WWW.RLFANS.COM • View topic - nationalising the Utility companies ?

Board index Welcome to RLFANS The Sin Bin nationalising the Utility companies ?

Off-topic discussion.
nationalising the Utility companies ?
Post Fri Nov 22, 2019 8:48 am
Posted by wrencat1873 on Fri Nov 22, 2019 8:48 am
wrencat1873 User avatar
Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Reputation Points: 1148
Rep Position: 2nd / 77,905

Quiz Score: 0

Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 7:28 pm
Posts: 12650
Although there is potentially a cash benefit (profits available to re invest in public services etc), There is a potentially much darker side to the "Big Government"

With Labours grand plan to take all of the major utilities back into state ownership, in terms of Union power and any future threat of strike action, what risk is there of a return to the 1970's with national strikes.
There is no doubt that the Unions would actually be the people in charge with the ability to stop the country in it's tracks at the first sign of discord.
Posted by Sal Paradise on Sat Nov 23, 2019 9:08 am
Sal Paradise User avatar
Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Reputation Points: 293
Rep Position: 88th / 77,905

Quiz Score: 0

Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2002 8:28 am
Posts: 17084
Location: On the road
wrencat1873 wrote:
Although there is potentially a cash benefit (profits available to re invest in public services etc), There is a potentially much darker side to the "Big Government"

With Labours grand plan to take all of the major utilities back into state ownership, in terms of Union power and any future threat of strike action, what risk is there of a return to the 1970's with national strikes.
There is no doubt that the Unions would actually be the people in charge with the ability to stop the country in it's tracks at the first sign of discord.


The whole Labour plan is for the unions to rise in importance - they want collective bargaining run by the unions, McDonald has also said secondary picketing will be back on under Labour.

Those of us who lived through the seventies know what happens when you give the unions carte blanche - the NUM brought the country to a near standstill and a three day week. It reached it zenith under Callaghan.

The problem with public ownership you can't simply close down the entity so if the unions go on strike how do you stop it? In private ownership you can do an Ineos which pushed McClusky back in his 5 star hotel. I remember as a youngster in Bradford Baird had a huge factory in the city. Pat Wall was the union boss at the factory and he was going to bring Baird's to heel - sadly for the workers Baird's simply said up yours and 2/3,000 people lost their jobs. Wall was OK though he went on to be the local MP.

Be careful what you wish for.
Your job is to say to yourself on a job interview does the hiring manager likes me or not. If you aren't a particular manager's cup of tea, you haven't failed -- you've dodged a bullet.
Re: nationalising the Utility companies ?
Post Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:55 am
Posted by Sir Kevin Sinfield on Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:55 am
Sir Kevin Sinfield Bronze RLFANS Member
Bronze RLFANS Member

Reputation Points: 790
Rep Position: 11th / 77,905

Quiz Score: 0

Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2014 8:57 am
Posts: 3586
Complete rubbish, nationalised industry is common throughout Europe and the rest of the World. It makes complete sense when the industry is a monopoly as is the case with Electricity, Gas, Water, Healthcare, Education and the Railways.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.inde ... html%3famp
Posted by Sal Paradise on Sun Nov 24, 2019 8:20 am
Sal Paradise User avatar
Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Reputation Points: 293
Rep Position: 88th / 77,905

Quiz Score: 0

Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2002 8:28 am
Posts: 17084
Location: On the road
Sir Kevin Sinfield wrote:
Complete rubbish, nationalised industry is common throughout Europe and the rest of the World. It makes complete sense when the industry is a monopoly as is the case with Electricity, Gas, Water, Healthcare, Education and the Railways.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.inde ... html%3famp


Nobody is suggesting there shouldn't be an element of the economy that is nationalised but with it comes risks, it is obvious to everyone the power the unions hold within the Labour party and if the got into power that is effectively power over the government.

Are you saying the antics in the 70s are a figment of imagination, that Baird's didn't close down a factory in Bradford, that Ineos weren't prepared to close down its operation, that we had a 3-day week were electricity was rationed?
Your job is to say to yourself on a job interview does the hiring manager likes me or not. If you aren't a particular manager's cup of tea, you haven't failed -- you've dodged a bullet.
Posted by Superblue on Tue Nov 26, 2019 7:15 pm
Superblue Strong-running second rower
Strong-running second rower

Reputation Points: 116
Rep Position: 200th / 77,905

Quiz Score: 0

Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 9:02 pm
Posts: 423
I was associated with one of the privatised water companies throughout one of the 5 year Amp periods.

Total farce,

The water company made 10% profit
The water company solutions consultant made 10% profit
Each of the 3 delivery design consultants made 10% profit.
Each of the 3 delivery contractors made 10% profit.

Folk were told in briefings not to admit to the water company of the profit levels being trousered.

That was just in the Capital Delivery side of things, not including operations and maintenance outsourcing.

And a lot of the equipment installed was crap, from preferred suppliers, with automated systems never working and switched to hand controls, all to reduce manpower and jobs.

And a lot of this cash leaving the country.

So multiply that up by the number of privatised utilities, shafted isn’t the word.
Posted by Sal Paradise on Tue Nov 26, 2019 8:18 pm
Sal Paradise User avatar
Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Reputation Points: 293
Rep Position: 88th / 77,905

Quiz Score: 0

Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2002 8:28 am
Posts: 17084
Location: On the road
Superblue wrote:
I was associated with one of the privatised water companies throughout one of the 5 year Amp periods.

Total farce,

The water company made 10% profit
The water company solutions consultant made 10% profit
Each of the 3 delivery design consultants made 10% profit.
Each of the 3 delivery contractors made 10% profit.

Folk were told in briefings not to admit to the water company of the profit levels being trousered.

That was just in the Capital Delivery side of things, not including operations and maintenance outsourcing.

And a lot of the equipment installed was crap, from preferred suppliers, with automated systems never working and switched to hand controls, all to reduce manpower and jobs.

And a lot of this cash leaving the country.

So multiply that up by the number of privatised utilities, shafted isn’t the word.


Add natural government inefficiency and all you so called profits will disappear - its really simple and there is a host of evidence to back up the additional costs by public ownership.
Your job is to say to yourself on a job interview does the hiring manager likes me or not. If you aren't a particular manager's cup of tea, you haven't failed -- you've dodged a bullet.
Posted by The Ghost of '99 on Tue Nov 26, 2019 9:54 pm
The Ghost of '99 User avatar
Cheeky half-back
Cheeky half-back

Reputation Points: 136
Rep Position: 182nd / 77,905

Quiz Score: 36

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 4:45 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Desperation Island
Sal Paradise wrote:
Add natural government inefficiency and all you so called profits will disappear - its really simple and there is a host of evidence to back up the additional costs by public ownership.

Are you saying the private sector is more efficient than the public? From what I've seen that is debatable in lots of organisations, particularly those like the big utilities where they aren't operating in genuinely competitive markets. Operations like the NHS and the old British Rail are/were profoundly lean setups squeezing a lot out of inadequate budgets.
"Brian McDermott, with a wry smile, nods when asked if he remembers a specific incident which made him realise he was a prick. 'I do', he murmurs."
Posted by IR80 on Wed Nov 27, 2019 8:21 am
IR80 Cheeky half-back
Cheeky half-back

Reputation Points: 147
Rep Position: 171st / 77,905

Quiz Score: 0

Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2019 8:59 am
Posts: 685
The Ghost of '99 wrote:
Are you saying the private sector is more efficient than the public? From what I've seen that is debatable in lots of organisations, particularly those like the big utilities where they aren't operating in genuinely competitive markets. Operations like the NHS and the old British Rail are/were profoundly lean setups squeezing a lot out of inadequate budgets.

NHS, lean?

You need a doctor, the NHS is massively financed, and incredibly wasteful.
Posted by The Ghost of '99 on Wed Nov 27, 2019 9:05 am
The Ghost of '99 User avatar
Cheeky half-back
Cheeky half-back

Reputation Points: 136
Rep Position: 182nd / 77,905

Quiz Score: 36

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 4:45 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Desperation Island
IR80 wrote:
NHS, lean?

You need a doctor, the NHS is massively financed, and incredibly wasteful.

I know it's fashionable to dismiss your arguments but go on then, give us detail and examples, metrics of outcomes vs spend and levels of overhead vs front line activity in public vs private healthcare to support one of your typically simplistic statements. I won't hold my breath.
"Brian McDermott, with a wry smile, nods when asked if he remembers a specific incident which made him realise he was a prick. 'I do', he murmurs."
Posted by wrencat1873 on Wed Nov 27, 2019 9:26 am
wrencat1873 User avatar
Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Reputation Points: 1148
Rep Position: 2nd / 77,905

Quiz Score: 0

Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 7:28 pm
Posts: 12650
Sal Paradise wrote:
Add natural government inefficiency and all you so called profits will disappear - its really simple and there is a host of evidence to back up the additional costs by public ownership.


And there is the nub of the nationalisation question.
Can the utilities be run as efficiently (or more so) under public ownership than they are in the private sector.
There is no doubt that these "monopolies" were sold off on the cheap to generate one off sums of cash for government coffers and there is equally no doubt than, many of the companies now running the "utilities" are making good money on the back of this, which should be pretty straightforward when they have a virtual monopoly.
I believe that the consumer would be the winner her as they would be protected from some of the swingeing increases in energy costs that we have all suffered in recent years and it's equally clear that "the market" hasn't helped keep prices down but, the big question is whether the Utilities would generate the same level of profit/cash surplus under government ownership and whether it's really worth the cost to find out.
Personally, I dont think there would be any massive benefit apart from possibly on rail and possibly royal mail.
Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 44 guests

Quick Reply

Subject: Message:
   

Return to The Sin Bin


POSTSONLINEMEMBERSRECORDYOUR TEAM
4,984,8011,89977,9054,559SET
LOGIN HERE
or REGISTER for more features!.
Thu 30th Jan 19:45
SL
WIGAN WARRIORS
v
WARRINGTON
Fri 31st Jan 19:30
 CH
DEWSBURY RAMS
v
LEIGH
Fri 31st Jan 19:45
SL
HULL KR
v
WAKEFIELD
Fri 31st Jan 19:45
SL
ST.HELENS
v
SALFORD
Sat 1st Feb 17:00
SL
CATALAN DRAGONS
v
HUDDERSFIELD
Sat 1st Feb 19:30
 CH
TOULOUSE
v
YORK
Sun 2nd Feb 14:30
SL
TORONTO
v
CASTLEFORD
Sun 2nd Feb 15:00
 CH
BATLEY BULLDOGS
v
FEATHERSTONE
Sun 2nd Feb 15:00
 CH
BRADFORD BULLS
v
LONDON BRONCOS
Sun 2nd Feb 15:00
 CH
HALIFAX
v
SHEFFIELD
ALL SCORES PROVIDED BY RLFANS.COM (SETTINGS)





11