Stop voting for fucking Tories

[Slick]

Has anyone been watching the Blair and Brown series on the BBC? I think it has been really good

[fishfoodie]

The sewage in the rivers story is quite funny. Privatisation: we're all in the sh*t.

The script about victorian infrastructure was almost contemptuous in it's implausibility.

The Tories handed the water companies a get of out jail free card; by allowing them to dump, untreated sewage in rivers, without consequences; & a couple of weeks later the water companies are doing exactly that; & using their free pass; rather than stumping up the extra money for Post-Brexit Chemicals.

Why would they pay higher wages for drivers; or increase their chemical storage, or stock on hand; when they can just open the taps, & dump raw sewage into the rivers ?

It's not going down at all well in the 'shires and the more rural and coastal Tory seats. Reckon they've fecked up badly here, bit like the planning cock ups that lost them the by-election, expect U-turn soon. Its a shame the politics of the issue will override the environmental issues but I suppose that's a Brexit benefit when we don't need to adhere to those pesky EU environmental standards?

I also herd* some of the drones parroting how all over Europe, other Countries also had plants pumping sewage into rivers, & thus the sea; but funnily enough; they didn't mention how the EU fines any Countries doing it !

Ireland has been hit regularly with eyewatering fines; because some of out treatment plants are grossly undersized; & the whole water treatment sector has been grossly underfunded for decades.

* seems appropriate, given the intellectual calibre of those involved

[Biffer]

This must be the most politically self-regarding meme ever. Everything good is left-wing; everything bad is right-wing (more properly: all good things come only from the left; if you find anything bad you must understand it to be right-wing).

Over a hundred years ago it was exactly the same, just in relation to the Liberals rather than Labour. As John Buchan put it, about the Liberals in 1911, though he was writing in 1940:

“Now that the once omnipotent Liberal party has so declined, it is hard to realise how formidable it was in 1911—especially in Scotland. Its dogmas were so completely taken for granted that their presentation partook less of argument than of a tribal incantation. Mr. Gladstone had given it an aura of earnest morality, so that its platforms were also pulpits and its harangues had the weight of sermons. Its members seemed to assume that their opponents must be lacking either in morals or mind. The Tories were the "stupid" party; Liberals alone understood and sympathised with the poor; a working man who was not a Liberal was inaccessible to reason, or morally corrupt, or intimidated by laird or employer. I remember a lady summing up the attitude thus: Tories may think they are better born, but Liberals know that they are born better.“

We can only hope that Labour goes the way of the Liberals and that we get an up-to-date and sensible centre left party.

It's funny because it winds up right wingers

Fair. I doubt that on this forum anyone genuinely believes that the mainstream left is inherently morally superior and more principled than the mainstream right. But I’m all for goading.

No.

But what I do believe is the current bunch of posh boys in power would happily cut environmental protection, food safety, health and safety at work, food traceability, consumer protections and anything else that makes it easier for the very rich to make more profit.

[Rinkals]

To be fair; he was facing a much tougher audience, than he usually does.

Quite!

Actually I think he is absolutely bang on correct. Recycling is pretty woeful, we need to stop using plastics.

A bit more balance than this increasingly ridiculous thread

Recycling plastics does not work, says Boris Johnson https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59039155

I would have to agree. (on Johnson's statement: the thread is entirely valid).

I'm not convinced that Boris Johnson is quite the genius that some of my family members feel he is, but I can't feel that he's said anything controversial in suggesting that the use of plastics should be reduced.

[Insane_Homer]

Rise of the #TurdReich

[Paddington Bear]

The sewage thing is interesting on so many levels.

First that the Tories crying murder at being caught by a clever parliamentary game is pretty funny given the amount of times they've tied a measure Labour have to vote against with a bill saying 'terrorists are bad' or 'puppies are cute' then campaigning on it. So as much as the story is pretty much bollocks they can't really complain, nature of the game.

The wider point of blame on private companies also misses the point that the kind of upgrades we're looking at would end up with us all paying higher bills, and that water companies have upgraded the quality of Britain's water from what it was fairly significantly.

[Insane_Homer]

The wider point of blame on private companies also misses the point that the kind of upgrades we're looking at would end up with us all paying higher bills, and that water companies have upgraded the quality of Britain's water from what it was fairly significantly.

Is that the £150Bn-£600Bn that the Cons are touting but no one will produce the calcs, but one of the reason's stated for rejecting the bill was "there is no real data on costs"? It's unsubstantiated bullshit.

Oh no the poor profiteering water companies, will no one think of the poor shareholders and fat cat execs during these difficult times.

or is it just the clearest illustration yet that privatising has wholly and utterly failed due to under investment and profiteering? Surely the shareholders shoulders, not the customers could foot the bill?

Moreover, the strangely recent and imminent problem that if we don't dump if the rivers, it will overflow into the street is a direct result of Brexshit.

Excellent interview @Feargal_Sharkey

Average UK water & sewerage bill £396 per year in England, dividend paid to shareholders of water companies is over £2 billion per year: around £85 per English household. So over 21% of an English water bill goes to shareholders.

[Paddington Bear]

Raw sewage has been being dumped into the rivers round the Chilterns for as long as I can remember, most of that time we were in the EU. Of course pre-privatisation rivers like the Thames and the Mersey were national disgraces. It's shit (literally) but the alternative is an enormous capital expenditure with probably less return than other green investments. I have no love for private water but I think the evidence that it's profiteering that causes this is thin on the ground.

[Insane_Homer]

Raw sewage has been being dumped into the rivers round the Chilterns for as long as I can remember, most of that time we were in the EU.

treated v untreated. There was dispensation for exceptional cirumstances when sewage can be dumped during heavy rainfall. You are correct, that this was been roundly exploited by the water companies.

During heavy rainfall the capacity of these pipes can be exceeded, which means possible inundation of sewage works and the potential to back up and flood peoples’ homes, roads and open spaces, unless it is allowed to spill elsewhere. Combined sewer overflows (CSOs) were developed as overflow valves to reduce the risk of sewage backing up during heavy rainfall.

[Paddington Bear]

Yeah as I understand it this is when the vast majority of dumping happens, for obvious reasons. Certainly my local river is not the place to be after heavy rainfall, outrageous but we shouldn't pretend that this is new.

[Insane_Homer]

Yeah as I understand it this is when the vast majority of dumping happens, for obvious reasons. Certainly my local river is not the place to be after heavy rainfall, outrageous but we shouldn't pretend that this is new.

What's new is that they can now dump untreated sewage whenever they want, without being fined, like Southern Water (£90 million) were very recently.

Southern Water has been fined a record £90m for deliberately dumping billions of litres of raw sewage into protected seas over several years for its own financial gain.

The Chief Exec and CFO were rewarded with healthy bonus' for this.

[I like neeps]

Raw sewage has been being dumped into the rivers round the Chilterns for as long as I can remember, most of that time we were in the EU. Of course pre-privatisation rivers like the Thames and the Mersey were national disgraces. It's shit (literally) but the alternative is an enormous capital expenditure with probably less return than other green investments. I have no love for private water but I think the evidence that it's profiteering that causes this is thin on the ground.

The problem seems to be it's harder to get treatment chemicals to be fair. The water privatisation is a total sham as the FT explains here:

https://www.ft.com/content/2beee56a-961 ... 88e51488a0

Tldr - the regulator sets the prices, customers are decided by geography, 3 of 8 of them are publicly listed the other 5 are owned by PE investors who get returns of 16-19% which is double what is to be expected of similar infrastructure assets. Those of us like myself who chose (oh no wait, we don't get to chose in this capitalist utopoia) Thames Water have paid off over 2bn on of the 2.6bn debt Macquarie took on to buy it anyway.

A story of the failures of privatisation. If Keir Starmer had a political bone in his body he'd be singing from the rooftops you're paying overseas investors through the nose to have literal sh*t in your rivers. But he won't because he's metaphorically sh*t in the river.

[Paddington Bear]

Of course, if we reverse privatisation we're reliant on the state running it better, and their record on that is... mixed.

[SaintK]

Raw sewage has been being dumped into the rivers round the Chilterns for as long as I can remember, most of that time we were in the EU. Of course pre-privatisation rivers like the Thames and the Mersey were national disgraces. It's shit (literally) but the alternative is an enormous capital expenditure with probably less return than other green investments. I have no love for private water but I think the evidence that it's profiteering that causes this is thin on the ground.

The problem seems to be it's harder to get treatment chemicals to be fair. The water privatisation is a total sham as the FT explains here:

https://www.ft.com/content/2beee56a-961 ... 88e51488a0

Tldr - the regulator sets the prices, customers are decided by geography, 3 of 8 of them are publicly listed the other 5 are owned by PE investors who get returns of 16-19% which is double what is to be expected of similar infrastructure assets. Those of us like myself who chose (oh no wait, we don't get to chose in this capitalist utopoia) Thames Water have paid off over 2bn on of the 2.6bn debt Macquarie took on to buy it anyway.

A story of the failures of privatisation. If Keir Starmer had a political bone in his body he'd be singing from the rooftops you're paying overseas investors through the nose to have literal sh*t in your rivers. But he won't because he's metaphorically sh*t in the river.

Yep. £57 billion of dividends have been paid out by these jokers in the past 20 years. Shame some it wasn't used on updating infrastructure

[Tichtheid]

Of course, if we reverse privatisation we're reliant on the state running it better, and their record on that is... mixed.

Because I haven't Goggled before posting I'm opening myself up to be shot down, but iirc water is publicly owned in Scotland and has a much better record of fixing and preventing leaks.

We do have a lot of state owned companies in the UK, especially in transport, the French, German and Italian states are parent company owners of private providers here.

[Paddington Bear]

Of course, if we reverse privatisation we're reliant on the state running it better, and their record on that is... mixed.

Because I haven't Goggled before posting I'm opening myself up to be shot down, but iirc water is publicly owned in Scotland and has a much better record of fixing and preventing leaks.

We do have a lot of state owned companies in the UK, especially in transport, the French, German and Italian states are parent company owners of private providers here.

Transport an excellent example though of where the railways have had significantly higher investment and ridership since privatisation, for all it's issues. Not going out to bat for private equity, just suggesting that State services reliant on the budget each year are not a magic bullet and have often underperformed.

[I like neeps]

Of course, if we reverse privatisation we're reliant on the state running it better, and their record on that is... mixed.

But we get none of the benefits of privatisation if we're in the business of giving out monopolies? I think the argument is okay if I can happily go to another supplier if mine are too expensive/pumping poo into my local rivers or another competitor firm were investing in a lot of good infrastructure or literally any argument of why privatisation is better. But I can't. I'm stuck with one supplier who is owned by an Australian investment bank and my bills are going up to fatten those cats unless I move house and then are stuck with another PE investment.

In any case, you can say mixed. Scotland and NI have public ownership of water and both have cheaper bills and improved infrastructure: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opende ... s-private/

Water privatisation has been an expensive joke.

[robmatic]

Of course, if we reverse privatisation we're reliant on the state running it better, and their record on that is... mixed.

I'm no fan of the state running everything but the way we have carried out privatisation in the UK is just really stupid. The water companies are private monopolies with minimal incentive to invest in infrastructure or provide good service.

[Insane_Homer]

They, should at the very least, be very well regulated and not left to self regulate with a toothless and complicit Ofwat.

[SaintK]

It's that company Randox again!!!

The Conservative MP Owen Paterson faces a 30-day suspension from the House of Commons for an “egregious” breach of lobbying rules, raising the possibility he could lose his seat if enough constituents trigger a byelection.

The MP for North Shropshire, a former cabinet minister, was found by the Commons commissioner for standards, Kathryn Stone, to have breached paid advocacy rules, after it was discovered he had worked as a consultant to Randox, a clinical diagnostics company, since August 2015. It was also discovered he was a paid consultant to Lynn’s Country Foods, a processor and distributor of meat products since December 2016.

In a ruling handed down on Tuesday, the commissioner found he made three approaches to the Food Standards Agency relating to Randox and the testing of antibiotics in milk; seven approaches to the same agency relating to Lynn’s Country Foods; and four approaches to ministers at the Department for International Development relating to Randox and blood testing technology

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2 ... ng-rules

[dpedin]

Of course, if we reverse privatisation we're reliant on the state running it better, and their record on that is... mixed.

Because I haven't Goggled before posting I'm opening myself up to be shot down, but iirc water is publicly owned in Scotland and has a much better record of fixing and preventing leaks.

We do have a lot of state owned companies in the UK, especially in transport, the French, German and Italian states are parent company owners of private providers here.

Transport an excellent example though of where the railways have had significantly higher investment and ridership since privatisation, for all it's issues. Not going out to bat for private equity, just suggesting that State services reliant on the budget each year are not a magic bullet and have often underperformed.

It is not private equity in rail - it is strategic investment by EU state owned companies that see the UK as a cash cow benefiting from the highest rail ticket costs in Europe. We are merely subsidising rail travel in the European countries! Ditto many other 'privatised' utilities. Over 70% of our water companies is owned by overseas banks, pension funds, countries, etc. EDF, Eon, Npower, are either state owned or have very close links with their own Govs. Our lightly regulated and managed utilities are essentially a fantastic investment and means of getting huge returns from the UK pop often in excess of 10-15% whilst failing to invest for the longer term. Anyone who thinks this form of 'privatisation' is good for any essential utility sector is barking mad.

[Paddington Bear]

The rail issue is much more complex than is often laid out - essentially the government has contracted out the running of services in exchange for a c.3% fee above costs. Fares is again more complex and the issue is more the system is confusing than all rail travel is really expensive. Moreover, the railways are clearly in better shape than they were under British Rail, as evidenced by ridership, safety and punctuality.

I don't love any of this and sentimentally I like British Rail and other State firms, I'm just pointing out there is a not zero chance of State owned firms cocking up delivery, and particularly in rail raising costs well above the 3% taken by the contractors.

[Insane_Homer]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59049343

https://committees.parliament.uk/commit ... terson-mp/

The Committee found that Mr Paterson repeatedly used his position as a Member to promote the companies by whom he was paid, and therefore breached paragraph 11 of the 2015 MP’s Code of Conduct.

...The Committee agreed with the Commissioner that Mr Paterson's breaches of the paid advocacy rule are of sufficient seriousness also to have caused "significant damage to the reputation and integrity of the House of Commons as a whole", and therefore also conclude that Mr Paterson breached paragraph 16 of the 2015 Code of Conduct.

...In line with previous cases of a similar severity, the Committee recommends that Mr Paterson be suspended from the service of the House for 30 sitting days.

[Dinsdale Piranha]

The rail issue is much more complex than is often laid out - essentially the government has contracted out the running of services in exchange for a c.3% fee above costs. Fares is again more complex and the issue is more the system is confusing than all rail travel is really expensive. Moreover, the railways are clearly in better shape than they were under British Rail, as evidenced by ridership, safety and punctuality.

I don't love any of this and sentimentally I like British Rail and other State firms, I'm just pointing out there is a not zero chance of State owned firms cocking up delivery, and particularly in rail raising costs well above the 3% taken by the contractors.

Private monopolies are a really bad idea (public monopolies can be pretty bad as well) Handing a monopoly to a company is asking for them to raise prices and lower investment. Was it Yorkshire water who decided not to fix leaks in the pipes and then got caught out in a drought?

The other side of that is when governments run out of money, long term investment is the first thing that gets canned. This is why the railways were in such bad shape after 30+ years of underinvestment. I remember seeing a programme - panorama or similar - where they were replacing every 3rd rotten wooden sleeper on sections of track because they didn't have the money to replace them all.

We are overpaying for upgrading railways currently but that's less bad than not spending at all which was what happened previously.

[Paddington Bear]

The rail issue is much more complex than is often laid out - essentially the government has contracted out the running of services in exchange for a c.3% fee above costs. Fares is again more complex and the issue is more the system is confusing than all rail travel is really expensive. Moreover, the railways are clearly in better shape than they were under British Rail, as evidenced by ridership, safety and punctuality.

I don't love any of this and sentimentally I like British Rail and other State firms, I'm just pointing out there is a not zero chance of State owned firms cocking up delivery, and particularly in rail raising costs well above the 3% taken by the contractors.

Private monopolies are a really bad idea (public monopolies can be pretty bad as well) Handing a monopoly to a company is asking for them to raise prices and lower investment. Was it Yorkshire water who decided not to fix leaks in the pipes and then got caught out in a drought?

The other side of that is when governments run out of money, long term investment is the first thing that gets canned. This is why the railways were in such bad shape after 30+ years of underinvestment. I remember seeing a programme - panorama or similar - where they were replacing every 3rd rotten wooden sleeper on sections of track because they didn't have the money to replace them all.

We are overpaying for upgrading railways currently but that's less bad than not spending at all which was what happened previously.

Yeah basically my point. I don't love the current set ups but realise that the alternatives are not perfect. Sticking with rail I think there was very little prospect of the West Coast upgrades, refurbishment of the London terminals and the new Azumas on the ECML/GWR for example happening if it was at the mercy of the Treasury each year.
I have very little confidence that any Chancellor of any party is going to spend a lot of money on sewers unless there's a chance of sewer explosions like when Homer Simpson took over bin collections in Springfield.

[SaintK]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59049343

https://committees.parliament.uk/commit ... terson-mp/

The Committee found that Mr Paterson repeatedly used his position as a Member to promote the companies by whom he was paid, and therefore breached paragraph 11 of the 2015 MP’s Code of Conduct.

...The Committee agreed with the Commissioner that Mr Paterson's breaches of the paid advocacy rule are of sufficient seriousness also to have caused "significant damage to the reputation and integrity of the House of Commons as a whole", and therefore also conclude that Mr Paterson breached paragraph 16 of the 2015 Code of Conduct.

...In line with previous cases of a similar severity, the Committee recommends that Mr Paterson be suspended from the service of the House for 30 sitting days.

Hmmm!

Paterson claimed the investigation by Kathryn Stone, the parliamentary standards commissioner, did “not comply with natural justice” and had played a “major role” in the death of his wife, Rose, who took her own life in June 2020.

[Insane_Homer]

Hmmm!

Paterson claimed the investigation by Kathryn Stone, the parliamentary standards commissioner, did “not comply with natural justice” and had played a “major role” in the death of his wife, Rose, who took her own life in June 2020.

Petulant twaddle, hiding behind the death of his wife is quite frankly despicable.

The Committee’s findings
The Committee noted at the beginning of its report that it was “painfully conscious that Mr Paterson lost his wife in tragic circumstances in June 2020; and we wish to express our deepest sympathy to him for his loss. This last year must have been very distressing for him and we have taken these circumstances fully into account in considering Mr Paterson’s conduct during the period of the investigation”, and recorded that it had “striven to ensure that Mr Paterson has had every opportunity to represent himself as fully as possible before the Committee, in person and in writing. We have extended deadlines at his request and we have accepted his request to be accompanied by his legal advisers and to make a formal opening statement to us”. However, the Committee noted that the allegations against Mr Paterson, which are the subject of the Commissioner’s memorandum, relate to his conduct between October 2016 and February 2020, before Mrs Paterson’s death.

[SaintK]

Hmmm!

Paterson claimed the investigation by Kathryn Stone, the parliamentary standards commissioner, did “not comply with natural justice” and had played a “major role” in the death of his wife, Rose, who took her own life in June 2020.

Petulant twaddle, hiding behind the death of his wife is quite frankly despicable.

The Committee’s findings
The Committee noted at the beginning of its report that it was “painfully conscious that Mr Paterson lost his wife in tragic circumstances in June 2020; and we wish to express our deepest sympathy to him for his loss. This last year must have been very distressing for him and we have taken these circumstances fully into account in considering Mr Paterson’s conduct during the period of the investigation”, and recorded that it had “striven to ensure that Mr Paterson has had every opportunity to represent himself as fully as possible before the Committee, in person and in writing. We have extended deadlines at his request and we have accepted his request to be accompanied by his legal advisers and to make a formal opening statement to us”. However, the Committee noted that the allegations against Mr Paterson, which are the subject of the Commissioner’s memorandum, relate to his conduct between October 2016 and February 2020, before Mrs Paterson’s death.

Quite
Randox and the Pattersons appear to be inextricably linked. He was paid to lobby for them and she was a leading steward of the Jockey Club and director of Aintree Racecourse where Randox is the headline sponsor of the Grand National.

[C T]

Hmmm!

Petulant twaddle, hiding behind the death of his wife is quite frankly despicable.

The Committee’s findings
The Committee noted at the beginning of its report that it was “painfully conscious that Mr Paterson lost his wife in tragic circumstances in June 2020; and we wish to express our deepest sympathy to him for his loss. This last year must have been very distressing for him and we have taken these circumstances fully into account in considering Mr Paterson’s conduct during the period of the investigation”, and recorded that it had “striven to ensure that Mr Paterson has had every opportunity to represent himself as fully as possible before the Committee, in person and in writing. We have extended deadlines at his request and we have accepted his request to be accompanied by his legal advisers and to make a formal opening statement to us”. However, the Committee noted that the allegations against Mr Paterson, which are the subject of the Commissioner’s memorandum, relate to his conduct between October 2016 and February 2020, before Mrs Paterson’s death.

Quite
Randox and the Pattersons appear to be inextricably linked. He was paid to lobby for them and she was a leading steward of the Jockey Club and director of Aintree Racecourse where Randox is the headline sponsor of the Grand National.

If I'm reading things correctly he's saying that it was the investigation that contributed to his wife's suicide. Of course if he hadn't repeatedly used his position as an MP to benefit two companies that paid him as a consultant then there wouldn't have been an investigation.

[Dinsdale Piranha]

The rail issue is much more complex than is often laid out - essentially the government has contracted out the running of services in exchange for a c.3% fee above costs. Fares is again more complex and the issue is more the system is confusing than all rail travel is really expensive. Moreover, the railways are clearly in better shape than they were under British Rail, as evidenced by ridership, safety and punctuality.

I don't love any of this and sentimentally I like British Rail and other State firms, I'm just pointing out there is a not zero chance of State owned firms cocking up delivery, and particularly in rail raising costs well above the 3% taken by the contractors.

Private monopolies are a really bad idea (public monopolies can be pretty bad as well) Handing a monopoly to a company is asking for them to raise prices and lower investment. Was it Yorkshire water who decided not to fix leaks in the pipes and then got caught out in a drought?

The other side of that is when governments run out of money, long term investment is the first thing that gets canned. This is why the railways were in such bad shape after 30+ years of underinvestment. I remember seeing a programme - panorama or similar - where they were replacing every 3rd rotten wooden sleeper on sections of track because they didn't have the money to replace them all.

We are overpaying for upgrading railways currently but that's less bad than not spending at all which was what happened previously.

Yeah basically my point. I don't love the current set ups but realise that the alternatives are not perfect. Sticking with rail I think there was very little prospect of the West Coast upgrades, refurbishment of the London terminals and the new Azumas on the ECML/GWR for example happening if it was at the mercy of the Treasury each year.
I have very little confidence that any Chancellor of any party is going to spend a lot of money on sewers unless there's a chance of sewer explosions like when Homer Simpson took over bin collections in Springfield.

https://www.tideway.london/

[dpedin]

Petulant twaddle, hiding behind the death of his wife is quite frankly despicable.

Quite
Randox and the Pattersons appear to be inextricably linked. He was paid to lobby for them and she was a leading steward of the Jockey Club and director of Aintree Racecourse where Randox is the headline sponsor of the Grand National.

If I'm reading things correctly he's saying that it was the investigation that contributed to his wife's suicide. Of course if he hadn't repeatedly used his position as an MP to benefit two companies that paid him as a consultant then there wouldn't have been an investigation.

... and mate of Dido Harding who was also a Steward at the Jockey Club and Nick Hancock who so happens to be MP for Newmarket?

[dpedin]

The rail issue is much more complex than is often laid out - essentially the government has contracted out the running of services in exchange for a c.3% fee above costs. Fares is again more complex and the issue is more the system is confusing than all rail travel is really expensive. Moreover, the railways are clearly in better shape than they were under British Rail, as evidenced by ridership, safety and punctuality.

I don't love any of this and sentimentally I like British Rail and other State firms, I'm just pointing out there is a not zero chance of State owned firms cocking up delivery, and particularly in rail raising costs well above the 3% taken by the contractors.

Private monopolies are a really bad idea (public monopolies can be pretty bad as well) Handing a monopoly to a company is asking for them to raise prices and lower investment. Was it Yorkshire water who decided not to fix leaks in the pipes and then got caught out in a drought?

The other side of that is when governments run out of money, long term investment is the first thing that gets canned. This is why the railways were in such bad shape after 30+ years of underinvestment. I remember seeing a programme - panorama or similar - where they were replacing every 3rd rotten wooden sleeper on sections of track because they didn't have the money to replace them all.

We are overpaying for upgrading railways currently but that's less bad than not spending at all which was what happened previously.

Yeah basically my point. I don't love the current set ups but realise that the alternatives are not perfect. Sticking with rail I think there was very little prospect of the West Coast upgrades, refurbishment of the London terminals and the new Azumas on the ECML/GWR for example happening if it was at the mercy of the Treasury each year.
I have very little confidence that any Chancellor of any party is going to spend a lot of money on sewers unless there's a chance of sewer explosions like when Homer Simpson took over bin collections in Springfield.

UK Gov funded the East Coast mainline and Kings Cross upgrade!

[Paddington Bear]

Private monopolies are a really bad idea (public monopolies can be pretty bad as well) Handing a monopoly to a company is asking for them to raise prices and lower investment. Was it Yorkshire water who decided not to fix leaks in the pipes and then got caught out in a drought?

The other side of that is when governments run out of money, long term investment is the first thing that gets canned. This is why the railways were in such bad shape after 30+ years of underinvestment. I remember seeing a programme - panorama or similar - where they were replacing every 3rd rotten wooden sleeper on sections of track because they didn't have the money to replace them all.

We are overpaying for upgrading railways currently but that's less bad than not spending at all which was what happened previously.

Yeah basically my point. I don't love the current set ups but realise that the alternatives are not perfect. Sticking with rail I think there was very little prospect of the West Coast upgrades, refurbishment of the London terminals and the new Azumas on the ECML/GWR for example happening if it was at the mercy of the Treasury each year.
I have very little confidence that any Chancellor of any party is going to spend a lot of money on sewers unless there's a chance of sewer explosions like when Homer Simpson took over bin collections in Springfield.

UK Gov funded the East Coast mainline and Kings Cross upgrade!

Yes, because they were contractually obliged to, that's my point.

[I like neeps]

Government uturning on the sewage discharge bill. The numbers of 150bn - 650bn cost were also entirely made up. Oh well, all's well that ends well. Even though a good amount of sewage will still reach the rivers.

[dpedin]

Government uturning on the sewage discharge bill. The numbers of 150bn - 650bn cost were also entirely made up. Oh well, all's well that ends well. Even though a good amount of sewage will still reach the rivers.

As predicted - that was quick .... possibly the quickest u-turn yet?

[fishfoodie]

Government uturning on the sewage discharge bill. The numbers of 150bn - 650bn cost were also entirely made up. Oh well, all's well that ends well. Even though a good amount of sewage will still reach the rivers.

All they're putting in is a requirement for a; "progressive reduction"; which is not just meaningless; but an invitation to maximize the amount of shit the flush into rivers this year; so that when the legislation does get enacted; then they can still dump five times more that they would in any normal year; & still show that "progressive reduction".

[fishfoodie]

In other news; to let you know that you aren't fit to lick the boots of Tory MPs

[Openside]

To be fair; he was facing a much tougher audience, than he usually does.

Quite!

Actually I think he is absolutely bang on correct. Recycling is pretty woeful, we need to stop using plastics.

A bit more balance than this increasingly ridiculous thread

Recycling plastics does not work, says Boris Johnson https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59039155

Agreed, I couldn’t understand why he was pilloried for that statement. It’s blindingly obvious.

[Glaston]

Quite!

Actually I think he is absolutely bang on correct. Recycling is pretty woeful, we need to stop using plastics.

A bit more balance than this increasingly ridiculous thread

Recycling plastics does not work, says Boris Johnson https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59039155

Agreed, I couldn’t understand why he was pilloried for that statement. It’s blindingly obvious.

To recycle better, I am now supplied with 3 Plastic containers .
My weekly recycling used to always fit into 1 bin .
This week: bin a) = 1 tin can and a plastic milk container, bin b) =1bottle and a jam jar. bin c) = remains of a cardboard box and a loo roll centre.
Bin b has gone missing
Luckily I dont have one of the wheelie bins for rubbish .


Re rivers and sewage
Arent UK rivers the cleanest they have been for a century? The return of the odd salmon to the Thames and other stuff.
Not that I think the Water companies should be allowed to discharge into water courses/sea on a regular bsis

[Sandstorm]

Quite!

Actually I think he is absolutely bang on correct. Recycling is pretty woeful, we need to stop using plastics.

A bit more balance than this increasingly ridiculous thread

Recycling plastics does not work, says Boris Johnson https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59039155

Agreed, I couldn’t understand why he was pilloried for that statement. It’s blindingly obvious.

Because he should have told the kids to do both: use less plastic AND recycle what you are forced to use. D’uh.