|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2023 13:00:28 GMT
I actually thought that the message about speaking to your councilor about support wasn’t a bad one to be honest. Whether anything would come of speaking to them, I don’t know. I'd imagine most people that are struggling see what help they can get before going on the rob tbh. Perhaps. I don’t know to be honest. Maybe some feel a sense of shame to it/don’t even know that there are resources there to help/think poorly of the government and don’t believe that they will help. Surely, advertising that the councils have been given a pot of money to help the most desperate is a good use of air time? To me, it sounds like a better use of time than, “you’re just a bit of a loser, aren’t you Mr Sunak?”. I mean, that questioning just sounded like a bit of a pathetic schoolboy attempt to get a rise out of him, which didn’t succeed. People should expect better from public servants. They should also expect better from journalists.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on May 19, 2023 13:24:01 GMT
When did the PM get replaced by an AI Chatbot on rewind?
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on May 19, 2023 20:13:43 GMT
|
|
|
Post by gawa on May 19, 2023 22:57:52 GMT
An example of how Stv works - t.co/14VUTqVRjzIf you're candidate can't reach the quota then they get eliminated and those who voted for them have their votes transfered on to their next preference. Much better system in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on May 19, 2023 23:56:45 GMT
We've not shot ourselves in the foot, we've blasted our whole bloody leg off! 🤦♂️
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on May 20, 2023 5:55:13 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on May 20, 2023 5:56:57 GMT
|
|
|
Post by 828492 on May 20, 2023 6:43:12 GMT
|
|
|
Post by 828492 on May 20, 2023 6:46:44 GMT
When did the PM get replaced by an AI Chatbot on rewind? Richi makes the Maybot look almost human. He just has no understanding of what the lives of so many people are really like.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on May 20, 2023 9:49:36 GMT
So who is responsible for this cover up and concealing the report? I used to go to an annual steel industry dinner in Scunthorpe at that time, which the local MP Elliot Morley used to attend when he was minister for fisheries and the environment. He ended up in gaol for falsifying his expenses. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elliot_Morley#:~:text=On%2020%20May%202011%2C%20Morley,the%20home%20detention%20curfew%20scheme. What good company I kept!
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on May 20, 2023 11:47:49 GMT
No need for me to repeat what I've already written on this subject This is simply mass corruption in plain sight The fact it is so blatant makes it more difficult to keep it covered up indefinitely I would assume some investigative Media Journalist are working on it right now. Unfortunately by then from past experience the money will have disappeared
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on May 20, 2023 12:20:14 GMT
And the corruption continues, when are the arrests going to begin?
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on May 20, 2023 13:08:58 GMT
And the corruption continues, when are the arrests going to begin? Christ almighty....
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on May 20, 2023 13:11:23 GMT
So who is responsible for this cover up and concealing the report? I used to go to an annual steel industry dinner in Scunthorpe at that time, which the local MP Elliot Morley used to attend when he was minister for fisheries and the environment. He ended up in gaol for falsifying his expenses. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elliot_Morley#:~:text=On%2020%20May%202011%2C%20Morley,the%20home%20detention%20curfew%20scheme. What good company I kept! You are of course asking the wrong question The question should be who made the stupid decision to sell off a Public Utility - Water, to create a Private Monopoly. The answer to that question is very simple Margaret Thatcher Thatcher in 1989 set in train a sequence of disastrous events which the 2002 report confirmed, it is still disastrous today. Why the report was and continues to be suppressed I can only speculate is that the Horse had bolted and its very difficult to reverse. Starmer did seem to indicate he might try but with so many other problems created by this present Conservative Administration he may not have the Bandwidth to address as a priority in the first term. Thatcher needed a successful sell off of a Utility to copperfasten her idealogical theory. Against the advice of Treasury the initial share price was too low to give Taxpayers value for money. My personal problem was is was oversubscribed six-fold so I didn't get all the shares I applied for. The total sale raised £7.4Bn and the shares immediately increased by 40% when floated, free money (Thanks Maggie) Most small investors then over a short period of time sold and took the gain which was the complete opposite of Thatchers aim and now ownership is in the hands of primarily Foreign Investment Funds. Since Privatisation these institutions have voted themselves £57Bn in dividends which has resulted in being saddled with massive debt. This debt precludes any room for Capital Investment in infrastructure. A supine regulator Ofwat has not helped the situation but to a large extent they have had to thread carefully because the Water Companies Balance Sheets are very fragile. The result is that consumers pay a higher than necessary price to fund excessive dividends for an increasingly inferior product due to lack of infrastructure investment.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on May 20, 2023 13:13:52 GMT
So who is responsible for this cover up and concealing the report? I used to go to an annual steel industry dinner in Scunthorpe at that time, which the local MP Elliot Morley used to attend when he was minister for fisheries and the environment. He ended up in gaol for falsifying his expenses. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elliot_Morley#:~:text=On%2020%20May%202011%2C%20Morley,the%20home%20detention%20curfew%20scheme. What good company I kept! [img class="smile" alt=" " src="//storage.proboards.com/800541/images/fwGSRilBFZwfei5Q6XIp.gif"] You are of course asking the wrong question The question should be who made the stupid decision to sell off a Public Utility - Water, to create a Private Monopoly. The answer to that question is very simple Margaret Thatcher Thatcher in 1989 set in train a sequence of disastrous events which the 2002 report confirmed, it is still disastrous today. Why the report was and continues to be suppressed I can only speculate is that the Horse had bolted and its very difficult to reverse. Starmer did seem to indicate he might try but with so many other problems created by this present Conservative Administration he may not have the Bandwidth to address as a priority in the first term. Thatcher needed a successful sell off of a Utility to copperfasten her idealogical theory. Against the advice of Treasury the initial share price was too low to give Taxpayers value for money. My personal problem was is was oversubscribed six-fold so I didn't get all the shares I applied for. The total sale raised £7.4Bn and the shares immediately increased by 40% when floated, free money (Thanks Maggie) Most small investors then over a short period of time sold and took the gain which was the complete opposite of Thatchers aim and now ownership is in the hands of primarily Foreign Investment Funds. Since Privatisation these institutions have voted themselves £57Bn in dividends which has resulted in being saddled with massive debt. This debt precludes any room for Capital Investment in infrastructure. A supine regulator Ofwat has not helped the situation but to a large extent they have had to thread carefully because the Water Companies Balance Sheets are very fragile. The result is that consumers pay a higher than necessary price to fund excessive dividends for an increasingly inferior product due to lack of infrastructure investment. Excellent post.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2023 13:22:37 GMT
What power does the UK have to take back control of its waterways? Does it have to buy them back at some agreed upon price? What if those making money on it simply don’t want to sell?
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on May 20, 2023 13:26:10 GMT
What power does the UK have to take back control of its waterways? Does it have to buy them back at some agreed upon price? What if those making money on it simply don’t want to sell? An act of parliament could bring it back into public ownership. Without compensation.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2023 13:31:10 GMT
What power does the UK have to take back control of its waterways? Does it have to buy them back at some agreed upon price? What if those making money on it simply don’t want to sell? An act of parliament could bring it back into public ownership. Without compensation. Also seems unfair/highly unlikely to happen. Doesn’t sound like a good way to promote future investments by others either.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on May 20, 2023 14:00:35 GMT
An act of parliament could bring it back into public ownership. Without compensation. Also seems unfair/highly unlikely to happen. Doesn’t sound like a good way to promote future investments by others either. The Market Cap of the English Water Utilities is about £80Bn which is overpriced as its based on the exorbitant Dividends continuing paid for by consumers to a Monopoly I.e. no alternative To buy back legally however that would be the price it would take plus perhaps another say £20Bn investment in infrastructure over say 5 years To do what Huddy would like would be extreme for reasons you describe and others. Some of these Water Companies are partially owned by Sovereign Wealth Funds of Foreign Countries This Administration has shown a capacity to legislate to break International Law and threaten to pull out of International Conventions so who knows what level of craziness they would go to.
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on May 20, 2023 14:26:35 GMT
An act of parliament could bring it back into public ownership. Without compensation. Also seems unfair/highly unlikely to happen. Doesn’t sound like a good way to promote future investments by others either. They have already made enough money.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on May 20, 2023 15:10:58 GMT
Couldn’t they just tax water company dividends at 100% until they have cleared up their shit, and apply that to the last couple of disastrous years of shit in our waters?
|
|
|
Post by lordb on May 20, 2023 15:49:01 GMT
An act of parliament could bring it back into public ownership. Without compensation. Also seems unfair/highly unlikely to happen. Doesn’t sound like a good way to promote future investments by others either. In the past nationalisation involved compensation
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on May 20, 2023 16:15:34 GMT
Couldn’t they just tax water company dividends at 100% until they have cleared up their shit, and apply that to the last couple of disastrous years of shit in our waters? Another way to do it is to prohibit dividends until the leaks are fixed.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on May 20, 2023 16:21:30 GMT
Couldn’t they just tax water company dividends at 100% until they have cleared up their shit, and apply that to the last couple of disastrous years of shit in our waters? Another way to do it is to prohibit dividends until the leaks are fixed. Obviously Governments can pass whatever Laws it wishes by getting a majority in Parliament The issue is what the repercussions might be.
|
|
|
Post by yeswilko on May 20, 2023 16:26:30 GMT
Also seems unfair/highly unlikely to happen. Doesn’t sound like a good way to promote future investments by others either. In the past nationalisation involved compensation Compensation for dumping shit in our rivers is surely a bit ridiculous by any standard
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2023 16:51:53 GMT
Also seems unfair/highly unlikely to happen. Doesn’t sound like a good way to promote future investments by others either. They have already made enough money. That’s not an adequate reason and it’s not really how the world works either.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on May 20, 2023 16:57:52 GMT
Another way to do it is to prohibit dividends until the leaks are fixed. Obviously Governments can pass whatever Laws it wishes by getting a majority in Parliament The issue is what the repercussions might be. Cleaner water and devalued businesses prime for nationalising
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on May 20, 2023 17:14:09 GMT
In the past nationalisation involved compensation Compensation for dumping shit in our rivers is surely a bit ridiculous by any standard Whilst I agree with the sentiment It really exposes the uselessness of Ofwat to regulate, its isssentially a self regulating industry, and the failure of Governments to properly fund Ofwat to do a proper job. It would be entirely legal and acceptable to enforce Water Utility Companies to clean up any mess they created plus compensatory damages. This simply doesn't happen. It would also be normal to fine Water Utilities for failure to fix pipe leakages etc Water Utility Companies are essentially being contracted by Government to provide a service very similar to Rail Companies, the difference being they have a Monopoly in their area plus there isn't unlike Rail an alternative product. If they were regulated properly I'm quite sure they would alter their Business Model which currently is high charges to customers, maximum dividends to shareholders and minimum spend on maintenance
|
|
|
Post by lordb on May 20, 2023 17:36:47 GMT
In the past nationalisation involved compensation Compensation for dumping shit in our rivers is surely a bit ridiculous by any standard Absolutely but all the same nationalisation without compensation is not realistic
|
|
|
Post by 828492 on May 20, 2023 17:57:01 GMT
|
|