Thames Water begging bowl out again., Privatisation; that was a success wasn't it! Options

[On the edge]

As well as the previously agreed well above inflation increase, looks as if Thames Water want us to pay an additional £29 per head to cover 'exceptional costs'. Looks as if the London sewerage network refurbishment is beyond their capability. They are also claiming debt collection is difficult in the South East because of the transient nature of the population.

Ho hum. Wasn't privatisation supposed to stop all of this and give us lower prices? Wasn't the capital needed for investments in infrastructure supposed to be coming from the City? Wasn't the organisation supposed to adopt commercial customer practices, i.e. collecting debt like everty other commercial organisation?

Privatisation has brought other massive benefits though. Huge profits for overseas bankers, Massive salaries for senior executives and a whole unstressed job creation operation called the Regulator.

Isn't it about time we called a halt to this unmanageable shambles? I seem to remember, many years ago, we were proud of our water utility. Clean fresh water delivered without fuss or bother to our homes and the dirty stuff taken away. Today, even that's questionable - see some of the other recent threads on this forum.

Thames Water - we're taking the p***.

[Andy Capp]

I understand the biggest problem faced and facing water utilities is ageing pipe work.

[On the edge]

I understand the biggest problem faced and facing water utilities is ageing pipe work.

Umm, I live in an ageing home, so we put a bit by for maintenance and repairs. Come to think of it, I work for an organisation which has to renew its productive assets periodically who again make appropriate provision; which is necessarily a cost to the business. We, unlike monopoly Thames Water, operate in a competitive market.

Are we really expected to believe that the very expensive senior executives at Thames Water thought that they'd simply be able to sweat the assets they are supposed to operate for ever, without cost? If so, they don't deserve their salary and we deserve better.

[Berkshirelad]

Part of the problem with debt collection for the water industry is that they cannot legally remove the product if you don't pay!

[Andy Capp]

Umm, I live in an ageing home, so we put a bit by for maintenance and repairs. Come to think of it, I work for an organisation which has to renew its productive assets periodically who again make appropriate provision; which is necessarily a cost to the business. We, unlike monopoly Thames Water, operate in a competitive market.

The chances are then that TW should have been charging us more.

Are we really expected to believe that the very expensive senior executives at Thames Water thought that they'd simply be able to sweat the assets they are supposed to operate for ever, without cost? If so, they don't deserve their salary and we deserve better.

How many people are there experienced with specialist Victorian pipe work and it's MTBF?

I don't like the costs either, but this is the capitalist society we have voted for.

[Claude]

Thames Water want us to pay an additional £29 per head to cover 'exceptional costs'.

Per household, is what I read.

[On the edge]

1. Ironic isn't it, even our local council knows how to collect debts when you 'can't cut off supplies'. Have we heard them saying they debt collection in such circumstances is a big issue? (Bet we will now of course!!)

2. I can't see why Thames Water would charge us more for capital improvements. If that's the case, why didn't Tesco put up its prices when relocated to the retail park? The cost of their new premises particularly with the bigger stock holding and expansion of refrigeration plant would have been huge!

3. With regard to 'victorian' engineering knowledge and its failure rate, frankly any competent newly qualified civil engineer would be able to make a decent assessment. Even suggesting that this is 'too hard' calls into question the competence of that profession. So, to find competent consulting engineers, a Google search perhaps?

4. This isn't the capitalist society we voted for. Thames Water are a monopoly, that means they can act in exactly the same way as the old socialist way - no competition, no choice, consequently no innovation and high 'take it or leave it' pricing. Look up Adam Smith or any basic economics text book. The Thatcher Government should have privatised AND introduced competition.

Finally, yes it is per household. £29 isn't much when you don't need Food Banks and aren't on a zero hours contract!

[Biker1]

Then of course there's this although DEFRA have denied it there's no smoke without fire!

[Andy Capp]

2. I can't see why Thames Water would charge us more for capital improvements. If that's the case, why didn't Tesco put up its prices when relocated to the retail park? The cost of their new premises particularly with the bigger stock holding and expansion of refrigeration plant would have been huge!

Because they moved to increase their sales? I'm not sure replacing ageing pipe work to maintain the same customer base is the same thing as what Tesco did.

3. With regard to 'victorian' engineering knowledge and its failure rate, frankly any competent newly qualified civil engineer would be able to make a decent assessment.

Would they? A bit difficult to draw on experience I would have thought.

Even suggesting that this is 'too hard' calls into question the competence of that profession. So, to find competent consulting engineers, a Google search perhaps?

I am sure that when the sell-off occurred, budgets were in place to assume a certain deterioration rate, but it can only be an estimate against the economic climate at the time. I'm fairly sure the government at the time was eager to get the impending repair bill off its books too.

4. This isn't the capitalist society we voted for. Thames Water are a monopoly, that means they can act in exactly the same way as the old socialist way - no competition, no choice, consequently no innovation and high 'take it or leave it' pricing. Look up Adam Smith or any basic economics text book. The Thatcher Government should have privatised AND introduced competition.

Bear in mind, TW have the second lowest tariffs of the utilities, but I will agree, the Tory government have largely made an 'abortion' of privatisation. I can't wait for the post to be sold off⸮

[On the edge]

Because they moved to increase their sales? I'm not sure replacing ageing pipe work to maintain the same customer base is the same thing as what Tesco did.

Arguably same principle, replacing 'time expired shops' with new ones. Similarly, they (as do most other organisations) have a rolling replacement / maintenance plan. The gas people have just finished replacing the victorian gas mains in Newbury and many other towns but they haven't come begging for an additional handout.


Would they? A bit difficult to draw on experience I would have thought.

Of course, experience can't be taught, but presumably Thames Water have engineering records and plans, if they don't they are the only network utility who are so deficient.


I am sure that when the sell-off occurred, budgets were in place to assume a certain deterioration rate, but it can only be an estimate against the economic climate at the time. I'm fairly sure the government at the time was eager to get the impending repair bill off its books too.

Yes there were. These were calculated under Stock Exchange rules and for all the 'asset rich' privatisations, this was an onerous task. Everything was based on conservative estimates and double checked by Consulting Engineers and Auditors. If anything, the effect was to damp the sale price. Having worked in one of the 'verification' projects, albeit not with water, I can confirm the inspection was onerous to say the least. (Good for a lot of overtime though!!)


Bear in mind, TW have the second lowest tariffs of the utilities, but I will agree, the Tory government have largely made an 'abortion' of privatisation. I can't wait for the post to be sold off

Couldn't agree more! And that's as someone who thought it was all the best idea since sliced bread. Should have known
better
⸮

[Andy Capp]

Never mind, I'm sure Ofwat will protect us⸮

[On the edge]

Never mind, I'm sure Ofwat will protect us⸮

Don't get me started on them....

[user23]

That's leaving things to market forces for you.

[Simon Kirby]

That's leaving things to market forces for you.

There aren't any market forces at play here are there? Don't the water companies have an effective monopoly? I don't like how Thames Water operate, but the state has also run pi55-poor utilities and services, so I don't see what the the answer is.

Actually I do see what the answer is - it's getting the state to operate efficiently and effectively like a professional business, but that has been problematic.

[Berkshirelad]

1. Ironic isn't it, even our local council knows how to collect debts when you 'can't cut off supplies'. Have we heard them saying they debt collection in such circumstances is a big issue? (Bet we will now of course!!)

The Council have the ultimate sanction of gaol.

Council Tax debt is collected via Magistrates' Courts rather than County Courts.

[On the edge]

That's leaving things to market forces for you.

Got to have a market for forces to work. Swap your Das Capital for the Wealth of Nations when you are next in the Library

There are other ways, which might work - so homework question. Apart from capitalism or communism, what other systems are there?

[On the edge]

The Council have the ultimate sanction of gaol.

Council Tax debt is collected via Magistrates' Courts rather than County Courts.

Actually so do Thames Water, used to be called a judgement summons...

There are also other innovative ways to reduce indebtedness, such as installing prepayment type meters. These are available at economic rates and because they are in common use by gas and electricity utilities the payment infrastructure is already in place. Use of these where tenancies turn over quickly would probably solve their problem.

Oooh but we'd have to fit them and read them and send someone out when they go wrong....(Cont. P98) However this has never bothered the other utilities. As the Energy industry has a programme to replace all of its meters with electronic communicating ones over the next few years and the Government are now insisting that water is metered, here is an opportunity for some collaborative and innovative ventures (Ha Ha)

[blackdog]

Apart from capitalism or communism, what other systems are there?

Our system - somewhere between the two.

[MontyPython]

Because they moved to increase their sales? I'm not sure replacing ageing pipe work to maintain the same customer base is the same thing as what Tesco did.

Which is what TW are doing increasing the infrastructure for a growing Customer base!

[MontyPython]

That's leaving things to market forces for you.

Wrong It's same old no competition just in private hands!

It is competition that drives improvements and efficiency when the customer has a choice whether to stay or leave.