´óÏó´«Ã½

Douglas,

Perhaps you could explain to the people of Scotland the successful privatization of essential public utilities, and how it has benefitted the people.

Should be a short blog.

very good point new blogger, British gas profits up 98% announced today there's another success then, profit doubled and no competition. as I said 5 posts/threads ago ask someone in England what they gained from water privatisation. unless they are a director of one of the private company's involved the answer will be he-haw.

Sid

In fact privatisation did a huge amount of damage to the consumer products industry. Whereas we once had a thriving white goods industry supported by the old electricity and gas boards we now have virtually nothing. The same applies to things like electrical engineering products. Most has disappeared into foreign ownership or just disappeared.

Once you privatise the sector champions and they themselves drift into foreign ownership then the chances of maintaining and grown a supply side sector fall away rapidly.

Not just sad but strategically utterly stupid unless of course you're intent on wiping out manufacturing.

Newblogger, as a Scot currently living in England I would say the privatisation of water has been a success. Here, it is normal to have metered water and only pay for what you use. That is a transparent and fair system.

In Scotland, water is normally paid through the council tax. Your water bill depends on how nice your house is, not how much you use. That is an unfair and opaque form of taxation. The English system is far superior.

This is all symptomatic of the depressing and unsustainable dominance of the public sector in Scotland. Reality will eventually hit and new tax-raising powers bring that day closer. Scotland is going to have to decide whether to remain as a socialist state or become a modern competitive economy. Many ex-pats like me are waiting to see which way it goes before deciding whether to come back.

SR4Z,

You have missed the point on purpose.

Why would Scotish Water need to be privatized in order to have a meter system?

Newblogger,

There is no incentive to meter a publicly owned water supply because (1) it would require a capital investment and (2) it would remove the power of local authorities to levy this surreptitious wealth tax.

My understanding is that it is possible to get a meter in Scotland but they make it difficult and expensive on purpose.

Did privatisation benefit me, an ordinary consumer, in England? The answer is a definite yes. Sorry if you don't like that but it's the truth.

#4 SR4Z afternoon, "reality will eventually hit and new tax-raising powers bring that day closer"
sorry reality is here and now, who caused it is out in the open, plain for all who want to see.
Do you mean the new tax raising powers via Calman ?

If you are you are having a laugh.

Calman releases the left hand that has been tied behind our back and replaces it with tying our right hand behind our back with the added bonus of sitting back and waiting for it to go belly up .
the calman tax proposals have been set up to fail. Simple

Sid

Just to follow up on the metering question...

Bristol Water (privatised): "Fitting [of a meter] will normally be free of charge for domestic customers"

Scottish Water: "costs involved in creating the space for the meter to be installed must be met by you...Standard survey costs of £81.90... minimum cost of any pipework alterations is around £217.00 ex vat". Then they continue with a string of reasons why it might not be good idea to get one!

#8

The cost of fitting the meter in Bristol will be re-cooped in charges, it most certainly isn't "FREE".

The fundamental difference is the water in Scotland belongs to the people of Scotland.

The water in England now belongs to a few individuals (Bristol water is Spanish).

I am surprised there are still some individuals trying to defend free-market libertarian anarchism after 2008.

#4

‘Your water bill depends on how nice your house is, not how much you use. '

This argument is one I am still unsure about. Scotland has plenty of water. England has hose-pipe bans (and in the case of Lancashire a while ago - simultaneously with a flood warning).

Water isn’t a commodity. Water itself is free and falls from the sky. What you actually pay for is the service of bringing it in and taking it away from your home. The infra-structure required is independent of how much you use. So, it is still essentially a council service you are paying for.

I completely agree it should have nothing to do with house size though!!!

#9 new blogger ,afternoon, I am with you :

there are none so blind as those who can see.

#4 SR4Z ,afternoon, are you trying to imply that if you have a "socialist state" it can never be "a modern competitive economy" ?

Sid

Sid, yes, if public sector spending is more than about 1/3 of GDP I don't think that can be sustained without some retreat from the global economy.

It's more like 1/2 of GDP in Scotland, and what's worse, the public sector has also has racked up enormous debt.

If a democratically elected socialist government increases public spending, then so be it, but it should be funded by taxes not delusional borrowing from the private sector. That just cheats all the citizens (and their kids) in the long run.

On the debate about Scottish versus English water charges: I live alone in a medium-sized 2-bedroom flat in Edinburgh, without a garden to water or a car to wash, and I am verging on frugal in my use of water. This year my Scottish Water charges are a flat rate £481.03. My mother, who does have a car to wash, lives alone in a 2-bedroomed house with a garden near the South Coast of England (in an area where water is scarcer per head than it is in parts of Africa and the Middle East) and tells me she pays £22 per year. Yes, that's right, TWENTY-TWO pounds per year. The differences? 1.) She is metered; 2.) and buys her water services from a privatized company. Personally I have no ideological conviction one way or another about state ownership/private ownership in general, but in this case I can come to no other conclusion than that I and probably most other Scottish residents are being massively ripped off by Scottish Water.

#12 SR4Z ,Evening,I would say where we are right now is not acceptable but nor do I want Scotland to become yet another 2 bit run of the mill modern competitive economy with no morals and even less Ideals. Gone are the days of bothering about the most vulnerable in our society it is very quickly becoming every man for himself and if you are not strong enough to survive - tough.
Britain is broken in more ways than most people care to think about whilst profit at all cost rules the roost & no one gives a $$$$ about anyone else our society is in tatters whilst our politicians are more bothered about what they can do to help the big corporations and companies instead of the people that bothered to vote for them because as we all know Joe public can't give you anything corporate Britain can hand it out by the shovel full.
Sid

Unimaginative, both my standing charge and my price per cubic metre are half Scottish Water's prices. Scottish Water will charge you £137/year just for the privilege of having a meter! I agree, it is a complete rip-off.

"But what if all the benefit of handing debt over to the private sector were to fall to the Treasury?"

To answer the question we must ask what happened to the proceeds when the English water companies were privatised. If the proceeds were reserved for purely English matters then, it is only fair that proceeds / savings from any privatisation of Scottish Water go to Holyrood. If on the other hand the proceeds from the English sale went to the general UK pot, then surely proceeds / savings from any privatisation of Scottish Water do likewise?

I am no sure where the debate arises?