Sue Pertwee-Tyr
Accuphase all the way down
The Tories now seem to be operating a scorched Earth policy. Leave the country in such a mess, and so difficult to unpick, that their successors will inevitably fail.
The Tories now seem to be operating a scorched Earth policy. Leave the country in such a mess, and so difficult to unpick, that their successors will inevitably fail.
Yes, but with different donors and politicians’ snouts in the trough. So set them up to fail, then resume in 5 years.The problem that you have is that the Labour Party is a MK11 version of the Tories. They are playing their intentions low key pre election but we all know that they are as Tory as the Tories.
No matter who wins the election, the same policies will continue.
No need to state the bleeding obvious. Proportionality, the Libs were the most bent lot and made the other parties look somewhat sweet. Toryism is going to continue because it attracts votes and there are a lot of Tory voters about to swing to Labour because of their Tory attitudes.Yes, but with different donors and politicians’ snouts in the trough. So set them up to fail, then resume in 5 years.
In this we are in total agreementThe problem that you have is that the Labour Party is a MK11 version of the Tories. They are playing their intentions low key pre election but we all know that they are as Tory as the Tories.
No matter who wins the election, the same policies will continue.
In the case of Thames Water, shareholders of the parent company have made it clear that future infrastructure funding is contingent on Ofwat taking a positive view of its proposed bill rises and taking a lighter touch on its regulatory enforcement measures.
We are concerned, therefore, that it may not be in your organisation’s interest to use the full extent of its powers given the impact that the failure of a major business would have on the stability of the sector and the public purse. Challenging dividend payments to Kemble Water, the parent company of Thames Water which itself generates no 3 income, has the potential to undermine its business and require Government action through a special administrative vehicle (SAV). Any forward programme must clearly set out how Ofwat will balance its need to regulate with protecting the financial viability of the water companies.
That letter from the Committee sounds like a classic threat/extortion letter: "send more money or this dog will die".Yesterday, the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee wrote to OFWAT. One part of its letter (here) said:
The whole letter is an indictment of the entire model - how have we ended up with a system where the public regulator needs to adopt 'light tough' regulation, or none at all, in order to protect the financial viability of failing, often legally opaque, private water companies?
There was an interesting segment on Radio 4's Today programme this morning. It made the point that the previous shareholders, Macquarie, were largely to blame for the debt position of Thames Water. The implication of this point was one I found hard to stomach. It implied that the current shareholders should in some way be 'helped' by the regulator/bill payers.Thames Water shareholders refuse to inject more cash unless bills rise
but Ofwat thus far refuses to let the put prices up... no doubt pressure will be brought to bear so they can keep creaming dividends off a company that is essentially loss making and not adhering to its charter... oh and the shareholders include pension funds as well as wealth funds from China and Abu Dhabi... so London's water supply is partly controlled by foreign wealth funds... great idea Hope they go bust and the shareholders get royally shafted!
I am often not right about things, but I was saying to people when these utilities were privatised that it would be in quarter of a century's time that the recklessness of this would start to be felt. I take little pleasure in being right on the money here.I know it will hurt pension investments, but the public shouldn't be propping up businesses like Thames Water. Obviously, the Tories don't want one of their privatisation main utility companies to fail, so they will do all they can to avoid that happening and it going on their record. It will be interesting to see what Labour do. These Privatised Water Companies have creamed off dividends and director bonuses during the last 30 years when there should have been more investment in infrastructure. Something like £70B has been paid out in dividends! Imagine if, as a state asset, that had been reinvested in the infrastructure: less leaks, better sewage treatment, cleaner rivers, seas etc. The public has awoken to this and the fact that successive tory and labour governments have not regulated them properly. Feargal Sharkey is a beacon of light on this. The next labour Government should ensure Ofwat regulates these companies in the public interest and not in the interest of shareholders and director bonuses. If that means they go bust, then so be it. We can then renationalise them.