THE FOURTH OF JULY

[Spectric]

However it's difficult to see how we could ever pay people in the UK enough to persuade them to take up the lifestyle that seasonable pickers endure.

We are already paying a potential workforce to do nothing so why not get them on job seekers to perform this work in exchange for benefits and it would be something on their CV, it would show a willingness to work.

 

[Jacob]

Not bad for a new PM's first week in office, a loss of 270 million by scrapping Rwanda

It was already spent and wasted. No point in throwing good money after bad.
The £270m would have been better spent on assisting immigrants, speeding up asylum processes and getting them into work, education etc.

 

[Fergie 307]

And fix the system so that applications are dealt with more quickly. Then genuine applicants can get on with their lives and start contributing to our economy, and the undesirable element can be identified and potentially sent back whence they came.

 

[Jacob]

We are already paying a potential workforce to do nothing so why not get them on job seekers to perform this work in exchange for benefits and it would be something on their CV, it would show a willingness to work.

The pay and conditions need to be good enough, but I doubt there is this huge reserve of capable labour just basking around doing nothing. It's a popular far right myth with no evidence.

 

[Fergie 307]

It was already spent and wasted so far. No point in throwing good money after bad.
The £270m would have been better spent on assisting immigrants, speeding up asylum processes and getting them into work, education etc.

Too right, a bloody stupid idea that would never have worked. I am sure the Rwandans are laughing all the way to the bank.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

I used to work in industrial control systems and did a lot of business with Thames Water back in the 80s and 90s. Before it was privatised it was full of people, from top to bottom, with pride in their work and a sense of duty in providing clean water and efficient sewage treatment to their customers. Back then the Thames was becoming clean again - they even had trout and many other species of fish recolonising the river.

Now the river is full of sh*t and the company is full of demoralised people who see insufficient investment in maintenance and new works, a board kowtowing to shareholders and all the profit that would have gone into maintenance and new plant pre-privatisation siphoned off to those shareholders, many of which are overseas.

They privatised OUR WATER for godssakes.

The culture in many nationalised industries was very positive as you describe - I used to work with colleagues previously involved in the energy sector who had much the same view - a commitment to the goals of the organisation and public service.

Privatisation was a mixed blessing - positive improvements in efficiency and the capacity of the water companies to invest without competing for government funds. Regulation increased transparency exposing much that was poor. The private sector took excessive advantage.

Looking specifically at Thames Water:

• it has not paid an external dividend since 2017.
• before 2017 it paid an accumulated £7.2bn dividends
• it was privatised with no debts in 1989, it now has debts of £15bn
• these have increased by £5bn since 2017 when the company came under current ownership
• revenue in 2023 was £2.4bn - debt is approximately 6 times income
• since 2006 they have invested ~£1.3bn pa - a total of over £20bn
• their balance sheet shows total assets £23bn, total liabilities £22bn and equity of ~£1bn

From a financial perspective the diagnosis is clear:

• investment undertaken has been insufficient to ensure adequate water quality
• cash flow is wholly inadequate to support even repayment of current debt as it falls due
• increased interest rates have reduced the amount available to repay loans
• assuming the government would effectively guarantee the loans is looking doubtful
• without government assurances, banks will not lend more to such a poor credit risk
• additional equity is unlikely if dividends are not paid and/or financial failure a high risk

Quite simply - income has been too low to cover the additional debt created by even the inadequate investment program. Reality - if we want better it will cost more.

Most responsibility rests with OFWAT whose remit covers economic, water quality and statutory compliance issues. They have failed - I suspect giving into pressure to limit price rises to the consumer in pursuit of political and inflationary interests.

Criticism of management bonuses may be partly justified. The current CE appointed only 7 months ago cannot be held accountable for problems accumulated over 3 decades. The financial cost of the executive team is trivial relative to the scale of the problems.

The question is what happens now. Keeping the taps running must be a key priority but who takes on the financial costs of resolution - banks write off debts, companies go into administration, government cover the financial losses, renationalisation??? Personal view:

• the company is bankrupt. Banks and shareholders should face the losses, not the taxpayer
• service delivery needs to be maintained - temporary control shifted to government
• a realistic investment plan and price increases to fund longer term restoration of services
• sell back to the private sector in 2-3 years underpinned by better regulation and a more coherent long term plan (like the banks in 2008-10)

 

[Fergie 307]

The pay and conditions need to be good enough, but I doubt there is this huge reserve of capable labour just basking around doing nothing. It's a popular far right myth with no evidence.

Plenty of evidence to the contrary, like the farmer who was featured on Countryfile. He tried to replace immigrant workers with locals. After a couple of weeks he only had one left of the original 30 odd. They didn't like the hard work for not a lot of money.
But I am with paulrbarnard, if we weren't so keen on buying everything on the cheap then farmers would be able to pay more. Ultimately is is the fault of customers.
There might be some excuse in present circumstances, but this trend of squeezing the producer long predates our present economic problems, Brexit etc.

 

[Jacob]

..... Ultimately is is the fault of customers.
...

Apparently it's down to the buying power of the big supermarkets. Farmers need a good union!

 

[Jacob]

.....

• the company is bankrupt. Banks and shareholders should face the losses, not the taxpayer
• service delivery needs to be maintained - temporary control shifted to government
• a realistic investment plan and price increases to fund longer term restoration of services

Yes

• sell back to the private sector in 2-3 years underpinned by better regulation and a more coherent long term plan (like the banks in 2008-10)

No. Why make the same mistake again? The basic private sector problem is that providing a good and essential service to the customer is not necessarily the most profitable way to run a business, as Thames Water shareholders have discovered, as have millions of other dodgy enterprises throughout history.

 

[niall Y]

Farmers should set a fair price for there produce, you don't go to a car dealership and tell them what you are going to pay for your new car as they have set the price. Yes it would mean supermarkets would both charge more and make less profit but we need fairness in the system and to pay the going rate for our groceries.

As laudable as this argument is, farmers will not then be able to compete with agricultural produce from abroad. Which will always have the advantage of earlier seasons and cheaper labour.
To make this work protectionist policies would have to be implemented, otherwise farmers in this country would be priced out of the market. Protectionism isn't necessarily bad, as any country that fails to look after its agricultural base is undermining its ability to survive in the future.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

Far right fanatics offer fantasy solutions which don't work. Brexit? Rwanda? The blame game; immigrants, single mothers on benefits, etc........
Somebody has to make sensible decisions.
And to look after the poor far-right nutters too - they only tend to make things worse, for other people and for themselves.
Stumbling around like sleepwalkers, no wonder they think of themselves as "the unwoke".

For many the term "unwoke" is a compliment reserved for those who have the independence of mind not to perpetually follow the herd.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

it is a worry, but the NHS is suffering terrible retention rates

I am sure you would agree an agreement needs to be reached

in the case of strikes....weve had loads of strikes over the last few years anyway

Compared to the 1970-1980 period, the disruption seen over the last two years is but a minor blip.

ONS graph

 

[Fergie 307]

Apparently it's down to the buying power of the big supermarkets. Farmers need a good union!

But we are the ones who drive it, by buying the £2 chicken from store X as opposed to the £2.50 one from store Y.

 

[cmoops2]

I hope you don’t mind but I feel this needs correcting.

Conservatives had earmarked around 100,000 to be deported to Rwanda….but there was no capacity for that number, so those people were simply in permanent limbo

Secondly Labour have said they could apply for asylum, which is not “letting them stay”



These are people that have been here already for some time….so are they suddenly going to start committing crime if they get asylum?


I can see no evidence that is connected to Labour

James Dyson, the man who campaigned for Brexit, moved his company headquarters to Singapore in 2019.

Let's also not forget that in August 2002, Dyson made 595 Malmesbury factory employees redundant and then transferred vacuum cleaner production to Malaysia. In August 2003 he then closed down washing machine production in Malmesbury (making another 65 redundant) and moved the work to the far East ...

 

[Jacob]

For many the term "unwoke" is a compliment reserved for those who have the independence of mind not to perpetually follow the herd.

Well that just shows how unwoke they really are!

 

[Rhossydd]

a loss of 270 million by scrapping Rwanda

You're blaming Starmer for the failed Rwanda scheme ? Give your head a wobble.

 

[RobinBHM]

Farmers need a good union!

Surely farmers need good onions

 

[Jacob]

Just wondered if one of the other moderators could clarify how bundling all migrants under the above sweeping statement doesn’t contravene Rule 5.2 which includes in the list of unacceptable behaviour:

• posting content which promotes hatred of any race, ethnicity, sex, gender, or religion;

Just asking for current or potential forum members who may have come from those countries.

Actually I've had several messages from forum members such as you describe, being very pleased to read so much in their support, coming from so many.
Maybe it's all better out than in?
Keep up the good work chaps!
PS One was an NHS doctor, another an ICU nurse. Others too.
Oddly enough I visited the doctor yesterday and had a trainee doc practicing on me, under supervision. She was a black girl from Nigeria (I think) and doing an excellent job.

 

[RobinBHM]

You're blaming Starmer for the failed Rwanda scheme ? Give your head a wobble.

Spectric has gone all Jacob on us.

 

[Cobbs]

Quis moderatores ipsos moderabit?


Call me juvenile...

You're juvenile!