Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How can England possibly be running out of water?

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 524 posts

Re: How can England possibly be running out of water?

#261

Post by username332211 »

bluecheese452 wrote: post #223
krona wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think the neglect and failure to invest in infrastructure is the worst Cumulative capital investment by water companies in England and Wales since privatisation: £250bn. The infrastructure they inherited was never designed for the things it's being asked to do today, and it has a life expectancy. It would literally cost trillions to upgrade the entire sewerage system. This isn't apologia, it's just reality. The r…

These systems were built at a time when the country was much poorer. It can afford to replace it.

These systems were built when the nation could build. That capability has been significantly diminished. London's equivalent to Paris' RER costs north of 1 billion pounds per mile.

Re: How can England possibly be running out of water?

#262

Post by FridayoLeary »

alephnerd wrote: post #242
MrDrDr wrote: post #240

This highlights one of the big problems with liberal democracies - how do you provide efficient (and even innovative) public services? There is no free market for many public services like water (and where there is I’m all for privatisation). But the people (I am in the UK) do not tend to elect a government on its ability to manage these types of services. I do wonder if there some other structure that blends a not f…

> I do wonder if there some other structure that blends a not for profit ethos with employee ownership and just enough competition Legislate that certain public services are to only be managed and administered by the civil service managed and autonomous statutory boards. That's probably the easiest thing to do in a parliamentary system like the UK. Sort of like a "Water Management Board". Not every function in a demo…

That sounds like more quangos? I'm not an expert on them but the way people complain about them, they have a penchant for wasting fantasic amounts of money, and have no accountability even by the standards of the civil service.

Politicians are simultaneously engaged in a desperate struggle to close down the defunct ones while opening up more, because they are a great way to avoid responsibility, which of course is one of the major operational goals of the civil service.

Re: How can England possibly be running out of water?

#263

Post by nvarsj »

einszwei wrote: post #71

Thatcher era privatization has been proven to be epitome of "short term gains for long term pain". Water, Power, Gas and Rail all privatized in a short span of decade and now the future generations will be footing the bill.

Don’t forget about selling off of NHS hospitals. I don’t think many people realize how much of the NHS is privately owned. NHS pays the owners for use of the facilities. It’s insane.

Re: How can England possibly be running out of water?

#264

Post by Kenji »

Frieren wrote: post #3

> Future generations, who will be dealing with long, dry summers, would probably be shocked at the profligate way clean tap water was used to flush toilets, water gardens and run washing machines. Climate change means societal change. There was a time that Northern Africa was one of the best places in the world to grow crops. They were at the top of civilization for thousands of years. Climate changed, what people co…

[dead]

Re: How can England possibly be running out of water?

#265

Post by qcnguy »

michaelt wrote: post #181
krona wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think the neglect and failure to invest in infrastructure is the worst Cumulative capital investment by water companies in England and Wales since privatisation: £250bn. The infrastructure they inherited was never designed for the things it's being asked to do today, and it has a life expectancy. It would literally cost trillions to upgrade the entire sewerage system. This isn't apologia, it's just reality. The r…

The thing is, if a water company is in good financial health, with low debt and lots of money to invest in infrastructure, it’s completely legal for private equity to buy the company, stop investing in infrastructure, take out loans until a third of customer bills go on interest payments, and take the loaned money as ‘management fees’. Then dump untreated sewerage in rivers and demand more money from bill payers, bec…

Governments don't pay for infrastructure by saving up surplus tax revenue in a piggy bank. They take out loans to pay for it, same as the water companies do. The UK pays around 8% of its spending on interest payments and that's rising rapidly, despite the fact it can print money.

British water companies are in lots of debt because they aren't really private. They're forced to spend huge sums to repair Victorian-era infrastructure whilst the government sets the prices they're allowed to charge. Decades of populist left or centre-left governments have kept the prices artificially low whilst requiring investment, resulting in a huge accumulation of debt.

This is exactly what would have also happened if the water companies were not privatized, so the fake "privatization" is a red herring. It's the expected outcome of price controls, not whether the utilities are owned by the state or not.

Re: How can England possibly be running out of water?

#266

Post by refurb »

komali2 wrote: post #252
refurb wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m assuming you’re really young. The US and UK were in terrible shape before Reagan and Thatcher took office. Both improved after they were elected?

If you're going to assume my age, I'll go ahead and assume your race, because I can't imagine why someone would support think Ronald "Strapping young bucks" Reagan, President of "School desegregation is a bad thing," steered the USA in a good direction. The same guy that opposed the voting rights act? The guy that didn't want an MLK day because people weren't acknowledging the 'reality' of the man? The guy that vetoe…

We were talking about making the country better not the media circus around it.

The US and UK economies were terrible. Stagflation, “malaise”.

Reagan ushered in a decade of strong economic growth. I’m sure all races would trade of a higher paycheck despite the media comments.

Re: How can England possibly be running out of water?

#267

Post by another-dave »

krona wrote: post #189
another-dave wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, all the more reason it shouldn't be privatised. If it only makes sense to have one of something (road network, water system) it's a natural monopoly, _and_ it's going to require large public investment to be maintained, why wouldn't you in-house the expertise needed to do that and avoid the shareholder dividends overhead?

My point is the differences you're postulating are a rounding error in the scale of the problem in front of you.

> Taken together, the fall in shareholders' investment and retained earnings - or profit - and rising dividend payments mean that, according to the University of Greenwich, owners have withdrawn £85.2bn. > > — BBC (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cw4478wnjdpo)

It might be a rounding error vs the scale of investment needed for water, but that investment is needed regardless of public or private ownership.

It's not a rounding error in terms of gov investment elsewhere — imagine an extra £85bn invested in, say, social housing? Even as a single one-off

Re: How can England possibly be running out of water?

#268

Post by qcnguy »

another-dave wrote: post #165
krona wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think the neglect and failure to invest in infrastructure is the worst Cumulative capital investment by water companies in England and Wales since privatisation: £250bn. The infrastructure they inherited was never designed for the things it's being asked to do today, and it has a life expectancy. It would literally cost trillions to upgrade the entire sewerage system. This isn't apologia, it's just reality. The r…

I mean, all the more reason it shouldn't be privatised. If it only makes sense to have one of something (road network, water system) it's a natural monopoly, _and_ it's going to require large public investment to be maintained, why wouldn't you in-house the expertise needed to do that and avoid the shareholder dividends overhead?

The overhead of having shareholders in this case is minimal. The profits they make are small, but having a goal of making profits does create discipline in resource usage.

The water system is like the electricity system. It's perfectly possible to have inflows and outflows be fully private, as long as the government keeps its hands off the pricing. The network itself can also be run privately, as both supplier and buyers want supplies to flow. The trick is to ensure there are numerous different companies with the expertise to maintain pipework and then allow local communities to quickly change to different contractors.

Re: How can England possibly be running out of water?

#269

Post by qcnguy »

seanalltogether wrote: post #90
sandbags wrote: post #34

As the article mentions, privatised water companies have built no new reservoir capacity and relied on drawing from rivers and other sources. What the article doesn’t mention is that pre-privatisation a new reservoir was built every year up to about 1960 and then every few years until privatisation in 1992. So we are about 30 years behind in adding capacity to the system. This combined with the inadequate levels of i…

The concept of reservoirs and emergency supply seems to be completely at odds with privatisation. What private company is going to spend loads of money to build deep reservoirs that are stressed only once every 5 or 10 years. None. They're going to reach for an immediate supply like a river or aquifer and then raise prices if those sources run low. It's insane to plan out infrastructure on the belief that private com…

We're talking about the industry that just finished Thames Tideway, fully privately financed? A project that will last for at least 100 years and probably longer? A project that was needed for decades but was ignored by government and only got built thanks to the private sector?

The idea private companies don't invest is just Labour propaganda. Another commenter has already pointed out your belief about reservoirs is wrong, as is the idea they wouldn't make other forms of investment.

And all this has happened despite the government imposing socialist price controls on the industry, a move usually guaranteed to kill investment!

Re: How can England possibly be running out of water?

#270

Post by alephnerd »

FridayoLeary wrote: post #262
alephnerd wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I do wonder if there some other structure that blends a not for profit ethos with employee ownership and just enough competition Legislate that certain public services are to only be managed and administered by the civil service managed and autonomous statutory boards. That's probably the easiest thing to do in a parliamentary system like the UK. Sort of like a "Water Management Board". Not every function in a demo…

That sounds like more quangos? I'm not an expert on them but the way people complain about them, they have a penchant for wasting fantasic amounts of money, and have no accountability even by the standards of the civil service. Politicians are simultaneously engaged in a desperate struggle to close down the defunct ones while opening up more, because they are a great way to avoid responsibility, which of course is on…

Not like Quangos - Statutory Boards at least in Singapore are a part of a ministry, but they are given full autonomy [0] to recruit, administer, and manage within their remit as legislated.

Quangos are a half assed attempted at doing something similar while trying to include some "inclusion", but with none of the checks and balances.

The reality is, not every Tom, Dick, and Harry should have a say on water management or R&D prioritization.

[0] - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statutory_boards_of_the_Sing...

Post reply on HN