Water Charges to ramp up, Thames Water London Super Sewer will cost us too Options

[gel]

Unfortunately this price hike will hit us out in Thames Valley too:

'Water bills to rise by £80 as London super sewer approved
Thames Water wins planning consent for 15-mile tunnel beneath London, adding £80 a year eventually to customer bills '

Good news is in first 5 years will only be a £40 hike

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environme...-approved.htmlp

[motormad]

Wonderful. As if times weren't hard enough for many people.

[Turin Machine]

Wont affect me, I only drink beer!

[JeffG]

Wont affect me, I only drink beer!

... and never take a shower, presumably.

[Exhausted]

I draw my water from a well and pee up the tree in the garden.

[MontyPython]

I draw my water from a well and pee up the tree in the garden.

....and no doubt sit in the middle of the road licking your b*ll*cks!

[x2lls]

Just think yourselves lucky that you have the ability to whinge about the cost of water. At least you have easy access to it.

[Andy Capp]

Just think yourselves lucky that you have the ability to whinge about the cost of water. At least you have easy access to it.

They'll be on about poor phone signals next!

[x2lls]

They'll be on about poor phone signals next!

[On the edge]

Odd isn't it, I've never known Tesco or Sainsbury jacking up their prices so they can replace their lorry fleet or build new shops! I thought the whole idea of privatisation was to get market dynamics into public services, oh silly me, it was really just another wheeze to line foreign bankers pockets.

[MontyPython]

Odd isn't it, I've never known Tesco or Sainsbury jacking up their prices so they can replace their lorry fleet or build new shops! I thought the whole idea of privatisation was to get market dynamics into public services, oh silly me, it was really just another wheeze to line foreign bankers pockets.

The problem with water privatisation was it brought no competition.

[On the edge]

The problem with water privatisation was it brought no competition.

Quite so. The only valid reason to privatise was to inject private sector finance to maintain the asset base - which is why screwing the customers to do just that is frankly immoral.

[Nothing Much]

Quite so OTE. The Electricity business was fairly happily running at a profit for users...perhaps more than 23 of them.
Mrs NM did the the restructuring as a company secretary...(it was a big committee.With loads of consultants at mega£££)

Oddly enough as I potter about I come across old buildings that are marked with carved stone.
LBI Elecricity Company.
And the big new deal is that Islington is about to run a new power station.
Bunhill Fields. No. not the methodist/dissenters graveyard.. Last home of Bunyon,Pepys & Defoe.
Libraries are closing...Burn the books.
ce

[Biker1]

The problem with water privatisation was it brought no competition.

Like FGW eh OTE?

[Simon Kirby]

The issue at the heart of the OP is that big infrastructure costs a lot of money. If we're not all to drown in our own filth then Thames Water need to build us a big new sewer, and we need to pay for that in our water bills. I don't have much sympathy with the complaint.

[Simon Kirby]

Odd isn't it, I've never known Tesco or Sainsbury jacking up their prices so they can replace their lorry fleet or build new shops! I thought the whole idea of privatisation was to get market dynamics into public services, oh silly me, it was really just another wheeze to line foreign bankers pockets.

I would argue that Tesco and Sainsbury don't need to jack up their prices because their prices are already at a level that enables the companies to re-invest and expend. Bazalgette was a Victorian, and to some degree the industry has been under-invested ever since, so we're just seeing the pigeons coming home to roost.

[On the edge]

I would argue that Tesco and Sainsbury don't need to jack up their prices because their prices are already at a level that enables the companies to re-invest and expend. Bazalgette was a Victorian, and to some degree the industry has been under-invested ever since, so we're just seeing the pigeons coming home to roost.

That could be a credible reason but for history. The older amongst us, particularly those cursed with a long memory might well recall past innovative moves in this industry. For instance, the water charges were separated out of rates to make good years of under investment meant the water boards needed control of their own finances. Then, the industry was privatised, because it needed an injection of public funds to make up for years of under investment. Next, Thames Water was taken over by a European multi utility, said at the time to be a blessing, because it needed an injection of funds to make up for years of under investment......isn't it time for another excuse?

[Rachel]

The issue at the heart of the OP is that big infrastructure costs a lot of money. If we're not all to drown in our own filth then Thames Water need to build us a big new sewer, and we need to pay for that in our water bills. I don't have much sympathy with the complaint.

Thames Water failled to stop sewage from it's sewers overspilling in Lambourn into the River Lambourn for weeks & months for the last two winters. I doubt that the 'sewer lining' work completed recently will prevent that, despite their assurances & the money they've poured into it/we've paid for. I doubt also that anyone who had to wade through that sewage, got splashed by it or even watched as human waste floated down the river will be thrilled to pay for London's sewers...charity begins at home & all that.

[On the edge]

Thames Water failled to stop sewage from it's sewers overspilling in Lambourn into the River Lambourn for weeks & months for the last two winters. I doubt that the 'sewer lining' work completed recently will prevent that, despite their assurances & the money they've poured into it/we've paid for. I doubt also that anyone who had to wade through that sewage, got splashed by it or even watched as human waste floated down the river will be thrilled to pay for London's sewers...charity begins at home & all that.

With you on that! I loved the announcement they made to one of the meetings held about the floods in the country districts, to the effect that they'd have to get regulatory permission to spend the money. Unbelievable!

[Biker1]

Thames Water failled to stop sewage from it's sewers overspilling in Lambourn into the River Lambourn for weeks & months for the last two winters. I doubt that the 'sewer lining' work completed recently will prevent that, despite their assurances & the money they've poured into it/we've paid for. I doubt also that anyone who had to wade through that sewage, got splashed by it or even watched as human waste floated down the river will be thrilled to pay for London's sewers...charity begins at home & all that.

Raw sewage runs out in the middle of Station Road too all over the station platform!