seems mad when we had water shortages around the country last year, that we allow something that uses so much water to go ahead.
Current Affairs The Conservative Party
- Thread starter Ashtonian
- Start date
- Status
Listened on the radio yesterday they were saying about how much water a day we are losing due to leaking pipe work.... can’t remember now if it was 3 million or 30 million litres a day.... it was astronomical anyway.
orchard
Player Valuation: £60m
Short term spivvery ffs mate
orchard
Player Valuation: £60m
Didn't realise you were a shepherd mate
You missed out on the chance to hang with Tommy Robinson.
roydo
in memoriam - 1965-2024
Most of it ends up back in the system at some point. Still mad that the infrastructure is still ropey after years of privatisation mind.
orchard
Player Valuation: £60m
Not really, they're there to make money for shareholders/skim subsidies.
roydo
in memoriam - 1965-2024
Most likely. I am not politically arsed about privatisation, but privatising the water baffled me at the time. Still does.
At least you can switch leccy, gas, phones etc. Not sure you have a choice with water.
orchard
Player Valuation: £60m
I understand the reasoning why they were all privatised, but I think the failed experiment is over, there wasn't ever much of a real choice to enable competition, individuals will always be at a disadvantage in negotiations compared with groups, and the real issue of poor management has never been addressed, imo.
Most experiments have evidence to prove either way don't they? What is the evidence in terms of the performance of the private companies versus their nationalized peers? What metrics are used? What are the results against those metrics? I don't know the answer either way btw, but if you're going to use words like experiment then you can't throw out that it's failed without providing at least a bit of actual evidence to support you rather than anecdotes.
I mean there was a story the other day about an NHS employee fiddling millions by faking a bunch of supplier relationships. I'm sure we'd all agree that is bad, but no one has made the case that this is a reason why the NHS is terrible, yet I suspect had that been a Virgin Health employee it would have been used as an example of how corrupt private health companies are etc. There's a strong case of confirmation bias in a lot of these things rather than letting the evidence guide you (the royal you btw, not you specifically).
zzr45
#MURDERINGSCUM
Have to say Schneider’s grandstanding is utterly grating. The government acknowledges that suicide is an issue and puts someone in charge to begin treating it as the problem it is. That clown completely dismisses it.
As someone who has been close to that edge, it’s really positive for me that we may see more acknowledgment of the wide ranging issues and we might see change. Speaking with friends that have been in similar positions it’s a view shared by others.
Mental Health is an issue in this country, it’s not helped by a minority of attention seeking individuals that abuse the system. I know from conversations with a mental health specialist that some will absolutely try their best to try and get diagnosed with a mental health problem. These people turn up and reel off internet sourced symptoms, but will be utterly unable to contextualise those experiences in their life or will blow minor anxiety or worry completely out of proportion. There’s a huge difference between being a bit apprehensive about something and being unable to get out of bed of a morning because it all seems utterly pointless. Sadly one group is more likely to talk about problems than the other.
It's a clear BS move with no thought behind it besides a PR stunt. To have no planning gone in to it shows it for the lie it is.
The Tories are affecting the mental health of thousands of people by screwing them for a few pounds a week in the name of austerity when it's a huge thing to the poor but doesn't make a damned bit of difference to the finances of the country
zzr45
#MURDERINGSCUM
The fact that there is now someone who is tasked with looking at suicide is a massive plus. Whether it’s a PR move or whatever doesn’t matter. It’s acknowledged that there’s a problem. It’s a start no matter how insignificant it seems. The same Twitterati that are poo-pooing the idea are the same that would be hailing Labour as visionaries had they done the same. It shouldn’t be a political stick with which to beat people with. As I’ve said, I along with others I know, see it as the hopeful start of something to prevent people going through what we have (and even worse.)
Of course that isn’t soundbite politics so can be dismissed completely.
tsubaki
Player Valuation: £90m
I think you are confusing the notion of the suicide prevention minister with the reality of it.
I agree, if you had someone to actually look at what it is the state does and how it could lead society in preventing much of what drives these tragedies then it would be a massive improvement on what we have now. Based on the history of this Government that is emphatically not what we will end up with.
- Status