The" leaders" debate

[truman]

They are missing and shouldn't be.

 

So that's a gigantic slab of spending that isn't included in Labour's numbers? It must run into tens of billions...

[Supertramp]

So that's a gigantic slab of spending that isn't included in Labour's numbers? It must run into tens of billions...

 

£110 billion for just the National Grid and water companies alone.

[sgtkate]

So that's a gigantic slab of spending that isn't included in Labour's numbers? It must run into tens of billions...

 

I'm not disagreeing with you. Yes it should be in there, or at least a good explanation as to why. Alan has said they won't renew private contracts, so while there should be no cost in 'buying them back' clearly there will be associated costs simply in creating new departments to run them if nothing else. And yes, it's a shame those numbers aren't there.

[Supertramp]

I believe the plan for re-nationalisation is to simply not renew the private contracts when they expire. Good idea in my view.

 

That's the trains. What about the water companies and the national grid and the energy companies?

[sgtkate]

£110 billion for just the National Grid and water companies alone.

 

Where has that figure come from? And if people can create figures like that, then can they do the same for the Tory manifesto?

[Supertramp]

I'm not disagreeing with you. Yes it should be in there, or at least a good explanation as to why. Alan has said they won't renew private contracts, so while there should be no cost in 'buying them back' clearly there will be associated costs simply in creating new departments to run them if nothing else. And yes, it's a shame those numbers aren't there.

 

Only the train franchises are franchises with no cost in taking them over once the contract expires.

 

---------- Post added 02-06-2017 at 11:04 ----------

 

Where has that figure come from? And if people can create figures like that, then can they do the same for the Tory manifesto?

 

What? The water companies are traded on the stock market. It's easy to calculate how much they are worth. So is the National Grid (but I think that may own other things that are not needed). So are energy companies.

[truman]

I'm not disagreeing with you. Yes it should be in there, or at least a good explanation as to why. Alan has said they won't renew private contracts, so while there should be no cost in 'buying them back' clearly there will be associated costs simply in creating new departments to run them if nothing else. And yes, it's a shame those numbers aren't there.

 

What "private contracts " do the water and energy companies have can be taken over at no cost? Even for the trains there's a cost unless all the rolling stock was free...

Edited June 2, 2017 by truman

[I1L2T3]

Only the train franchises are franchises with no cost in taking them over once the contract expires.

 

---------- Post added 02-06-2017 at 11:04 ----------

 

 

What? The water companies are traded on the stock market. It's easy to calculate how much they are worth. So is the National Grid (but I think that may own other things that are not needed). So are energy companies.

 

The reality is that the govt will not be able to nationalise all the companies quickly, and whatever Corbyn things about 100% nationalisation it won't happen. The solution could probably be arms-length private companies 51% owned by the taxpayer. Still very profitable and still attractive to investors. Still subject to Ofwat, Ofgem oversight around pricing, billing, customer service, maintenance etc...

 

So basically you're just spreading made up scare stories

[sgtkate]

What "private contracts " do the water and energy companies have can be taken over at no cost?

 

I think both of us were getting mixed up with the trains and no you are indeed right that the water and electricity companies would need to be bought out. If the current valuation puts them at £110bn, only figures on profit I can find is £105 per customer average(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/household-bills/7292915/Energy-companies-making-105-profit-per-customer.html) , based on 23.4m households (https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/householdsintheuk) so that's an annual profit of £2.5bn for the energy companies.

 

Average water company profit margin was 9%, so based on average household water bill of £395 a year, so £36 profit per customer, giving another £840mn each year in profit.

 

Add together gets you £3bn a year, buying back on those current valuations (which now seem remarkable high based on the profits being made but I'll trust your figures) would mean it would take 33 years to clear the debt. On the pure basis of cost I'd say it's doesn't look like a great policy, however, if the government is able to bring costs down for consumers then that needs looking at too but sadly we don't have figures for that either.

[Supertramp]

The reality is that the govt will not be able to nationalise all the companies quickly, and whatever Corbyn things about 100% nationalisation it won't happen. The solution could probably be arms-length private companies 51% owned by the taxpayer. Still very profitable and still attractive to investors. Still subject to Ofwat, Ofgem oversight around pricing, billing, customer service, maintenance etc...

 

So basically you're just spreading made up scare stories

 

Me? That's the Labour manifesto saying they want to Privatise these things.

 

All I've done is indicate how much it would cost.

 

What you've done is make something up.