[Finance] Southern Water over 50% increase in bills

[Guy Fawkes]

I understand that, maybe this helps
View attachment 200917

I get that, and it may be badly affecting water quality, but is that the only source of pollution in that stretch of water ? or is it in a fairly rural area that has a lot of run off from farmers field too which add to the problem?

Science wise, is it usual for high nitrates and high phosphates to be linked to the release of untreated / inadequately treated waste water? or are there often other pollutants that are the main issues affecting water quality from spills ? - Is there a constant release, is it very common, or more occasional ? - are they carrying out upgrades to deal with i to try to make that a problem of the past, etc..... and if they are, what's the time scale ?

To me there are always a lot more questions to be asked to fully understand something like what is happening there. Too readily the public will hear a headline and make assumptions based upon a pre-conceived bias (like the fine mentioned a few posts above, (deliberate act to mislead the EA, Ofwat, etc for financial again and i feel should have also resulted in the individuals responsible for those decisions also facing court action and possible prison sentences, which is possible under existing laws and i'm surprised nothing's been done - the same for those at the post office who knew of the issues with Horizon but kept prosecuting post masters)

The public assumption is that the same people are in charge, doing exactly the same shady actions to boost profits and line their pockets whilst doing nothing to resolve the issues like sewage spills - but it's far from the truth

 

[schmunk]

I get that, and it may be badly affecting water quality, but is that the only source of pollution in that stretch of water ? or is it in a fairly rural area that has a lot of run off from farmers field too which add to the problem?

Science wise, is it usual for high nitrates and high phosphates to be linked to the release of untreated / inadequately treated waste water? or are there often other pollutants that are the main issues affecting water quality from spills ? - Is there a constant release, is it very common, or more occasional ? - are they carrying out upgrades to deal with i to try to make that a problem of the past, etc..... and if they are, what's the time scale ?

To me there are always a lot more questions to be asked to fully understand something like what is happening there. Too readily the public will hear a headline and make assumptions based upon a pre-conceived bias (like the fine mentioned a few posts above, (deliberate act to mislead the EA, Ofwat, etc for financial again and i feel should have also resulted in the individuals responsible for those decisions also facing court action and possible prison sentences, which is possible under existing laws and i'm surprised nothing's been done - the same for those at the post office who knew of the issues with Horizon but kept prosecuting post masters)

The public assumption is that the same people are in charge, doing exactly the same shady actions to boost profits and line their pockets whilst doing nothing to resolve the issues like sewage spills - but it's far from the truth

Why are you so keen to defend Southern Water / the water industry?

First you're making the outrageous claim that water is too cheap and ought to be more expensive; now you're deflecting blame from the water companies for the frequent serious pollution incidents they have caused.

 

[chip]

I get that, and it may be badly affecting water quality, but is that the only source of pollution in that stretch of water ? or is it in a fairly rural area that has a lot of run off from farmers field too which add to the problem?

Science wise, is it usual for high nitrates and high phosphates to be linked to the release of untreated / inadequately treated waste water? or are there often other pollutants that are the main issues affecting water quality from spills ? - Is there a constant release, is it very common, or more occasional ? - are they carrying out upgrades to deal with i to try to make that a problem of the past, etc..... and if they are, what's the time scale ?

To me there are always a lot more questions to be asked to fully understand something like what is happening there. Too readily the public will hear a headline and make assumptions based upon a pre-conceived bias (like the fine mentioned a few posts above, (deliberate act to mislead the EA, Ofwat, etc for financial again and i feel should have also resulted in the individuals responsible for those decisions also facing court action and possible prison sentences, which is possible under existing laws and i'm surprised nothing's been done - the same for those at the post office who knew of the issues with Horizon but kept prosecuting post masters)

The public assumption is that the same people are in charge, doing exactly the same shady actions to boost profits and line their pockets whilst doing nothing to resolve the issues like sewage spills - but it's far from the truth

I agree, all sorts of activity affect water quality and I have somewhat conflated two related issues. Those pictures where taken at West Dean, it is rural but not high intensity agrigultural. I think Goodwood and West Dean estates are now mostly organic. The sewage releases have been going on for over a decade and at a number of locations. Raw sewage has regularly been discharged from the sewage processing plant into this river. There simply isn't the capacity in sewage plants, this has been known for at least 15 years and was entirely predictable. Given that context, with a continuing degredation of water quality, there's not much to disabuse me of the idea that this is the same people doing the same crap. Southern Water don't have a great track record on this.

 

[Lenny Rider]

Isn't this one thing the Government could actually nationalise almost overnight?

The provision of fresh water is almost a basic human right rather than an income stream, pardon the pun, for shareholders?

 

[Guy Fawkes]

Why are you so keen to defend Southern Water / the water industry?

First you're making the outrageous claim that water is too cheap and ought to be more expensive; now you're deflecting blame from the water companies for the frequent serious pollution incidents they have caused.

Just relaying facts to counter hysteria around the subject (as i do on a wide range of other subjects)

The outrage over price increases - when put in context of how little a litre of water actually costs a consumer

And it's not deflecting, but pointing out how the public blame water companies for all pollution in rivers - when there are many other contributors that get overlooked (such as farming run-off) - the public being the public and going by the hysteria on the subject are just lumping them all into one thing and blaming one cause (the water companies in this case)

To solve the issues, all sources of these pollutions hitting waterways need to be addressed, which is less likely if the focus is only on 1 element of it. Blaming it on just one element will not lead to a proper resolution, which is what we all surely want to happen?
(basically pointing out it's a multi-party issue with many having to play a part in resolving the issues and only forcing one to act will not lead to it being solved)

 

[chip]

Just relaying facts to counter hysteria around the subject (as i do on a wide range of other subjects)

The outrage over price increases - when put in context of how little a litre of water actually costs a consumer

And it's not deflecting, but pointing out how the public blame water companies for all pollution in rivers - when there are many other contributors that get overlooked (such as farming run-off) - the public being the public and going by the hysteria on the subject are just lumping them all into one thing and blaming one cause (the water companies in this case)

To solve the issues, all sources of these pollutions hitting waterways need to be addressed, which is less likely if the focus is only on 1 element of it. Blaming it on just one element will not lead to a proper resolution, which is what we all surely want to happen?
(basically pointing out it's a multi-party issue with many having to play a part in resolving the issues and only forcing one to act will not lead to it being solved)

The issue you miss is that the price increase has nothing to do with the "cost" of water, it's because of past and present practice. The water companies have been bled dry and loaded with debt for the benefit of shareholders. They simply didn't reinvest or follow the law. Southern Water have been repeatedly fined:

Southern Water fined record £90m for deliberately pouring sewage into sea

Privatised firm dumped billions of litres of raw sewage off north Kent and Hampshire coasts to avoid costs and penalties

www.theguardian.com

Southern Water fined £330,000 after stream pollution killed 2,000 fish

A UK court has fined Southern Water £330,000 (US$416,748) for a raw sewage leak in July 2019 that killed almost 2,000 fish near areas designated to protect nature. An alarm alerted the company to an issue early in the day, but they failed to act, allowing the spill to last for as much as 20 hours.

www.thechemicalengineer.com

It would be nice if there was a focus on something, where is the evidence that is happening now. Also, Southern Water's failures here now lead to flooding on the Harting Down road and elsewhere. They aren't doing what they are paid for and are making us pay in advance for things that probably wont happen. It's all down to how we interpret 'facts' I guess.

 

[Guy Fawkes]

The issue you miss is that the price increase has nothing to do with the "cost" of water, it's because of past and present practice. The water companies have been bled dry and loaded with debt for the benefit of shareholders. They simply didn't reinvest or follow the law. Southern Water have been repeatedly fined:

Southern Water fined record £90m for deliberately pouring sewage into sea

Privatised firm dumped billions of litres of raw sewage off north Kent and Hampshire coasts to avoid costs and penalties

www.theguardian.com

Southern Water fined £330,000 after stream pollution killed 2,000 fish

A UK court has fined Southern Water £330,000 (US$416,748) for a raw sewage leak in July 2019 that killed almost 2,000 fish near areas designated to protect nature. An alarm alerted the company to an issue early in the day, but they failed to act, allowing the spill to last for as much as 20 hours.

www.thechemicalengineer.com

It would be nice if there was a focus on something, where is the evidence that is happening now. Also, Southern Water's failures here now lead to flooding on the Harting Down road and elsewhere. They aren't doing what they are paid for and are making us pay in advance for things that probably wont happen. It's all down to how we interpret 'facts' I guess.

The cost of staffing has gone up, the cost of energy has gone up, the cost of parts, maintenance and new / improving existing infrastructure has gone up. The number of properties they supply has gone up.

I also remember swimming in the sea as a kid near Newhaven and watching turds floating by (pre-privatisation) but public perception is that this practice only started after privatisation and is a decision purely driven by greed. There was a hell of a lot wrong prior to privatisation (poor drinking water quality and sewage spills / water quality)

It wasn't that long ago that fish and other aquatic life finally returned to the Thames river, due to improvements made by water companies, yet now the stories / narrative is around how bad the Thames river quality is under private ownership, and how it's not safe for the boat race crews to go in the water (why I say there is hysteria around public opinion on the subject)

 

[chip]

The cost of staffing has gone up, the cost of energy has gone up, the cost of parts, maintenance and new / improving existing infrastructure has gone up. The number of properties they supply has gone up.

I also remember swimming in the sea as a kid near Newhaven and watching turds floating by (pre-privatisation) but public perception is that this practice only started after privatisation and is a decision purely driven by greed. There was a hell of a lot wrong prior to privatisation (poor drinking water quality and sewage spills / water quality)

It wasn't that long ago that fish and other aquatic life finally returned to the Thames river, due to improvements made by water companies, yet now the stories / narrative is around how bad the Thames river quality is under private ownership, and how it's not safe for the boat race crews to go in the water (why I say there is hysteria around public opinion on the subject)

I can also remeber swimming in the sea with passing floaters and it was good when this stopped happening. Unfortunately, it's happening again and there is a hell of a lot wrong post privitisation. We kept horses in a field that the river in my pictures flows through. Sometimes we did see human excrement in the river. The water companies have simply failed in their duties, repeatedly. It isn't hysteria to complain that the body charged with meeting a minimum standard is failing to do so. It isn't hysteria pointing out that privitisation has leaked money to shareholders and households are now picking up the bill. All of our bills have gone up, ths seems the least justifiable in an industry with an ineffective regulator and a history of noncompliance. Your first sentences just makes generic excuses for failure we are now paying for with vague promises of some future possible improvement from a dire situation.

 

[Since1982]

Does anybody really believe that privatising water has been a success? If there were ever one utility that is so basic it should be nationalised and aggressively priced controlled it is water.

 

[Guy Fawkes]

Does anybody really believe that privatising water has been a success? If there were ever one utility that is so basic it should be nationalised and aggressively priced controlled it is water.

There is such a rose tinted glasses view on the water industry from when it was state owned.

One of the main reasons why is was sold off was that the state simply couldn't afford to pay for the upgrades and improvements required from such a poorly performing industry to get it up to standard.

Yes i know this is frrom Wikipedia and how reliable that can be, however:

Quality of service

[edit]
In 2008, the quality of water and sanitation services in England and Wales was regularly and comprehensively monitored by the economic regulator, OFWAT. OFWAT statistics show that service quality has improved since the early 1990s, i.e. shortly after services were privatised. For example, the number of unplanned interruptions, properties at risk of low pressure, the share of complaints that were not answered within five days and combined sewer overflows have all declined, while sewage treatment works compliance has increased and river water quality has improved.[12]

Drinking water quality is also universally high, although isolated incidents where quality falls have occurred. For example, in June 2008 about 250,000 people in Northamptonshire were being told to boil tap water for drinking after routine tests by Anglian Water found cryptosporidium[13]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in_England_and_Wales#cite_note-13

So this suggests there was an improvement, at least until 2008, but it would be interesting to see if there were further improvements made since.
The biggest issue in making a direct comparison is a lack of testing carried out under state ownership compared to more recent times and a greater public interest which means more incidents enter the public sphere that before, however this doesn't necessarily mean that there are now more than when in public hands and doesn't mean that there haven't been improvements made since changing hands.

 

[Since1982]

There is such a rose tinted glasses view on the water industry from when it was state owned.

One of the main reasons why is was sold off was that the state simply couldn't afford to pay for the upgrades and improvements required from such a poorly performing industry to get it up to standard.

Yes i know this is frrom Wikipedia and how reliable that can be, however:

​

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in_England_and_Wales#cite_note-13

So this suggests there was an improvement, at least until 2008, but it would be interesting to see if there were further improvements made since.
The biggest issue in making a direct comparison is a lack of testing carried out under state ownership compared to more recent times and a greater public interest which means more incidents enter the public sphere that before, however this doesn't necessarily mean that there are now more than when in public hands and doesn't mean that there haven't been improvements made since changing hands.

Rose tinted or not, and I'm plenty old enough to remember pre privatisation, it's a basic human need that does not belong in the hands of those whose primary concern is profit and shareholder earnings. And just for the record, I spent time as a shareholder manager in a PE owned business so I've no ideological aversion to private capital. But in this case I am opposed, and I'd happily see my tax £s spent on investing in a sustainable water industry than leaving it to the likes of Macquarie, Chinese, Middle Eastern sovereign wealth funds and the like.

 

[portlock seagull]

I can also remeber swimming in the sea with passing floaters and it was good when this stopped happening. Unfortunately, it's happening again and there is a hell of a lot wrong post privitisation. We kept horses in a field that the river in my pictures flows through. Sometimes we did see human excrement in the river. The water companies have simply failed in their duties, repeatedly. It isn't hysteria to complain that the body charged with meeting a minimum standard is failing to do so. It isn't hysteria pointing out that privitisation has leaked money to shareholders and households are now picking up the bill. All of our bills have gone up, ths seems the least justifiable in an industry with an ineffective regulator and a history of noncompliance. Your first sentences just makes generic excuses for failure we are now paying for with vague promises of some future possible improvement from a dire situation.

It’s hard to see how this can be prevented, beyond some dystopian style management where Red Army Officers are shot for failure or the like. We are all powerless to do anything other than cough up until we can cough no more. We all need water to exist as you say. Greed and corruption have won the day.