Half of Tory Voters want energy re-nationalising.

I know they can and I think they would. Just my opinion from when they were nationalised.

Lovetopaint037

It's a mystery to me. First Liz Truss is way behind the other candidates and Rishi ahead. Then we are told she is so far in the lead that she is a shoe in for PM. What has been going on? Suspect a Johnson conspiracy as a revenge strategy on Rishi Sunak . BJ has peerages to offer as carrots!!!

Sunak was ahead when the electorate was the Parliamentary Party. i.e. Tory MPs, and thus a relatively small number of people. The other candidates supporters from the early stages transferred their support to Truss.

Truss is ahead with the membership of the Tory party. Still a small number of people but many more than the Parliamentary Party.

I think competition is good so I’m not a fan of nationalism. Remember the days when British Telecom had the monopoly? Consumers had to go on a waiting list for a telephone line of their own & in the meantime many were offered a shared or ‘party line’. (Early 1970’s). You’d pick up the receiver, realise ‘someone else’ was on it, apologise and try again later .... no thanks!

That was because of the technology, not the unions or nationalisation.

There is absolutely no chance that we would go back to that if it got renationalised.

Competition is good where their is genuine competition.

That is the issue

We can’t go back to party lines with digital ??

Whitewavemark2

We can’t go back to party lines with digital ??

Quite ?

I take your point about competition, but I don't think that paying shareholders is good for essential services. There will always be overheads and a need for reinvestment (spectacularly so in the case of water), so bills will never be simply what we use, but if there are no shareholders to pay, and the government can regulate the industry, we are bound to get cheaper bills. When the existing neglect has been dealt with we should get a better service too.

Well not that exactly (I do realise technology has moved us on) but restrictive practices shall we say? When there’s no competition - “take it or leave it” - monopolies can become complacent and bloated. Still a ‘no thanks’ from me re nationalisation. I think choice & competition is healthy.

Urmstongran

Well not that exactly (I do realise technology has moved us on) but restrictive practices shall we say? When there’s no competition - “take it or leave it” - monopolies can become complacent and bloated. Still a ‘no thanks’ from me re nationalisation. I think choice & competition is healthy.

That is exactly what is happening to our water

The current water situation is the worst of both worlds, as there is no competition but the shareholders still need to be paid.

Of all of the utilities that is the one that I think really should be nationalised as a matter of urgency. BT has been overtaken by events, as much of their domestic telecoms business is now mobiles and broadband, and there is no pressing reason why that should be nationalised; but I would still argue that gas and electricity should be.

Whitewavemark2

Competition is good where their is genuine competition.

That is the issue

I know this make you think Nationalisation but I don't want them just to drop the old model in.

Denmark has the highest proportion of wind power in the world. Its transmission grid (like our National Grid) is fully publicly owned and most wind farms are cooperatively or community owned.

I doubt you will be surprised, Whitewave but the idea of cooperatively or community ownership of the source energy really appeals to me.

Can someone tell me about the water companies in France? Looking it up it sounds as if they are community owned, too.

DaisyAnne

Whitewavemark2

Competition is good where their is genuine competition.

That is the issue

I know this make you think Nationalisation but I don't want them just to drop the old model in.

Denmark has the highest proportion of wind power in the world. Its transmission grid (like our National Grid) is fully publicly owned and most wind farms are cooperatively or community owned.

I doubt you will be surprised, Whitewave but the idea of cooperatively or community ownership of the source energy really appeals to me.

The workforce could still be unionised, DaisyAnne.
Not sure what you have against unions.

I'm sure I didn't say I had anything against unions Maizie. I am happy for people to join. I just don't want them trying to run the country or hold the whole country to ransom. People in unions - yes. People running unions, I'm not at all sure. That's my prejudice. Others are prejudiced in the opposite direction.

I also, very positively, like the idea of communities running their own lives. I don't think it's breaks any laws and it is possible I will change my mind.

I read that the EU is preparing to use it’s muscle to intervene in the energy market.

The price of gas has dropped as a result.

Just think how awful it would be if we were still in the EU and those dreadful Europeans were forcing lower energy bills onto us.

Instead we are a sovereign nation!! And so not having the muscle to do what the EU is doing we can watch our bills go higher and higher.

But it is all soooo worth it.

The privatised model of utilities, but also care homes, prisons, hospital services etc is broken. Something has to be better.

DaisyAnne water companies in France are a private / public partnerships in a concession which can last 20 years. It is an historic arrangement going back to the nineteenth century.
They are tightly regulated. Veolia is one of the big ones. Water meters are the norm.

Whitewavemark2

I read that the EU is preparing to use it’s muscle to intervene in the energy market.

The price of gas has dropped as a result.

What they are suggesting makes sense if I have understood it correctly.

Currently, the price of all energy is tied to the price of gas. The intention is to decouple gas. Energy prices would then be closer to the actual costs of electricity generation.

It makes sense to me so far. I haven't seen any arguments against it but maybe they are yet to come.

Thank you Mamie. Is that rather like we tried to do with the railways, I wonder?

Follow on to Mamie. I think the word "tightly regulated" may be the ones that make the difference. We seem to have gone for private/public partnerships in the UK with little or almost no regulation.

I think the majority of electricity in the U.K. is generated by gas

Obviously I have my dim head on this morning, but if the price of gas remains high, how will it be possible to reduce the price of electricity?

Other than the generating companies reducing their profit margins.

GrannyGravy

If you "decouple", the price of other sources will come down. Because there are some cheaper sources, the price of gas would be brought down too although, I would have thought, by not quite as much.

Personally, I hope that would generate greater interest in investing in "other sources".

I doubt the very profitable gas companies will like it. That may stop our government from joining the EU and others in this. It probably depends on how much in donations gas companies have given the Conservatives.

Yes DaisyAnne the prices are controlled too. I think historically they were organisations developed between municipalities and other companies to supply drinking water.

The problem is that the wholesale energy prices have shot up on the international markets, resulting in huge profits for the energy producers. These international energy producers are not subject to UK jurisdiction so it may be hard to even impose a windfall tax on them.

Proposals such as nationalising energy companies will make little difference, as their profits are not huge, and some have gone out of business. Proposals such as removing green levies and tax are just tinkering around the edges. The government are going to have to hugely subsidise energy costs to prevent businesses going bust and people freezing. It is a very grim picture I think.