.

 

[Peterdev]

Of course the inducements to buy into BT and BG would have helped changed opinion on privatisation. Demutualisation of building societies and TSB changing its ownership would have also altered views on private v public ownership too.
As far as Brexit is concerned my view remains the same. We are still not fully out and it is work in progress. I’m sure Labour will try and get us back in by joining the single market. The people have voted twice in 1975 and 2015 so it might be another 35 years before a vote might be held again. The idea of working together for the good of us all economically was overtaken by a drive towards a central EU government with the U.K. playing a fundamentally minor role. Any criticism of EU institutions was always rejected as they knew better how to run our country than we did.

 

[werthersoriginal]

Or, more likely, they didn't care.

It's a tough one. You'd want the above infrastructure to be nationalised so that 100% of profits could be re-invested in said infrastructure. But it's not just a cliche to say that public ownership often leads to inefficiency...

Don’t know why people still trot out the stuff about the public sector being a gravy train, cushy, inefficient, etc compared to the private. My sister in the NHS has far worse t and cs than I do in the private sector and is much more tightly controlled in her working life. You need to let the 70s recede into the past.

 

[QR]

Of course the inducements to buy into BT and BG would have helped changed opinion on privatisation. Demutualisation of building societies and TSB changing its ownership would have also altered views on private v public ownership too.
As far as Brexit is concerned my view remains the same. We are still not fully out and it is work in progress. I’m sure Labour will try and get us back in by joining the single market. The people have voted twice in 1975 and 2015 so it might be another 35 years before a vote might be held again. The idea of working together for the good of us all economically was overtaken by a drive towards a central EU government with the U.K. playing a fundamentally minor role. Any criticism of EU institutions was always rejected as they knew better how to run our country than we did.

Go on then, describe the Brexit you voted for and how it will deliver better economic outcomes than what was in place before.

Oh, and don't miss out the bits about cheaper food, no Vat on energy bills, less red tape, the great trade deal with the USA, and Brexiteers favourite reduced immigration.

 

[boogaloo]

With nationalisation the Water companies are ultimately answerable to the public. If the constant leaks, hosepipe bans after a few days of dry weather, tons of turds floating down the Thames, excessive bills then the public outcry will be huge, which can ultimately lead to the government in charge being kicked out of number 10.

With privatisation they are only answerable to shareholders. It's not like being a fast food joint like McDonalds where high prices, rubbish service and rubbish food means people will switch to Burger King, because Water Companies are essentially a monopoly, and everybody NEEDS water. So all they care about is what the shareholders think, and try and avoid getting fined if they pump too much crap into sea (although our spineless government don't seem overly concerned by that - maybe it's because they too are share-holders? ).

 

[Peterdev]

Go on then, describe the Brexit you voted for and how it will deliver better economic outcomes than what was in place before.

Oh, and don't miss out the bits about cheaper food, no Vat on energy bills, less red tape, the great trade deal with the USA, and Brexiteers favourite reduced immigration.

What I wanted was proper accountability. I didn't want Britains laws passed by the EU.
Cheaper food would’ve been nice but a lot of factors have prevented that, covid for one, and the lack of a decent negotiated deal.
There will always be red tape. Depends on what you want and how it is defined.
For what it’s worth I agree the trade deal with USA hasn’t come. The sticking point is probably in no small part due to the Northern Ireland situation, which is again something that should have been resolved by now.
The immigration issue hasn’t been resolved at all, and probably wouldn’t have been whether we were out or in. Our obligations to HK, Afghanistan, Syria, amongst others will always been that we have effectively open borders creating havoc in the supply of housing and the infrastructure needed.
I also think the farming situation needs addressing. I for on am appalled that we seem dependent on the import of second rate fruit and veg whilst we are destroying our own crops. I think the farming industry should be Subsidised in an effort to make them more self sufficient.
As a result of the EU our fishing industry has been allowed to be decimated.
I believe in the socialist principle of nationalising the water industry and preventing the pollution of our rivers to the detriment long term of our country.

 

[Essexyellows]

To be fair I think this place could probably do a better job of running the country than any politically constrained government.

We all, more or less, agree on the basics.

Nationalised infra for the people it serves and proper PR.