Nationalising essential utilities - like water - should not cost taxpayers anything at all

[@ruthe6017]

It is astonishing that they managed to run up so much debt in a monopoly business with exceptional and reliable income.

[@tovsteh]

Its easy to waste money that isn't yours, especially when you don't have any accountability/consequences for mismanaging it. Its out of control in Western governments.

[@mementomori7825]

Borrow money to pay dividends to owner. Ez.

[@puppets.and.muppets]

you are a fool. this was always their intention. to have a good plunder.

[@mikesmart390]

All done on purpose.greed

[@davideyres955]

Take Thames water, the debt was growing slowly before 1997 and then it took off. Blair’s Labour allowed them to borrow as they liked. The problem with water is not the privatisation but an utter failure of government oversight. All of the regulators seem to be ineffective and that is the fault of the government whichever one is in power. Privatisation was done to free government of the cost of borrowing to improve the industry and the incompetence of the government has facilitated the greedy so and sos to lumbering the companies with stainable debt, not for the badly needed investment but to hand money to various people. It’s utterly failed to do what is should have done.

[@iainsneddon3010]

Given the Water companies' continued corporate malfeasance, both operational and financial, there's a case just to expropriate them for the common good

[@andrewjohnston9115]

What you are missing is that the officers of the Water companies have shown incompetance, the shareholders on the the other hand are as much victims of this incompetance as are the customers. So simply expropriating isn't a fair solution and as RJM states the shareholders would have to take a "haircut" in any case. Governments who go around seizing assets without compensating the owners of those assets tend not to last as it's effectively state sponsored theft.

[@iainsneddon3010]

@andrewjohnston9115 I would argue that what you are missing Andrew is that the taxpayer will be asked to bail out the water companies anyway, with the shareholders largely protected, if the experience if the bank bail outs is anything to go by. I'd rather state sponsored theft, your term not mine, than theft from us all as tax payers by the corporate class, again. Bear in mind also they have been beneficiaries of massive dividends in a monopoly market, without paying for the infrastructure upkeep and improvement, that the bill payer is also expected to pay a premium for. The rationale behind the privatisation was increased service, according to Thatcher, not profit extraction at our expense, as has happened.

[@bigjd2k]

@@andrewjohnston9115it’s obvious it’s a bad, risky investment. They’ve had plenty of time to sell. Tough!

[@mishapurser4439]

@@andrewjohnston9115 The shareholders are the ones who ran away with the money that should have gone into investment in infrastructure. They are not victims and do not deserve our concern.

[@stephendavis5530]

Yep! I've said this for a while. As they have proved themselves to be incompetent and are massively in debt, they should be nationalised without compensation. What's always conveniently forgotten, as was the case with Royal Mail, is that in many cases, privateers have picked up a valuable state asset for a song! If shareholders lose out, then tough! They knew the risks going in. Shares can go down as well as up!

[@alanbrown9178]

Re-nationalising the water boards in England seems to me to be a no-brainer. Here in Scotland, our government resisted considerable pressure from the tory government in Westminster to privatise our water and as a result we have cheaper water rates, better drinking water and cleaner beaches and waterways. What's not to like? Edited to correct "nationalise" to "privatise"

[@pamelaatkinsonscats2873]

I’m so glad I live in Scotland.

[@quillo2747]

I work with english water companies and Scottish water. Scottish is far far behind in performance, from leakage to per capita consumption to asset age. Scottish don't even know household consumption because you pay a flat fee in your council tax rather than paying based on the metered water consumed like England does. In both cases the investments need approving and funding by the state, but being nationalised Scottish has no incentive to improve. The state can not fine itself, but they can fine a private company. Carrot and stick works. The main problem we have is mass immigration, 5 years ago when investments were last planned out, no one predicted one million immigrants being added to the population in a single year. One million more people using the water and sewer infrastructure in a single year. It can't cope and we can't build fast enough, especially when we had no idea that was coming.

[@JasonAtlas]

@@quillo2747 Be gone Mr Farage. Go back to pretending to be a farmer.

[@michaelmayo3127]

"resisted considerable pressure from the tory government in Westminster to nationalise our water" So the water in Scotland is own by private companies? But that's the same, as in England. So what is the point, that you are trying make?

[@ScottishRoss27]

At The 2024 International Water Association Awards, Scottish Water was 1 of 12 winners globally of its Climate Smart Utilities Recognition Programme. Also Scotland won the bid to host the 2026 IWA World Water Congress & Exhibition. At the 2024 UK Water Industry Awards Scottish Water won Asset Management Initiative, Digitalisation Project and Apprentice of the year. At the 2024 Women in Utilities Awards Scottish Water Business Stream won Best Employer for Women and its chief executive won Woman of the year.

[@hubblescope1967]

We need you to school Rachel

[@jcoul1sc]

It was tories that sold it current government has no money

[@timwoodger7896]

She already knows 😢 the Corporatocracy picked our government and the Corporatocracy pulls all their strings.

[@jcoul1sc]

@timwoodger7896 what's your evidence for that

[@jcoul1sc]

@timwoodger7896 are you communist

[@Redf322]

She knows. Corbyn’s Labour had these policies.

[@SimonSlade-xw5kr]

Actually the clues as to who benefits are in the names: Privately Owned=Private Individuals, Nationalised=The Nation

[@zlamanit]

5:00 the fact that the national debt always growths doesn't mean that it's not paid. Currently 8.4% of government spending is on debt interest and if the debt is never repaid then interest payments are way higher than the original debt. The government may have not repaid debt it took 50 years ago but it paid more in interest and will pay more in the future. Water companies can be nationalised for nearly free by enforcing strict regulations. If they cannot keep rivers clean then they shouldn't be able to take any money as profits, set harsh fines, and the only cost will be infrastructure - most of which is worthless to anyone but the operator as it cannot be removed and repurposed.

[@CuriousCrow-mp4cx]

Are they? How do you know that? You do not know how old some of these government bonds are, and you obviously don't understand percentages. We still have bonds from the Napoleonic War period still being serviced today. The coupon rate on these are like 2% or 3% on a £100 bond. So the annual cost is still £2 or £3 per year. In the early 19th century that would have been a huge sum. Now, in the 21st century, you can't even buy a sandwich for that amount of money. Check for yourself. There are inflation calculators online for the UK, based on the Bank of England's database. Mine which calculates from 1800-2023, tells me that £2 in 1800 would have the purchasing power of £218.70 today, but the UK government still pay 2% on a £100 bond from the 1800s, as the coupon is a percentage of the original bond. They are not inflation protected. This is simple liability management. So Starmer isaking a political choice, and not an economic or financial one. Governments are the only institutions who can borrow on this basis, but Starmer has misreperesented the reasons why he is against privatisation. Starmer hasn't taken the King's Shilling: he's taken his donors' shilling. Corporations and plutocrats court whosoever is in place to be in government, and Starmer isn't politically canny enough to play the game to his advantage. He's using the state to keep his donors happy, and not the electorate. But tbh, he's no different to anyone else in doing so. Read "The Dictator’s Handbook: Why Bad Behavior is Almost Always Good Politics (2022 expanded edition)" by Bruce Bueno de Mesquita and Alastair Smith. It should put you straight about political imperative.

[@nameberry220]

the government receives interest rates lower than inflation. each year the government doesn't pay, it gets cheaper to pay it back later.

[@truthseeker5911]

Much of the governments debt is held by our pension funds or is represented by other forms of our savings and so in one way or another we ourselves benefit from the interest payments. As sectoral balances describes that when the government sector runs a financial deficit then the private sector must run a financial surplus.

[@nicholaspostlethwaite9554]

Yes it is deliberate theft by deliberately running and targeting inflation. Not only bond holder but more directed at stealing coin clipping all the money the poorer have in cash forms. They used to be honest in the past but are now wary of admitting it as we know it is aimed at the poor for the benefit of the asset rich. They used to say 'inflating away debt'. Translate that into the truth, Inflating away the cash based entire lives of those not rich and invested in assets. Basically it is oppressing the peasants and making them alone pay the debts back via inflation.

[@fredsmith1970]

My brother worked in the water industry for over 35 years... from when the latter days of nationalisation and throughout their privatisation. He recounted that one year the additional borrowing of one company pretty much equated to the dividend paid to their share holders. He said that the best thing for the water industry was for it to be nationalised again... so the main focus would be on the service to the consumers and not to the share holders and investors.

[@Bettys_Eldest]

I worked at Thames from 79 through to 17, and even after privatisation was proud to say I worked for them, as it was still very much a public service. Then Macquarie took over in 2005, I stayed as long as I could stomach it. Only after leaving did I realise just how ill working there had made me.

[@stephenhookings1985]

Did you drink the water? Seriously though- I believe you are 100% right.

[@handsfree1000]

It was never right to sell the water board it’s an essential not a commodity

[@jcoul1sc]

At the time it was right but they could have included much more rules and hand it back now

[@lesleyhillman487]

Learned a lot about nationisation from this. Didn't know it was done with bonds.

[@jcoul1sc]

@lesleyhillman487 bonds or gilts are government debt you buy the government then pays you a yield for them Osborne paid off some bonds from the south China sea bubble

[@jcoul1sc]

Yield or annual interest

[@highpath4776]

A lot of water supply companies were private, supplying from acquired boreholes over the years , long before and immediately up to generally the sell off of the ex local authority/board owned water supply and sewage treatment entities.

[@CooperJames-b4x]

All essential utilities water, gas, electricity and healthcare should be in public ownership.

[@busybeeteach]

and internet, transportation, social security (USA)!

[@MusicFromNowhere]

Bankrupt?? Did they issue dividends whilst falling into debt? That's pretty much a fraud.

[@charliemoore2551]

Agreed. The directors should be facing jail time for that.

[@MargaretDeakin-d6m]

Yes. Why doesn't our Justice System protect us from these bad faith companies? Why is business allowed to operate against the interests of the people? Destroying our health seems to go unpunished?

[@seebarry4068]

Not in Tory times.... So not now either.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

So is leaving the pension debts off the books. That's an actual fraud. Section 2, 2006 fraud act. What's interesting is we have a professor of accountancy who won't talk about that.

[@Geokinkladze]

Fraud? Absolutely not. If a business wishes to undertake large capital expenditures then it can raise funds by issuing more shares, but it may work out cheaper to borrow money. Borrowing money could therefore lead to increased shareholder wealth which can be redistributed in the form of dividends (a mixture of cash or shares), or capital growth in the share value.

[@peterm6219]

Utilities should never have been privatised in the first place

[@billB101]

You have Thatcher to thank for that.

[@jamesbirch130]

I agree. However, now we have had so many years of private non investment that it would ultimately cost the government a fortune just to bring it back to where it should be..

[@Mike-lb1hx]

Pre privatisation sewage treatment at Blackpool was a long pipe below low tide and possibly they minced the shit up so people didn't recognise it. Similarly there were reports that not a single beach would meet blue flag standard. Phone Lines took months to be installed. Ah the glory days of public ownership

[@jamesbirch130]

@Mike-lb1hx I know it's great the way things technology have improved over the years... Something they would never have done under public ownership.. profits always should come first.

[@patrickporter1864]

But but the private sector always does things better and cheaper. Public sector bad private sector good effective efficient. Don't you know.

[@harrisonbergeron9746]

why should it, thatcher stole all those state funded assets, they should be returned to public ownership. it's not like the owners are doing a great job, is it?

[@adenwellsmith6908]

Where are the trillions the workers have paid the socialist welfare state for their old age?

[@frogandspanner]

She stole the TSB and sold it off.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

@@frogandspanner So where are the trillions the workers have paid the socialist welfare state for their old age? TSB is peanuts.

[@lisa5249]

Privatization generally makes things worse…

[@frogandspanner]

@@lisa5249 I have yet to see an example of improvement of _any_ service when privatised.

[@burropoco]

Renationalise the water companies. Legislate so that any future Gov that wants to privatise needs to put it to a public Referendum.

[@theotherside8258]

if we re-nationalise and fail to compensate, its a fair bet that the tories will not be abe to privatise them again, who would take the risk?

[@MuchWhittering]

Because as we all know, public referendums never go horribly wrong.

[@Swan67-zw9jo]

A few points for consideration 1) As a bond is debt, the UK pays on credit so still pays but with interest 2) the value would legally have to be linked to the share price. 3) Many pension funds are invested in utilities so buying cheap is not just attacking billionaire financiers. However, I agree there are mass problems with the current model

[@danielpledger7445]

Your channel should be mandatory watching for all politicians and their advisors. Sadly they all just listen to vested interests and politically dogmatic "think" tanks.

[@sailawayteam]

Stink tanks.

[@alanrumble7238]

Spot on Richard. I have said for some time that Starmer and Reeves need to look at what Labour did after they were elected in 1945 when the country's economy was shot after WW2.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

The UK is bankrupt. They are just pouring petrol on the fire. Migration is costing the UK massive amounts. The pension debts are out of control. State spending is out of control. Labour knows this and has gone full fascist as a consequence.

[@phill6859]

The situation was different. The people who owned the industries wanted to be bought out and the bonds were a better option. The water companies are not close enough to collapsing

[@adenwellsmith6908]

@@phill6859 The big dividend, increase in debts was allowed by the regulator. That's the big issue. It's a failure of regulation. This is a problem that repeats itself across government. For example, I wanted to get the gambling commission to take action on illegal gambling. They had a pack, with the evidence, the works. Crime reports too. Were they interested? No. They would rather deal with bookies and casinos, because that's where they get entertained and jobs when they retire.

[@paultaylor7082]

@@phill6859 Thames Water is. So are other water companies, saddled with massive debts.

[@tropics8407]

Was just thinking the same thing. How does the regulator allow that ? Surely a dereliction of duty ? 🤷‍♂️

[@stephensalt6787]

I was a Tory supporter but I always thought that electric production and water supply should never have been privatised, they are both vital to life and therefore beyond the reach of venture capitalists.

[@123mehmehmeh]

im glad some of you see sense, this is so far beyond the dumb socialist vs capitalist debate, its insane to me that some people argue otherwise. They cry about taxes going up, but fail to realise it will drive down inflation. Tax me £50 more, i could not care like

[@nicholaspostlethwaite9554]

Food is much much more vital so I guess supermarkets and all local food shops needs to be nationalised too? Then we would end up on rations issued by the State. The drivel people put out about 'vital' services should be run badly, and probably for free, by the State is infantile. Sure everyone wants everything cheaper or for free but that is just crazy. Best get your own supplies of water and power as the whole system relying on any State existing and handing out everything is going to collapse. This era is the decline before the fall as in Rome before. May take a long time as did Rome, but becoming obvious and inevitable.

[@123mehmehmeh]

@@nicholaspostlethwaite9554 why is it always one extreme or the other with you people? you can BALANCE an economy. Yes food is vital, nobody is saying it isn't and no, nobody wants "everything" for free. Stop this batshit insanity man, that's the real infantile view.

[@JolaFasolaGroszek]

How come they charge us for product they have not created? Whoever made water should be paid for it.

[@vietashroffoliver2521]

Hearty thanks Mr Murphy, this video needs to go viral

[@glasscity3104]

I remember when living in the UK at the time when the water utilities were sold off by the government of the day. The UK should look at how the Water Corporation of Western Australia is operated and managed and is fully owned by the government of Western Australia. The Water Corporation is also considered a world leader in innovation in future proofing and providing water in a sustainable way.

[@DAVIDALLISON-v9w]

The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.

[@inguzwulf]

Don't look up!

[@peterjol]

I seem to remember part of the way Thatcher sold people on the idea of privatisation was with the cheap share sell off to the public and the notion that ordinary people owning the shares makes them become the 'owners'..but of course 'ordinary' people couldn't afford to have their capital tied up in shares so they soon sold them and made a little profit selling them to the rich people who can. The shares were always intended to end up in the hands of the rich..who could then just sit back and enjoy extracting wealth from the industries.

[@pensarfeoChannel]

I don't get why we need to pay anything at all in anyway for this. We can just make regulations that demands immediate action. In not uk should fine these companies that are much larger than the value of the company value itself!!!

[@adenwellsmith6908]

Which means it goes on the water bills. When the state has control, who pays the fines then?

[@vgstb]

@@adenwellsmith6908 If the fine is significant enough and the allowed delay for payment short enough then bankruptcy is unavoidable. Bankruptcy opens the road toward nationalization.

[@quillo2747]

What action? All investments in the water industry get approved and funded by the government, they are civil engineering firms, they get paid to build things and try to build as much as possible. 5 years ago when infrastructure was last being planned and approved no one preducted mass immigration rising to 1 million net a year. The infrastructure cant cope, and yet this planning period the government is still saying no to some investment. The government already holds all the cards, if they aren't investing enough today why do you think they would if it became nationalised?

[@pensarfeoChannel]

@@adenwellsmith6908 No, the point of the fine is that they won't be able to pay, they go into bankruptcy and the government takes over the company for 0. We could also regulate caps on how much people should be paid.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

@@pensarfeoChannel It's got a name. Theft, and its a human rights abuse. But lets say it happens. State takes over, and the mistakes carry on. Now who pays the fines?

[@tiffinmeister]

There should be a public investigation into the debts of privatised companies like Thames Water to establish why they were required (given the lack of investment in the company) and who are the beneficiaries. These are financial instruments that should never have been allowed in a monopoly utility business and must be excluded from any recompense.

[@MayaBen-x5r]

A lot of people are suffering from putting food on the table yet many are sleepwalking! Facing this recession without investing is actually risky, salaries are easily spent!

[@MatildaHamish]

That is true my dear, Investment is the best idea presently and without it, human struggles are worthless.

[@SheilaAngus]

Financial education is indeed required for more than 70% of the society in the country as very few are literate on the subject. Thanks to Jasmine Harvey the lady my friend recommended to me.

[@DylanLeigh-n7v]

Everyone needs a different stream of income, such as where one can invest some parts of his or her monthly salaries.

[@DinmaAbwooli]

Am surprised you made mention of Jasmine Harvey, she's the best at the moment and her professional strategies are everywhere...

[@MayaBen-x5r]

I'm really interested in this information, how can I reach out to her???

[@SimonSlade-xw5kr]

It has always been a tenant of mine that, as a minimum, the basic essential services necessary for sustaining life should not be subject to the profit motive. Yes I have concerns about efficiency but greed is not good.

[@therealpbristow]

How much rent is it paying you? (...Or did you perhaps mean "tenet"? =;o} )

[@BionicRusty]

Just to be clear, the UK water system has not been updated, revitalised or largely repaired since it’s introduction in the mid 1800’s. The companies have profited, whilst poorly maintaining and breaking the law on a regular basis, for which the system was introduced in the first place.

[@Grrrrr-v9d]

Trouble is, even if they're nationalized at the symbolic cost of 1 pound, there's the huge issue of the CAPEX cost in the next 10 years or so. For decades already, they criminally gutted the maintenance budgets, basically letting everything rot. Thus the effluent in the rivers. It would take enormous investment just to get everything back to a semblance of working order. Is there any way to audit their operations and clawback the dividends and the obscene management bonuses for "performance"? Oh, and also the management invoices they received from the owners, which is how they siphon money when they can't show a profit on the P&L.

[@theotherside8258]

You'd be right but the current intention is for all that to be passed to customers anyway.

[@quillo2747]

They haven't gutted anything. Capex spend has gone up constantly. The government approves and funds all the projects, the companies themselves make money by building as much as possible, its the government that approves it. We have waste overflowing into rivers because 25 years ago out infrastructure was designed for 50 million people. The sheer scale of the population rise wasn't predicted. Even 5 years ago in the last infrastructure planning round, no one knew our population would rise in a single year by 900,000 due to immigration. The sewers were designed to accommodate the forecasted number of people, we now have an extra 900,000 in a single year using that infrastructure and the treatment works can't cope so it overflows.

[@TheShortStory]

Hear hear!

[@cliveramsbotty6077]

it's not like i can shop around anyway. i need water and thames water are the only company who will sell it to me.

[@timmasonguitar]

We all need to send this video to our MPs and get it played in PMQs

[@nicholaspostlethwaite9554]

They need a good laugh! Pure comedy, rage baiting for clicks.

[@charleswillcock3235]

For me the problem in the UK is, the people who are running the water companies, and the regulator. “Forget what people say watch what they do” - for me the track record of those who are taking millions in pay per year for running a legal monopoly which you have no choice but to pay is obscene. When the water companies were state owned there was a lot of pollution in rivers. After privatisation the pay on the Boards went up, maybe there was some more investment, but not sufficient to keep pace with the needs. Unless Ofwat becomes massively more effective and the Boards of water companies become more competent at cleaning up sewage spills and building water storage nothing will change. The real question is under public ownership, what would change? I am 100% in favour that water companies need to massively up their performance, that is the key issue which needs to be addressed.

[@kieranclarges2514]

Not to mention the fact that when the water companies were nationalised, The sales contract contained conditions, One of which was the demand that the water companies modernize... Something they have so far refused to do, Instead deciding to hand out profits the share holders! These water companies breached the sales contract, which results in a void contract. So not only can the Take everything back they can also take their profits!

[@Google_Does_Evil_Now]

False privatisation. There's no choice, it's a monopoly. £30,000,000 to water bosses who don't have any competition. It's a scandal. Prices to us increased by 86% in 4 years. Lock them up. Get our money back.

[@RedSntDK]

It's nuts that one need to argue for the nationalisation of essential utilities when the results of privatization is so obvious.

[@albatross170]

If Thames Water can't service it's debt, it is insolvent. It has a minus value! The shareholders have made a loss. The state must not give value to the shareholders.

[@billB101]

If it's insolvent and goes bankrupt, the operation is shut down and the assets are sold off to pay its debt, it doesn't just disappear. What then?

[@Redf322]

⁠@@billB101 the state buys the assets. It lends itself the money, and pays it back from the huge profits. Or it sells bonds. Either way these huge monopolies make profits.

[@billB101]

@@Redf322 So basically a huge shift in capital from the state to the owners. If Labour did this they've be absolutely creamed. And if not who exactly would buy these 30 year bonds at 3% without the post WW2 sentiment there was back then. As per usual Murphy is full of pie in the sky unworkable solutions, like it's all some easy fix problem.

[@garypCronshaw]

Thank you, excellent!

[@Bigwillyjhonson]

why is this focused against starmer? why is ithis only something that can happen now labour are in?

[@stephenhookings1985]

It seems Richard is pleading with Kier to understand how finance really works - almost the last phrase in the video. Answer: he is asking his chancellor and getting poor advice.

[@theotherside8258]

he is the one who is silencing all the real Labour voices and policies.

[@federicop74]

Fair value will be a substantial amount just in order not to scare out future investors but I totally agree we must bite the bullet and nationalise water suppliers in order to get clean water which is kind of essential. The government is not thinking straight.

[@manoo422]

All the govt have to do is fine them for ALL of their pollution to OUR rivers and when they go bankrupt step in and take them back to public ownership. No cost, no bonds...

[@StoneyGround-zs8oh]

Thanks Richard!

[@GCPCtr]

Wonderful clarity...

[@not_mybrother7705]

Water companies have cooked the books. And ruined the water networks.

[@StanleyRestall]

They could cancel HS2 and use the money saved to buy the water industry. Seriously though, why don't we fund infrastructure e.g. power grid updates or wind farms etc. by issuing bonds ?

[@blackbulldog4897]

Funding is never the issue, the UK gov can never run out of £s. The problems/questions are always: . do we have the resources to do what we want to do? . does the govt have the political will to do it?

[@StanleyRestall]

@@blackbulldog4897 Have you got those reasons in the correct order ?

[@AlfH-qo4uf]

When these industries were first nationalised they were British companies and most shareholders were probably British. Now they are largely foreign owned, some by foreign governments adding to the political considerations for re-nationalisation.

[@Bettys_Eldest]

No one is queuing up to buy Thames Water at the price the balance sheet would suggest it is worth. No reason why the government should pay a premium over the market value.

[@CuriousCrow-mp4cx]

They won't.

[@theotherside8258]

We have to do it in a way that the taxpayer and customer does not pay to put these things right only to see the next tory govt sell it to their friends again to give their other mates tax cuts.

[@custossecretus5737]

The re-nationalisation of essential assets shouldn’t cost a thing, it’s the years of neglect by the the private sector that is going to cost the tax payers a small fortune. Personally I would fine the companies and their shareholders for breech of contract, for not maintaining the system and for polluting the waterways. Though I expect the contract they have allows them to simply convert income into dividends for the shareholders.

[@zlamanit]

Just enforce the existing regulations and private water companies will be especially worthless.

[@theotherside8258]

My worry is Richards mention of a valuation for these companies. When it was done for Northern rock they looked at share values before the crash and I don't think they took debt into account that much.

[@andrewrobinson2565]

This is BRILLIANT news. Thank you 🙏.

[@OldeJanner]

I never agreed with any utilities or coal and steel being privatised, holding the civil service to account is what we needed! And we do even more now!

[@MargaretDeakin-d6m]

My issue with this is that these private water companies have taken loans and created their own bankruptcy. All that money has gone and unrecoverable. It still has to be done though. Nationising is the only way forward to guarantee the health of us all. Clean water is non- negotiable.

[@theotherside8258]

We can no longer guarantee clean water though. The law requires that water tests take place in this country by certified labs but all the UK labs that do this have now shut down. Consequently UK water supplies cannot be now tested for quality. I wonder why the water companies refused to pay the labs enough to keep them open?

[@MargaretDeakin-d6m]

@theotherside8258 another part of the right wing love of deregulation I suppose? The psychopaths have too much control in spite of the devastation their desire for more more costs us. Cameron and Osborne became vastly rich, along with their cronies.

[@ApiaryManager]

Hold on: didn't Thatcher sell all the public utilities, etc off in the 80's? What happened to the money they received for them?

[@cobbler40]

I have a feeling the taxpayer will pick up the debts of the water companies not the private equity companies.

[@keithnewby7095]

Brilliant Richard at his very best

[@kategarland7654]

We must get our rivers back.😥 Thank you

[@not_mybrother7705]

And we have seen the Palestinians innovate simple water purification set ups. No excuses now to not begin simple projects to improve water quality.

[@ricardosmythe2548]

Totally agree. These companies have been mismanaged to such a degree that there virtually worthless

[@stevetetley5479]

We shouldn't have to pay for water

[@paultaylor7082]

Really?

[@alexhubble]

Nationalising a domestic industry need not cost anything at all. Keir Starmer works in the law factory, make a law. With regard to the debt, UKG expects to pay out £89 billion in 2024-2025 in interest payments on issued debt, 7.3% of the budget. Or as the Professor says, nothing at all.

[@trialsted]

When Thames water said they'd go bust if they didn't increase water prices, my only thought was to let them go bust and for the government to buy it for what it's now worth.

[@willieckaslike]

Of course it shouldn't. The privateers have already been paid, by way of the extremely high prices they charged the clients for a very inferior service.

[@AaaaandAction]

Let the water companies go bust and take them over for nothing after the grabby investors have lost their shirts. “The value of your investments can go up and down” - we were endlessly told.

[@philipallveryexcitingconfu8285]

Thanks so much Richard

[@stirkz]

Powerful forces from behind the curtains pull all the strings in this country and they will never take a “haircut” their greed knows no bounds

[@pressssss]

Great points once again, how do we not have more people like you in charge -.-

[@nicholaspostlethwaite9554]

Because he is away with the fairies? Click baiting, may be good for him but no one else.

[@everTriumph]

Having paid good money for shares when the water assets were privatised, I would expect a fair return on the asset. I don't hold many shares, and did not actually agree with privatisation, but I was adamant to keep some of the assets out of greedy corporate hands where its main use is to gamble for gain.

[@colinireson9339]

Thank you Professor for making this subject easy to understand. It was a delight to listen to.

[@Brian_Equator]

Hi. right, so no cash changed hands on the day of conversion to a nationalised company, but the government effectively raised a large debt to pay the shareholders. This debt was called a bond in fact. So in effect the cash payments to shareholders were just spread out over many years. This is still a payment, just not all up front. Did I miss something? Brian

[@Hiprich]

Unfortunately the UK has over subscribed to the US free market neoliberal capitalism. Our biggest downfall Starmer is a conservative in labour clothing. Your analysis is a piece of academic excellence

[@johnwright9372]

It should be done without a penny going to shareholders and creditor banks. Thatcher gave them away cheap debt free.

[@poornoodle9851]

What? Expecting a private business to be subjected to capitalism? No, no corporate socialism is what we were looking for…(irony)

[@simonbamford8441]

Thanks for watering down the elements of the debate!

[@arnobertogna4718]

Absolutely spot on

[@unbreakable7633]

Government will always cost taxpayers money. "The object of all despotism is revenue." -- Thomas Paine

[@johnburrows3385]

Thanks Thatcher.

[@stephenhookings1985]

Are two words that shouldn't be in the same sentence.

[@JohnPark-xf2gq]

Thatcher is not one of those worrying about keeping warm given where she is probably resident having a hell of a time.

[@richardhooper2700]

Thank goodness for your sanity of explanation!

[@not_mybrother7705]

Water companies have ruined the water networks year after year. They should not be paid. The people have water rights and all should be given access to suitable drinking water without the horrific impact on the environment.

[@transplant-f3p]

Communities should own and operate water utilities. The community can apply more pressure to politicians than it can private companies.

[@samkayak8712]

On nationalisation, a charge should be made for the environmental damage that those industries created. An example of this would be Lough Neagh, in Ireland.

[@markbon5146]

Remember he is a lawyer not an accountant . Oh and he is like the rest of them a puppet.

[@MentalLentil-ev9jr]

Who is "he"?

[@stuartburns8657]

Starmer I assume. Ex solicitor

[@AlfH-qo4uf]

Puppet of whom?

It's not just the water, it's electric and everything else!

[@jamessmith5554]

Private or publically owned. The money required to give the uk a dual sewerage system, ie separate surface & foul water drainage, is estimated to cost ~£700bn. Even phased over 70 years it could add 40% annually to people's sewerage bills

[@zippybanana2691]

Thames Water should be forcibly put into Administrative or liquidated with the Government seizing the assets THEN Nationalising it leaving the debt with those that paid themselves large dividends

[@highpath4776]

By the 1970s the Nationalised Industries had a target of making a real return of 5percent on investment. This gave some really odd decisions of not to immediately invest as the payback would take longer than 13months to even register as an income stream.

[@seanatherton4310]

All british land should be nationised, belong to country and all people looked after for best

[@MaggieKendall-i3x]

This is really interesting to know. The water industry is still giving bonuses for failure. If you really believe in capitalism let them go bankrupt.

[@billB101]

You realise what would happen if they did... right?

[@ajc7166]

Water companies--- private company with a monopoly.

[@stevo728822]

The assets are foreign owned and therefore bound by Bilateral Investment Treaties, Trade Agreements and the Human Rights Act. The compensation has to be agreed with the foreign party. It's not like post-WW2 when the assets were British owned.

[@melvyn2946]

we were born on this planet, Why should we have to pay anything

[@rodneycooperLMSCoach]

We are all very good at ignoring or not knowing history.

[@nigeltrivass4128]

Brilliant as always

[@Paul-kp1tu]

All our essential industries here in Australia have been sold to private companies most of the foreign owned or controlled. Many with 99 yr leases on the infrastructure. If nationalisation was to happen here it would cost the government or taxpayer everything we have or would ever get. Bonds would never pay for it. I can’t see any recent governments even trying to do this , paying companies in bonds is still giving them money. The only way is to take it all back by force of law , dissolve those companies control and tell the lawyers to get lost. Australia’s example is a complete disaster which has not enriched the country , has not given the state government the funds they needed and the ongoing costs are escalating. The whole divulgement of state owner assets game was a complete fraud.

[@seanfaherty]

It’s true. Those thieves should have to pay back every cent

[@rodden1953]

Why should any money for water go to share holders when it could be spent on better infrastructure.

[@alastairdonaldson-jj9vh]

I should have words with Mr Starmer. He's in need of some good advice. Best wishes. Al.

[@mkmrys]

US UK becoming one economically

[@fawfulBeans]

It's insane that privatisation is justified entirely on the idea that market competition drives efficiency. Brother, where is the competing water table?

[@Redf322]

Nationalised water and the electricity grid are vital for green energy production, water supply, hydro generation, and flood control.

[@-jz5mm]

Bottom line of ALL other Rights

[@GordonDivine7]

Good plan. What about all the pension funds that have shares in the water companies? I can see the Government being taken for hundreds of billions.

[@CuriousCrow-mp4cx]

The pension funds would be happy to swap those for government bonds, as the latter is a better form of collateral. Water company Shares are illiquid assets, and their value has declined. Pension funds use liability management with bonds already to cover future liabilities. And offering Gilts as collateral for their investing financing will be cheaper than offering shares.

[@mikesmart390]

Let them go bust

[@billB101]

And then what, it doesn't suddenly cancel out the debt.

[@mikesmart390]

@billB101 it should do I lost money when company went bust in shares