Yes we may have absolutely shafted our sewage infrastructure but for a few brief quarters we created great value for shareholders.
this post was submitted on 22 Apr 2024
44 points (97.8% liked)
UK Politics
3089 readers
64 users here now
General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both [email protected] and [email protected] .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
[email protected] appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
What's with all the water news coming out of the UK?
Piss poor management for decades has finally been noticed.
Years of poor management and a push for profits over sustainability.
Once the water companies were privatised, they took out massive loans and performed no maintenance. The loans were purely to pay shareholder dividends. Now they're loaded down with debt.
Atop this, that crumbling infrastructure can't handle the increased water flow that's due to rainfall increases. So there's been a general trend of dumping raw sewage into rivers (the fines are cheaper op ex than the capex needed to fix the situation).
It's parasitic capitalism at its finest.
Sounds a lot like how private equity firms destroy companies.
The bit about the fines being cheaper than the fix is terrible.
Privatisation in the 80's has lead to a shitshow, first figuratively and now literally.
I don’t defend the decision; but when it was enacted it did work; in exactly and only that specific circumstance, for an exceptionally short period of time. It offloaded a comparatively small bill to the private sector, in exchange for the monopolies; a terrible idea IMHO.
I liken it to a house move. If I must pay removal people, I can either pay them what they ask, or burn everything I own and save on the price of the movers. Burning everything might save me money during moving week, but after that one initial saving, I will be paying ungodly amounts to repurchase everything I burned.
We’re one of the only places in the world with Privatised water, and we’re doing a dramatic reenactment of the case study of why it’s not a good idea.
It's strange because it also goes against any argument normally used for privatisation.
How do I shop around and get other companies to compete for my service when I can't get a different water supplier or waste removal?
I disagree with the privatisation strategy at the best of times, this just makes the mind boggle.
Leaking
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Ofwat dismissed this plan, prompting shareholders at Thames' parent company, Kemble Water, to withdraw a proposed cash injection and default on debt interest payments.
Thames has now proposed spending an extra £1.1bn on top of its original plans on "projects benefiting the environment", although it did not give details of what these would be.
It is thought that a final decision from Ofwat will come at a crucial meeting on 23 May with a "draft determination" of what companies will be allowed to charge from next year issued on 12 June.
Thames Water chief executive, Chris Weston, said: "Our business plan focuses on our customers' priorities... we've now updated it to deliver more projects that will benefit the environment.
In last month's Oxford and Cambridge boat race, both crews were given safety advice to avoid swallowing water splashed up from the river.
The samples were taken downstream from Little Marlow Sewage Treatment Works, although Thames Water said all discharges from the site had been fully compliant with environmental law.
The original article contains 586 words, the summary contains 169 words. Saved 71%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!