" [Labour] thinks there is room for improvement and, politically, there is significant pressure to ‘do something’ about utilities.
“One idea we believe might be attractive to the Labour leadership is re-purposing utilities and utility networks into a new breed of declared social purpose companies – companies that remain privately owned, who absolutely can (and should) make a profit, but ones that also have a special duty to take a long-term view.”
Won’t somebody please think of the children shareholders!
The higher levels of companies are obliged to oppose this on behalf of their shareholders. If they do not, they run the risk of being removed. It would be hilarious, if the money wasn’t coming out of our pockets for a utility we have no control over.
Forcing companies to take a long view is absolutely more sustainable, because it prevents boards of directors from bleeding a company next quarter to make this one look good.
Bleeding a company dry which is critical infrastructure and therefore the gov will have to step in spending tax ££ on it.
These companies should’ve never been privatised.
but ones that also have a special duty to take a long-term view.”
Nice of them to admit they don’t currently care about anything but the short term. Changing the name won’t change their outlook, get these utility monopolies back into government control.
" [Labour] thinks there is room for improvement and, politically, there is significant pressure to ‘do something’ about utilities.
“One idea we believe might be attractive to the Labour leadership is re-purposing utilities and utility networks into a new breed of declared social purpose companies – companies that remain privately owned, who absolutely can (and should) make a profit, but ones that also have a special duty to take a long-term view.”
Won’t somebody please think of the
childrenshareholders!The higher levels of companies are obliged to oppose this on behalf of their shareholders. If they do not, they run the risk of being removed. It would be hilarious, if the money wasn’t coming out of our pockets for a utility we have no control over.
Forcing companies to take a long view is absolutely more sustainable, because it prevents boards of directors from bleeding a company next quarter to make this one look good.
Bleeding a company dry which is critical infrastructure and therefore the gov will have to step in spending tax ££ on it. These companies should’ve never been privatised.
Nice of them to admit they don’t currently care about anything but the short term. Changing the name won’t change their outlook, get these utility monopolies back into government control.