Comments on: NIC chair argues that maintaining a private water sector is the ‘right approach’

By: mike muller

mike muller — Tue, 22 Aug 2023 06:58:47 +0000

It might be useful, for a start, to review the standards and priorities that were inherited from the European Union. Some of them reflect the interests of the service providers rather than the service users. This was supported by an unholy alliance between service providers and environmental lobbyists. Many of the provision of the EU’s water framework directives are unlikely to be met by the member countries and this is one area in which a review would be justified. As an example, Thames Tideway provided huge benefits for the corporates involved but it has yet to be demonstrated that it was the best way to use scarce public resources.

By: Ian Collins

Ian Collins — Mon, 21 Aug 2023 16:40:03 +0000

The country simply couldn’t afford to buy back and renationalise water companies. Water company’s operating licences could be withdrawn through statutory mechanisms but this would be an extremely lengthy process and could be hugely detrimental to water company share price, dividend and pensions investments and would impact investment in the network whilst each company worked its way out. Yet, and has been proven by Thames, the current model is not sustainable, so something has to change. Do we pay the true cost of water, like other utilities, I guess we will shortly find out either directly through increasing water bills or indirectly through taxation setaside to subsidise the model.