Water should be nationalised

Apparently, you can now see the ring of human excrement surrounding Brexit Britain from space, the raw sewage of Brexit’s environmental fallout lapping at the shores of our sceptic isle.

Feargal Sharkey - "Yesterday morning, dumping sewage into rivers & onto beaches was illegal... but by yesterday afternoon the govt had legalised the dumping of sewage... this is probably the greatest act of violence against the environment I've ever witnessed... "

27th August 2022

twitter.com/Haggis_UK/status/1563452074213314560

Waters off the beaches in Dunkirk have also suffered from sewerage pollution recently, also blamed on the dumping from UK South Coast.

Yes, posted about this morning (above). Can't blame them- pollution does not stop at borders, be it acid rain, sewerage, or whatever. Which is why the EU has very strict and clear rules (some in the UK wanted to get rid of to make more profit for shareholders!

I see that the French are complaining about our poisoning the sea and marine life and it beginning to affect the French coast.

DaisyAnne

Jess20

Yes, essential services should be privatised, especially with severe climate changes on the way. Matter of fairness and survival.

Nationalisation seemed like a good idea after the war. It's easy to understand why. However, we haven't been at war - at least not with another country. How we live has changed so much. We have discovered that different areas have different needs and priorities.

So yes, I think we need to own our utilities. However, I would not want it to work from the state down. I believe we should be looking to work from the community up.

Prior to 1974 there were 198 water supply undertakings of which 33 were private. The remaining 165 were formed into 10 regional water authorities.

"^Sewerage and sewage disposal had been dealt with by more than 1,300 country borough and county district councils.[8][9][10] Daniel A. Okun, an environmental engineer and internationally renowned figure in the field of water supply and water resources management, regarded the RWAs as "pioneers of their era."[9][10] This "trailblazing" concept of a single authority, based on a river basin or watershed, being responsible for water extraction, water supply, sewage treatment and environmental pollution prevention, led to "considerable efficiency gains."[6] Despite these efficiency gains, the RWAs were hampered by chronic underfunding and lack of investment from central government. Underinvestment in infrastructure combined with sustained water pollution by industry contributed to a continued decline of both river and tap water quality.^"

I can just imagine the chaos at a local level in discussions at a local level.

"^Sewerage and sewage disposal had been dealt with by more than 1,300 country borough and county district councils.[8][9][10] Daniel A. Okun, an environmental engineer and internationally renowned figure in the field of water supply and water resources management, regarded the RWAs as "pioneers of their era."[9][10] This "trailblazing" concept of a single authority, based on a river basin or watershed, being responsible for water extraction, water supply, sewage treatment and environmental pollution prevention, led to "considerable efficiency gains."[6] Despite these efficiency gains, the RWAs were hampered by chronic underfunding and lack of investment from central government.[9] Underinvestment in infrastructure combined with sustained water pollution by industry contributed to a continued decline of both river and tap water quality.^"

I can just imagine the problems in getting a group of communities to agree on anything.

You'll see from the following that Thatcher's govt started the gradual decline in investment in water

"^By 1980, investment in the water sector was just one-third of what it had been in 1970. Margaret Thatcher's Conservative government, which had been elected in 1979, had curtailed the RWAs ability to borrow money they deemed necessary for capital projects.[8][9][11] Daniel Okun said: "Before, they could borrow money everywhere easily. They could get money at very good rates. Restrictions on external borrowing prevented the [RWAs] from getting capital. They were considered ineffective because they could not borrow money. Thatcher prevented them from borrowing and then blamed them for not building."[9] When the European Union introduced stricter legislation on river, bathing, coastal, and drinking water quality, the sector was in no position to meet the expenditure requirements and the UK was prosecuted for noncompliance.[12][b] Estimates of the capital expenditure required to achieve EU standards and meet the existing backlog in infrastructure maintenance ranged from £24 to £30 billion.^"

I make no apologies for extracting info from Wikipedia. If you go to the entry there are several source references

Perhaps Johnson's and other Cabinet members' children should be photoshopped sitting or swimming in that water! Of course, he took his own kids to Greece's pritine beaches instead.

38 Degrees are planning to take a giant postcard of a s--t covered beach to Downing Street next week. If you're a registered supporter you should have received their email If not please look at the website and sign the card.

Quite rightly, France and other EU countries are far from happy about their own waters, fish and wildlife being polluted by UK Sewerage. And can you blame them?

The UK is threatening health and marine life on the French coast by allowing raw sewage to be dumped in the Channel and North Sea, say three Euro MPs.

Pollution warnings have been issued for almost 50 beaches in England and Wales, after heavy rain caused sewage overflow to be diverted into rivers and the sea.

The French MEPs accuse the UK of neglecting environmental commitments and risking marine life and fishing.

British water companies have said they are investing in solving the problem.

Since its departure from the European Union, the United Kingdom had neglected its environmental commitments, the MEPs said in a letter calling for legal or political action from the European Commission.

A UK government spokesperson said their allegation was "simply not true".

Despite no longer being bound by EU laws, the UK was still a signatory to relevant United Nations conventions on protecting shared waters, the MEPs argued.

The three MEPs all belong to French President Emmanuel Macron's pro-EU En Marche party. One of them, Pierre Karleskind, chairs the European Parliament's fisheries committee.

From BBC News. Another reason for the UK to be distrusted.

David__Osland
@David__Osland
·
1h
Britain has the most expensive energy in Europe, the most expensive train fares in Europe, the most overcrowded prisons in Europe and the dirtiest rivers and beaches in Europe. Such are the successes of privatisation.

Sorry, but the Tories have to GO, and room created for new, kinder ideologies. After a couple of glasses of wine when out for dinner the other night I found myself saying with great conviction "Anyone who votes Tory now is being downright IMMORAL" In vino veritas. Things are too dire now for poorer people, to hang on to such beliefs. Am I a die-hard left-winger? No. I have voted Conservative in my life, but no more. NO MORE!

However, I would not want it to work from the state down.

I recall that most of the nationalised utilities were split into regions. Whether or not this allowed for flexibility with regards to regional needs I don't know, but I would suspect that there was not a lot of direct central government control.

Jess20

Yes, essential services should be privatised, especially with severe climate changes on the way. Matter of fairness and survival.

Nationalisation seemed like a good idea after the war. It's easy to understand why. However, we haven't been at war - at least not with another country. How we live has changed so much. We have discovered that different areas have different needs and priorities.

So yes, I think we need to own our utilities. However, I would not want it to work from the state down. I believe we should be looking to work from the community up.

I still can't choose who to get water from and still have to pay irrespective, I can't see what has improved for the customer with privatisation.

Yorkshiregran

As someone who worked for 28 years in a huge water company, both before privatisation and afterwards, I can honestly say the waste BEFORE privatisation was horrendous, too many staff, sometimes not enough work, people promoted just because they had been there longest not how efficient they were, answerable to no one and still no ability to choose who you got your water from. Just water rates to pay irrespective.
Things honestly became more efficient afterwards, promotion based on ability. Be careful what you wish for!

I don't see how things have improved for the consumer though. I personally would prefer a larger number of people earning a decent living, than a small number of people being paid inflated sums.
And why should loyal employees not be rewarded.

pooohbear2811

Surely the long term answer to a shortage of water is desalinastion stations? we are an island surrounded by water, other countries do it so why not us?

Surely the old principle should apply first. REDUCE, re-use, recycle

I have stopped washing on normal long programmes, unless clothes have stains. Reduced time, reduced to 30C, for normal day to day wash. But totally agreed, we should have systems that allow the use of grey water intelligently- for flushing loos for sure. And during a drought, accept that 'if it's yellow, let it mellow'.

Long term- we need much better integrated systems. And this even more so in industry.

why are there no schemes or grants for rainwater harvesting? I'd happily store more for the garden - and to flush the downstairs loo - if some help were available.

Problem is, during a drought once you've used your butt full it won't be replaced. What we should be doing is grey water harvesting. It's ridiculous that water that could be reused in the garden just goes straight into the sewers. I don't think it would be difficult to do as a DIY project.

Surely the long term answer to a shortage of water is desalinastion stations? we are an island surrounded by water, other countries do it so why not us?

In Europe, only the Czech Republic has privatised water!

fb.watch/eLO4ebJ2YS/

Petrol is also subsidised in France at the moment.

varian - yes, it makes me shudder! I'm just astonished, though, by our 'problems' with water supply. We have plenty in the North and not enough in the South - so where are the pipelines? Where's our version of the Eastern Arabian aquifer (that supplies Bahrain etc.)? How come cruise ships use desalination but we don't? Are there going to be drought warnings and hosepipe bans every year now? If so, why are there no schemes or grants for rainwater harvesting? I'd happily store more for the garden - and to flush the downstairs loo - if some help were available.

Is it not ironic that just as Margaret Thatcher's policies have been proven to have been so damaging to our country that Sunak and Truss are competing to claim they are the very incarnation of Thatcher?

Rameses

All public services should be nationalised. End of.

All privatisation does is rip off the very people they are supposed to be serving and make the rich richer.

Agree absolutely. One of the first things the directors of the newly privatised companies did was to give themselves massive pay rises - totally undeserved.

There's no saying that utilities would be run in the same way if renationalised, ordinarygirl.

i have considered this but as an ex civil servant I must disagree with this idea. Every government continually cuts public spending in real terms on public services . The government gives each service X millions but then the service HAS TO pay back at least £1-3 million. I remember for several years the meetings we had to try and find money to pay back to the treasure. Hence even if water was brought back into public ownership the service would not be helped. No new investment would happen. At least a private firm will be allowed to invest some money - even if shareholders have to receive a small dividend.