As long as the shareholders don't suffer.

[fozy tornip]

Keep your dirty cox out of my boat race.

 

[fozy tornip]

I feel I may've let myself down a bit there.

 

[dutchguylivingintheuk]

"Thames too dirty for winning Boat Race cox to be thrown in"
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2...-at-river-thames-pollution-ahead-of-boat-race

This is an event with a lot of powerful and wealthy people in attendance (some of them even rowing!) so maybe it will create ripples ...

They probably allow Thames Water to tax the taxpayers / their forced costumers to pay for the cleanup, AND pay the dividends on the profits made out of that operation. As a result off course said operatipon will exist out of the bar minimum. (all whilst upping the prices by the maximum)

off course the only ones benefitting from this are also the ones who caused it.

 

[BoldonLad]

They probably allow Thames Water to tax the taxpayers / their forced costumers to pay for the cleanup, AND pay the dividends on the profits made out of that operation. As a result off course said operatipon will exist out of the bar minimum. (all whilst upping the prices by the maximum)

off course the only ones benefitting from this are also the ones who caused it.

Out of interest, how does the Dutch system of water/sewerage operate?, is it public or private, or a mixture? How are the comparable costs?, does it “work”?

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

Funny how this is the first time I have heard the rowers (etc) complaining `about "poo" in the water at the Boat Race

Never heard it before but the things you see suggest that we only know about it sometimes suggest that we know about it now because there is more monitoring around

This suggest that things are worse this year

or maybe people have complained before but were not believed - or the papers were not interested because it was not topical!

 

[AndyRM]

Kick them out for whingeing. It's always the same two teams, someone else deserves a chance.

 

[BoldonLad]

Funny how this is the first time I have heard the rowers (etc) complaining `about "poo" in the water at the Boat Race

Never heard it before but the things you see suggest that we only know about it sometimes suggest that we know about it now because there is more monitoring around

This suggest that things are worse this year

or maybe people have complained before but were not believed - or the papers were not interested because it was not topical!

The polution problem is, apparently, worse this year because of higher rainfall (which overloads the sewerage/drainage system, because the same system is used to drain rain water and waste water).

However, that does not mean that polution was absent in earlier years.

 

[C R]

The polution problem is, apparently, worse this year because of higher rainfall (which overloads the sewerage/drainage system, because the same system is used to drain rain water and waste water).

However, that does not mean that polution was absent in earlier years.

Yes, the current excuse is that it is the design of the system which is at fault, and as the design predates the private companies fixing it is nought to do with them.

 

[albion]

Indeed. It was the wettest winter in 130 years, apparantly. And 250 years too.

However, all the debt has been built up to pay large dividends first, invest in infrastructure last.

 

[C R]

Indeed. It was the wettest winter in 130 years, apparantly. And 250 years too.

However, all the debt has been built up to pay large dividends first, invest in infrastructure last.

Same years ago I worked for a company that makes equipment used in water treatment. As part of my job I had a lot of interaction with engineering staff of two of the big water companies. Every single one of them complained that they had to run the systems to the edge of the engineering margins every single day, there was never any slack.

 

[BoldonLad]

Yes, the current excuse is that it is the design of the system which is at fault, and as the design predates the private companies fixing it is nought to do with them.

I beg to differ. They should have been investing in separate system. Clearly, it will/would take time, but, sooner it is started, sooner it will be finished. The pre-privatisation water authorities should also have done more .

 

[C R]

I beg to differ. They should have been investing in separate system. Clearly, it will/would take time, but, sooner it is started, sooner it will be finished. The pre-privatisation water authorities should also have done more .

Well, that was my point, and indeed the technical staff at the water companies know that full well, but those decisions are not being taken on technical grounds.

 

[albion]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-manchester-68680144.amp

The Cedar Don't Care Group.

 

[BoldonLad]

Well, that was my point, and indeed the technical staff at the water companies know that full well, but those decisions are not being taken on technical grounds.

You mention "some years ago" in another post. Was that pre-water privatisation? I am not for one second suggestion that the (Privatised) Water Companies are not responsible for the pollution, but, the Water Authorities pre-privatisation were not visibly tacking the problem which already existed. We had, and still have, a Victorian system.

 

[C R]

You mention "some years ago" in another post. Was that pre-water privatisation? I am not for one second suggestion that the (Privatised) Water Companies are not responsible for the pollution, but, the Water Authorities pre-privatisation were not visibly tacking the problem which already existed. We had, and still have, a Victorian system.

It was about ten years ago. It was clear then, and widely talked about in the technical circles I moved in, that the way water companies were prioritising shareholders happiness over operational sustainability was not sustainable over the long term. The suspicion I heard at times was that large investors were expecting that the government would step in eventually and indemnify them if nationalisation were to happen. Talk about double dipping.

I don't know how things worked before privatisation, I hadn't even started high school by then. I would say, though, that having had responsibility for the infrastructure for about forty years, the private companies have a significant responsibility in the current situation. It is their business to provide the service, so it is incumbent on them to maintain the tools of their trade in a reasonable condition. If they didn't do their due diligence right when they took the business on, they have no right to expect the tax payer to bail them out.