| Review of Water Industry 09:39 - Jul 20 with 1765 views | Churchman |
This is due to be published tomorrow. I will be interested to see if there’s anything in it or whether it’s just another can to kick down the road. They love a Review. Especially, as has been shown with the Waspi women, it can be completely ignored.
The problems and the reasons behind the national disgrace of the water industry have been blindingly obvious for literally decades. No government has given a hoot about it and in the meantime this country is turning into an environmental toilet.
Ironically, I don’t blame the owners of the water companies at all. They are doing what is right by their shareholders. Of course renewing infrastructure, repairs and leaks are at the bottom of the priority list.
When the Tory criminals sold off this asset we all already owned, they were solvent. Now they are not and we are paying through the nose something that should be dirt cheap in a country with this amount of rainfall. Our rivers and coasts should not have any sewage running into them either.
Labour have been in power a year. They knew what the problems were long before the last election. What has Environment Secretary Reed done in the last year, beyond the odd Sudoku? Zilch by the look of it but maybe I’m being harsh. And those still alive who were responsible for this disaster plus those since who’ve ignored the obvious every year since should be held to account.
Thoughts?
|  | | |  |
| Review of Water Industry on 10:07 - Jul 20 with 1399 views | flettonblue |
Media already announcing Ofwat is being scrapped, I d like to see a merge of all 3 water regulators- Ofwat, EA and DWI,can't see why they won't do that tbh given their similarities and some overlap.Going to take at least a decade to fix just given the sheer amount of engineering improvements and maintenance that's needed to bring things up to current regs let alone future proof (and aside of the cost of this to bill payers, there's no supply chain and skills out there to do it much quicker I don't think). Think there's a valid argument in failings and decisions made by the regulators overtime naturally but they've only worked to the direction and the resources given by government and the legislation set in parliament to follow (which hasn't changed substantially sine privatisation until the recent special measures act). These have facilitated a culture,behaviour in companies that have led them to sweat assets to death and judge their risk against profit not the environment/ morally right thing to do and enable a sector that shrugs it shoulders,rolls it's eye and plans in for fines and punishment over prevention (then green washes as much as possible ). I think the gov has waited for the review just so further down the line when customers have to pay for this again they can say the review caused some of this rather than the blinding obvious that's been known to the public over the last few years. |  | | |
| Review of Water Industry on 10:25 - Jul 20 with 1365 views | Pinewoodblue |
You can be sure it won’t be a very ‘socialist’ response. |  |
| |
| Review of Water Industry on 10:31 - Jul 20 with 1358 views | Churchman |
| Review of Water Industry on 10:07 - Jul 20 by flettonblue |
Media already announcing Ofwat is being scrapped, I d like to see a merge of all 3 water regulators- Ofwat, EA and DWI,can't see why they won't do that tbh given their similarities and some overlap.Going to take at least a decade to fix just given the sheer amount of engineering improvements and maintenance that's needed to bring things up to current regs let alone future proof (and aside of the cost of this to bill payers, there's no supply chain and skills out there to do it much quicker I don't think). Think there's a valid argument in failings and decisions made by the regulators overtime naturally but they've only worked to the direction and the resources given by government and the legislation set in parliament to follow (which hasn't changed substantially sine privatisation until the recent special measures act). These have facilitated a culture,behaviour in companies that have led them to sweat assets to death and judge their risk against profit not the environment/ morally right thing to do and enable a sector that shrugs it shoulders,rolls it's eye and plans in for fines and punishment over prevention (then green washes as much as possible ). I think the gov has waited for the review just so further down the line when customers have to pay for this again they can say the review caused some of this rather than the blinding obvious that's been known to the public over the last few years. |
Shadow housing secretary Kevin Hollinrake has the brass neck to burble ‘Investment in infrastructure expensive largely because the UK has a Victorian era sewage system.’ No wonder the tories are toast with a wally like him on the front bench.
Instead he argues the water industry is better run by the private sector. Yeah right. We have seen precisely where the private sector left water and sewage provision (and other utilities). It’s estimated that with the current pittance level of investment, it’d take 700 years to upgrade the system. In relative terms it’s the same as King Edward 3rd after smashing the French at Crecy in 1346 saying ‘let’s sort out the sewers. Should be done by 2045’
They’re not interested. Neither are the politicians because there will be no visible result before they are booted out.
Joseph Bazalgette's London sewer system took 16 years to build, with construction starting in 1859 and largely completed by 1875. This included the construction of the main interceptor sewers and the network of smaller sewers feeding into them. An enormous undertaking using mainly manpower. They would never have been built but for the Great Stink of 1858 that directly affected politicians.
Nothing has changed. These things are doable. You just have to have the will and the courage to do it. So, you don’t need to pay out huge compo to these water companies to buy them out. Fine them into bankruptcy and buy them for £1. Water is the source of life. We have an abundance of it. If dry old Portugal has an unlimited supply because they invested in it, it should not be beyond this country to do so. | | | |
| Review of Water Industry on 10:37 - Jul 20 with 1347 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Review of Water Industry on 10:31 - Jul 20 by Churchman |
Shadow housing secretary Kevin Hollinrake has the brass neck to burble ‘Investment in infrastructure expensive largely because the UK has a Victorian era sewage system.’ No wonder the tories are toast with a wally like him on the front bench.
Instead he argues the water industry is better run by the private sector. Yeah right. We have seen precisely where the private sector left water and sewage provision (and other utilities). It’s estimated that with the current pittance level of investment, it’d take 700 years to upgrade the system. In relative terms it’s the same as King Edward 3rd after smashing the French at Crecy in 1346 saying ‘let’s sort out the sewers. Should be done by 2045’
They’re not interested. Neither are the politicians because there will be no visible result before they are booted out.
Joseph Bazalgette's London sewer system took 16 years to build, with construction starting in 1859 and largely completed by 1875. This included the construction of the main interceptor sewers and the network of smaller sewers feeding into them. An enormous undertaking using mainly manpower. They would never have been built but for the Great Stink of 1858 that directly affected politicians.
Nothing has changed. These things are doable. You just have to have the will and the courage to do it. So, you don’t need to pay out huge compo to these water companies to buy them out. Fine them into bankruptcy and buy them for £1. Water is the source of life. We have an abundance of it. If dry old Portugal has an unlimited supply because they invested in it, it should not be beyond this country to do so. |
I wondered what impact a hardline approach would have on investments held by pension funds so asked GoogleAI.
Received a very detailed response
While a small percentage of shares in English water companies are held by UK pension funds, the majority are owned by international investors, private equity funds, and banks. Specifically, only 8.5% of shareholders in the UK water sector are UK pension funds. The majority of shares are held by firms from countries like the US, Australia, and others.
Here's a more detailed breakdown:
UK Pension Funds: Hold a relatively small portion of shares, estimated at 8.5%.
International Investors: Over 70% of the English water industry is controlled by firms in various countries, including the US, Australia, and others, according to a 2022 report.
Other Owners: Private equity firms and banks also hold significant stakes.
Listed vs. Private: While some water companies are listed on the stock exchange (like United Utilities and Severn Trent), their shares are largely held by the same types of investment funds and private equity firms that own the private water companies. | |
| |
| Review of Water Industry on 11:00 - Jul 20 with 1310 views | charlie_blue |
Not only did we outsource assets we also outsourced the skills. The sticking point in renationalization would be the sheer scale of incorporating not only several companies, all operating differing pay structures, but a whole industry back under Government control.
Initially it would cost billions & create a whole new bureaucracy as thats the way Civil Service operate. Thats the fundamental problem with the country. |  | | |
| Review of Water Industry on 11:01 - Jul 20 with 1307 views | Churchman |
| Review of Water Industry on 10:37 - Jul 20 by Pinewoodblue |
I wondered what impact a hardline approach would have on investments held by pension funds so asked GoogleAI.
Received a very detailed response
While a small percentage of shares in English water companies are held by UK pension funds, the majority are owned by international investors, private equity funds, and banks. Specifically, only 8.5% of shareholders in the UK water sector are UK pension funds. The majority of shares are held by firms from countries like the US, Australia, and others.
Here's a more detailed breakdown:
UK Pension Funds: Hold a relatively small portion of shares, estimated at 8.5%.
International Investors: Over 70% of the English water industry is controlled by firms in various countries, including the US, Australia, and others, according to a 2022 report.
Other Owners: Private equity firms and banks also hold significant stakes.
Listed vs. Private: While some water companies are listed on the stock exchange (like United Utilities and Severn Trent), their shares are largely held by the same types of investment funds and private equity firms that own the private water companies. |
This was published 18 months ago and there were a number of articles from various sources that long pre date this:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2023/dec/18/how-much-of-y
Basically, investment? You’re having a laugh. Shareholders and dividends. What has been milked out of the system roughly equates to the debts these companies claim. In other words they’ve borrowed and paid themselves out with that borrowing on the basis that the mugs in Britain will pay up through bills, taxes, whatever. As wheezes/scams go, it’s a good one. You couldn’t make it up.
This will continue until a government has the gonads to stop it. In the meantime, a year into a new govt, I’ll be interested to see what their review says beyond the usual excuses. Replace Ofwat? So the Titanic has hit an iceberg. Let’s move the sun loungers around. That should sort it. Oh. [Post edited 20 Jul 11:02]
| | | |
| Review of Water Industry on 12:30 - Jul 20 with 1230 views | flykickingbybgunn |
| Review of Water Industry on 11:01 - Jul 20 by Churchman |
This was published 18 months ago and there were a number of articles from various sources that long pre date this:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2023/dec/18/how-much-of-y
Basically, investment? You’re having a laugh. Shareholders and dividends. What has been milked out of the system roughly equates to the debts these companies claim. In other words they’ve borrowed and paid themselves out with that borrowing on the basis that the mugs in Britain will pay up through bills, taxes, whatever. As wheezes/scams go, it’s a good one. You couldn’t make it up.
This will continue until a government has the gonads to stop it. In the meantime, a year into a new govt, I’ll be interested to see what their review says beyond the usual excuses. Replace Ofwat? So the Titanic has hit an iceberg. Let’s move the sun loungers around. That should sort it. Oh. [Post edited 20 Jul 11:02]
|
When the water companies were sold by the govt in order to ensure the shares sold it was guarrenteed a % return each year on shares.
The companies prioritied this payment over investment because they had to.
The result is massive debts all around and leaky pipes.
The water companies should be taken over without compensation. Nor should the tax payer fund the debts. Share holders have had enough out of the public as it is. [Post edited 20 Jul 12:59]
|  | | |
| Review of Water Industry on 12:32 - Jul 20 with 1223 views | mellowblue |
| Review of Water Industry on 11:01 - Jul 20 by Churchman |
This was published 18 months ago and there were a number of articles from various sources that long pre date this:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2023/dec/18/how-much-of-y
Basically, investment? You’re having a laugh. Shareholders and dividends. What has been milked out of the system roughly equates to the debts these companies claim. In other words they’ve borrowed and paid themselves out with that borrowing on the basis that the mugs in Britain will pay up through bills, taxes, whatever. As wheezes/scams go, it’s a good one. You couldn’t make it up.
This will continue until a government has the gonads to stop it. In the meantime, a year into a new govt, I’ll be interested to see what their review says beyond the usual excuses. Replace Ofwat? So the Titanic has hit an iceberg. Let’s move the sun loungers around. That should sort it. Oh. [Post edited 20 Jul 11:02]
|
I can see it being can down the road. The Government has little leverage over the water companies to make them invest properly and certainly cannot afford to nationalize it and then be forced to throw massive sums into improving water supply and improving waste management, in general modernizing on a grand scale which they clearly have not got. Of alll the de-nationalizations of the 80's, the water industry has been the worst impacted, I would have thought. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Review of Water Industry on 13:06 - Jul 20 with 1163 views | OldFart71 |
Despite being responsible for the shambles that is Thames water the bosses and shareholders continue to receive vast sums. The whole industry is a national disaster. Infrastructure that has been compromised for years in the name of greed and profit and yet Ofwat allows these companies to charge more to consumers for things that should have been done. | | | |
| Review of Water Industry on 13:10 - Jul 20 with 1141 views | jasondozzell |
Should be nationalised but the whole point of the Starmer project was to ensure it wouldn't be. |  | | |
| Review of Water Industry on 15:57 - Jul 20 with 1025 views | Basuco |
| Review of Water Industry on 12:32 - Jul 20 by mellowblue |
I can see it being can down the road. The Government has little leverage over the water companies to make them invest properly and certainly cannot afford to nationalize it and then be forced to throw massive sums into improving water supply and improving waste management, in general modernizing on a grand scale which they clearly have not got. Of alll the de-nationalizations of the 80's, the water industry has been the worst impacted, I would have thought. |
The telecoms/broadband industry has been hit hard by privatisation, the copper network is in a very poor state due to lack of maintenance and under investment for many, many years, while the fibre roll out is very slow and expensive. If BT had not been privatised the fibre roll out to the entire UK would have been completed 43 years ago at a fraction of the cost. We now have the ridiculous situation where some areas have 3 different fibre broadband providers to choose from, all vastly over priced and many areas have no fibre option. |  | | |
| Review of Water Industry on 17:31 - Jul 20 with 947 views | cbower |
The insanity of the Thatcher mania of privatisation. There is nothing more fundamental to life than water and privatisation made it a commercial commodity. How could the consumer possibly benefit ? Competition? No chance! I could never switch water suppliers could I ! We've just lined the pockets of the wealthy and invested the bare minimum in infrastructure whilst creating an environmental catastrophe. Sickening. |  |
| |
| Review of Water Industry on 18:07 - Jul 20 with 930 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
As much as anything they need to tighten up regulations and oversight. Welsh Water are a bad offender and they have a not-for-profit model. State ownership should happen, but as things stand it would just see the same result through insufficient funding and working to the lowest common denominator. Most of the firms are actually debt laden so acquisition would require serious public investment. After nationalising EDF, the firm lost billions in the first year of full state ownership. Privatising a monopoly, where there is no competition was just a nonsensical choice.
I’m not keen on the idea of a takeover without paying the market valuation, rule of law and property rights mean we have an attractive jurisdiction in which to operate, and are crucial if we don’t want to frighten off FDI. You only have to watch how the current US administration have created huge uncertainty for businesses.
In fairness to Labour they’ve committed to renationalising the rail network so perhaps they will be bold (but probably not). | | | |
| Review of Water Industry on 18:22 - Jul 20 with 899 views | DJR |
| Review of Water Industry on 18:07 - Jul 20 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
As much as anything they need to tighten up regulations and oversight. Welsh Water are a bad offender and they have a not-for-profit model. State ownership should happen, but as things stand it would just see the same result through insufficient funding and working to the lowest common denominator. Most of the firms are actually debt laden so acquisition would require serious public investment. After nationalising EDF, the firm lost billions in the first year of full state ownership. Privatising a monopoly, where there is no competition was just a nonsensical choice.
I’m not keen on the idea of a takeover without paying the market valuation, rule of law and property rights mean we have an attractive jurisdiction in which to operate, and are crucial if we don’t want to frighten off FDI. You only have to watch how the current US administration have created huge uncertainty for businesses.
In fairness to Labour they’ve committed to renationalising the rail network so perhaps they will be bold (but probably not). |
I was a staunch supporter of the nationalised utilities (my father worked for one) but the issue I have with renationalisation is that these are not the same organisations that they were when they were nationalised.
When privatised, huge pension surpluses were used to give early retirement to many with great expertise (including my father), and I don't think that expertise has ever been replaced because cutting costs became the mantra. At the same time the public ethos was lost.
Putting it another way, my view is that it's very difficult to put Humpty together again. [Post edited 20 Jul 18:29]
|  | | |
| Review of Water Industry on 18:22 - Jul 20 with 899 views | flykickingbybgunn |
| Review of Water Industry on 17:31 - Jul 20 by cbower |
The insanity of the Thatcher mania of privatisation. There is nothing more fundamental to life than water and privatisation made it a commercial commodity. How could the consumer possibly benefit ? Competition? No chance! I could never switch water suppliers could I ! We've just lined the pockets of the wealthy and invested the bare minimum in infrastructure whilst creating an environmental catastrophe. Sickening. |
Water privatisation came long after Thatcher. Just sayin'.
If the companies are not meeting their statutory targets they should be nationalised without compensation for either their share holders or their creditors.
Just like any other company going bust would. | | | |
| Review of Water Industry on 19:00 - Jul 20 with 858 views | cbower |
| Review of Water Industry on 18:22 - Jul 20 by flykickingbybgunn |
Water privatisation came long after Thatcher. Just sayin'.
If the companies are not meeting their statutory targets they should be nationalised without compensation for either their share holders or their creditors.
Just like any other company going bust would. |
The mania for privatisation within the Tory Party, founded upon the Thatcherite doctrine of the 1980s, drove them to privatise anything they could. It all leads back to her in my opinion. | |
| |
| Review of Water Industry on 19:12 - Jul 20 with 836 views | TractorWood |
| Review of Water Industry on 18:22 - Jul 20 by flykickingbybgunn |
Water privatisation came long after Thatcher. Just sayin'.
If the companies are not meeting their statutory targets they should be nationalised without compensation for either their share holders or their creditors.
Just like any other company going bust would. |
Anglian Water is mostly foreign owned too. Mostly by foreign pension funds and investment vehicles. So not only are we scammed for water, the profits immediately go to Australia, Canada, Luxembourg etc. |  |
| |
| Review of Water Industry on 19:15 - Jul 20 with 830 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Review of Water Industry on 10:07 - Jul 20 by flettonblue |
Media already announcing Ofwat is being scrapped, I d like to see a merge of all 3 water regulators- Ofwat, EA and DWI,can't see why they won't do that tbh given their similarities and some overlap.Going to take at least a decade to fix just given the sheer amount of engineering improvements and maintenance that's needed to bring things up to current regs let alone future proof (and aside of the cost of this to bill payers, there's no supply chain and skills out there to do it much quicker I don't think). Think there's a valid argument in failings and decisions made by the regulators overtime naturally but they've only worked to the direction and the resources given by government and the legislation set in parliament to follow (which hasn't changed substantially sine privatisation until the recent special measures act). These have facilitated a culture,behaviour in companies that have led them to sweat assets to death and judge their risk against profit not the environment/ morally right thing to do and enable a sector that shrugs it shoulders,rolls it's eye and plans in for fines and punishment over prevention (then green washes as much as possible ). I think the gov has waited for the review just so further down the line when customers have to pay for this again they can say the review caused some of this rather than the blinding obvious that's been known to the public over the last few years. |
Good post. The Environment Agency won a court case filed against them alleging they were culpable for toxic waste in the slurry from sewage plants that’s used on fields for food. Even though they knew that some extremely toxic chemicals were being dumped into their sewage plants they could prove that they hadn’t been given a clear steer by government so couldn’t be in breach of any legislation. A ridiculous situation and potentially massive human health problem that we’re barely aware of, all due to inadequate legislation and guidance. |  |
| |
| Review of Water Industry on 19:24 - Jul 20 with 816 views | DarkBrandon |
| Review of Water Industry on 18:07 - Jul 20 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
As much as anything they need to tighten up regulations and oversight. Welsh Water are a bad offender and they have a not-for-profit model. State ownership should happen, but as things stand it would just see the same result through insufficient funding and working to the lowest common denominator. Most of the firms are actually debt laden so acquisition would require serious public investment. After nationalising EDF, the firm lost billions in the first year of full state ownership. Privatising a monopoly, where there is no competition was just a nonsensical choice.
I’m not keen on the idea of a takeover without paying the market valuation, rule of law and property rights mean we have an attractive jurisdiction in which to operate, and are crucial if we don’t want to frighten off FDI. You only have to watch how the current US administration have created huge uncertainty for businesses.
In fairness to Labour they’ve committed to renationalising the rail network so perhaps they will be bold (but probably not). |
You are right about regulations. It seems the regulators have been way too lenient with these companies.
I read a really good article on this pointing out that all bar one of the water companies leaked sewage into rivers at a frequency just below the limit set by the regulators. If we want less sewage in our rivers we should regulate these companies more strictly. Of course reducing sewage spills comes at a cost, and in the end much of that will be paid by customers. The other company (Southern iirc) were way over the limit. They’d just effed it all up.
Nationalising won’t help with any of this. At least not directly. We’d be better off allowing these companies to borrow to invest, and take reasonable levels of profits.
I agree with you on shareholder compensation for nationalisation. It is the franchise system in the rail network which allows Labour to nationalise the rail companies at no cost |  | | |
| Review of Water Industry on 22:39 - Jul 20 with 696 views | mellowblue |
| Review of Water Industry on 18:22 - Jul 20 by flykickingbybgunn |
Water privatisation came long after Thatcher. Just sayin'.
If the companies are not meeting their statutory targets they should be nationalised without compensation for either their share holders or their creditors.
Just like any other company going bust would. |
1989, Mrs T was still running things. | | | |
| Review of Water Industry on 23:29 - Jul 20 with 637 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Review of Water Industry on 18:22 - Jul 20 by flykickingbybgunn |
Water privatisation came long after Thatcher. Just sayin'.
If the companies are not meeting their statutory targets they should be nationalised without compensation for either their share holders or their creditors.
Just like any other company going bust would. |
Why do you say that about the privatisation timeline? As the post above says, her government privatised water in England and Wales in 1989 towards the end of her second term. In Scotland it’s still publicly owned (and they apparently have a 50% higher infrastructure investment per household as a result). I’m not sure what happens in N. Ireland. Are we all talking about England and Wales? If so it was definitely Thatcher (along with a lot else, including all other utilities, telecommunications, steel, railways, airways, ports, airports, aerospace, and also largely the councils by proxy through large-scale outsourcing). | |
| |
| Review of Water Industry on 07:57 - Jul 21 with 429 views | DanTheMan |
It's another can down the road 🙄 |  |
| |
| Review of Water Industry on 08:09 - Jul 21 with 417 views | DJR |
| Review of Water Industry on 23:29 - Jul 20 by Swansea_Blue |
Why do you say that about the privatisation timeline? As the post above says, her government privatised water in England and Wales in 1989 towards the end of her second term. In Scotland it’s still publicly owned (and they apparently have a 50% higher infrastructure investment per household as a result). I’m not sure what happens in N. Ireland. Are we all talking about England and Wales? If so it was definitely Thatcher (along with a lot else, including all other utilities, telecommunications, steel, railways, airways, ports, airports, aerospace, and also largely the councils by proxy through large-scale outsourcing). |
Yes it was the Water Act 1989 (in her third term) which enabled privatisation but the following from Wikipedia gives some background.
Margaret Thatcher's Conservative government, which had been elected in 1979, had curtailed the Regional Water Authorities' ability to borrow money they deemed necessary for capital projects. Daniel Okun said: "Before, they could borrow money everywhere easily. They could get money at very good rates. Restrictions on external borrowing prevented the [RWAs] from getting capital. They were considered ineffective because they could not borrow money. Thatcher prevented them from borrowing and then blamed them for not building."
The Conservative government of the day had originally proposed water privatisation in 1984 and again in 1986, but strong public feeling against the proposals led to plans being shelved to prevent the issue influencing the 1987 general election. Having won the election, the privatisation plan was "resurrected and implemented rapidly". [Post edited 21 Jul 8:33]
| | | |
| Review of Water Industry on 08:34 - Jul 21 with 363 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Review of Water Industry on 07:57 - Jul 21 by DanTheMan |
It's another can down the road 🙄 |
Surfers Against Sewage: this is putting lipstick on a pig
Abolishing Ofwat will not stop sewage dumping or profiteering, unless the finance and ownership structures in the water industry are also changed, warns campaign group Surfers Against Sewage.
Giles Bristow, chief executive at Surfers Against Sewage, says:
“Look past the glossy veneer of today’s Independent Water Commission recommendations and you’ll see it utterly fails to prioritise public benefit over private profit. This is not transformational reform, this is putting lipstick on a pig – and you can bet the champagne is flowing in water company boardrooms across the land. Prime Minister, you must abandon the dangerous fantasy that the current privatised water industry can be patched up – it can’t, and the public knows it. Your party was elected on a pledge to clean up our rivers and coasts; now deliver on that promise, and go far beyond these half measures.
“For 35 years, profit has come first – and our waters have paid the price. Only one path forward remains: a full, systemic transformation that ends the ruthless pursuit of profit and puts the public good at the heart of our water services. We welcome Sir Jon’s calls for a national strategy, enshrining public health objectives in law and regional water planning. But we won’t be taken for fools — abolishing Ofwat and replacing it with a shinier regulator won’t stop sewage dumping or profiteering if the finance and ownership structures stay the same.
“Voters are tired of swimming in sewage and drowning in ever rising bills. They won’t accept any more toothless tinkering or PR spin—they demand specific, radical reform. Delay any longer, and you risk losing not only public trust but the confidence of your own MPs. Let the water companies keep raking in dirty profits at our expense, and the electorate won’t forgive you.” |  |
| |
| Review of Water Industry on 08:37 - Jul 21 with 359 views | Freddies_Ears |
I simply do not understand how it is even legal to load a company with its own debt, or to pay dividends other than out of profit. The water company owners have simply destroyed the value in the industry, extracting tens of billions of £ rather than investing it back into sewage treatment, new reservoirs, leak fixing etc etc etc. Ofwat failed to regulate, either because it did not have the power (govt issue) or because it was utterly incompetent.
Have any other countries allowed this state of affairs? If not, then why the naff didn't we think first, or at least once it started to go wrong?
Dare I wonder how much the water company owners paid UK political parties over the last 10+ years? | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
