3 ms·

Sure, but in this case, it's a non-profit bound by a series of regulations related to water supply. We already have an example of the model you proposed, in th

Sure, but in this case, it's a non-profit bound by a series of regulations related to water supply. We already have an example of the model you proposed, in the rail network. In practice, it's another way for losses to be socialised and profits to be privatised. I don't think there is a way to reconcile the fundamental unprofitability of long-term maintentance of national infrastructure with private operation. Fundamentally, the government's job is to do what we cannot.

jemmyw 3y ago
> We already have an example of the model you proposed, in the rail network I can see why you thought that but that's not what I meant. I should get my water from the local council, it should be branded as Sussex water or whatever. They can use private companies to do the work required to deliver and bill, or they can do it in-house, I don't care. Same as how the govt uses private contractors for doing road building and maintenance. It being a public service does not mean there's no place for private companies in there.