As long as the shareholders don't suffer.
- Thread starter Salty seadog
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
C R
Guru
You misunderstand, it is too expensive for the VCs, they may have to go without two of their fortnightly holidays.
icowden
Shaman
Agreed. There is very strong evidence that the current regime just allows foreign companies to extract all of the taxpayers money. UK water companies all have £bns of debt because the value was extracted by parent companies in the form of dividends. Thames Water has a £14.3bn debt but has paid out £7.2bn in dividends .
https://www.theguardian.com/busines...w-privatisation-drained-thames-waters-coffers
Govt should nationalise and tell the owning company they can keep the debt.
My thought was to fine them maximum amount for every illegal violation until they are bankrupt they buy the now worthless company for 1p. But even doing it by maybe more reputable means it still looks like it won't cost much (see above Yesterday at 11:19. But Labour seem determined to use the valuations as presented by the Water Companies themselves and no surprise, that's a lot of money. No idea why Labour are so ready to listen to vested interests and paid lobbyists rather than independent experts (maybe because independent experts don't hand them free concert or football tickets, buy them clothes, etc.?)
Ian
icowden
Shaman
They do seem to have forgotten that they are the party that is supposed to not engage with lobbyists and nationalise things without caring about the private companies.
More games to avoid scrutiny by our politicians, tricks to look like they are doing something when they can't be held to it
They must think we are real suckers. If they were serious they'd be undertaking commitments that they can be held to account on, commitments that can be monitored eg x% (on todays figures) per year reduction.
Ian
Except our next General Election must be held before August 2029 so come the election and they haven't met their commitment then ... it's not 20230 yet!
They must think we are real suckers. If they were serious they'd be undertaking commitments that they can be held to account on, commitments that can be monitored eg x% (on todays figures) per year reduction.
Ian
briantrumpet
Veteran
They've been taking the weewee for a long time now, so probably think they might as well extract as much cash as they can while they still can. There don't seem to have been any prior repercussions for doing so.
But then Labour's promised and delivered Water (Special Measures) Act was full of loopholes such that one must assume it was deliberate (because incompetent raises even greater concerns).
eg bonus bans can only be applied to the top/very senior staff like Chief Executive/Chief Financial Officer/Chairman so didn't stop eg Thames Water paying £2.4m bonuses in April (remembering the financial state of Thames Water).
Seems all the water companies have to do is call the payments "retention payments" rather than "bonuses" and they get round Labour's new rules ... simples. Or just double pay (as Southern Water have done). Talk about (deliberately?) poor useless legislation.
Ian
Last edited:
The Crofted Crest
Active Member
... and pumping it straight back into the rivers.
(My bold)
Why is the new regulator to be acting in the interests on the investors? They are the ones who have been doing very well historically, their dividends approximately matching the debts the Water Companies have accumulated. So the deividends they've taken create the debt we then have to pay for!
Long beyond time the entire industry was re-nationalised and for that to happen Government need to stop listening to Water Company lobbyists who present ludicrous values for the all but bancrupt companies. Independent economists keep saying the Water Companies own valuations are ludicrous but Government seems to happily accept those ludicrous figures!
And even if there is a valuation more than £0 there is no legal obligation to pay compensation to anybody (and in the past such payments have not been made https://www.clivelewis.org/uncatego...estoring-water-companies-to-public-ownership/
Or pay shareholders back what they've put in
We're all paying anyway, either through taxation or through paying much higher waterb bills. We're pay whatever happens, just current system means we're paying for shareholder dividends and ludicrous salaries/bonuses. And those employees demanding such massive payments to retain them or they'll leave are the ones whose decisions have resulted in our rivers becoming open sewers, the individuals who have oversean the lack of investment whilst directing the money to shareholders and themselves that we are now all going to have to pay for.
Ian
