Your view

I am a traditional Tory, but it’s time our water was renationalised

Letters to the editor: our readers share their views. Please send your letters to letters@independent.co.uk

Tuesday 02 April 2024 13:31 EDT
Comments
‘When the Thames is too dangerous for the university boat race, it’s clear we are the laughing stock of the world’
‘When the Thames is too dangerous for the university boat race, it’s clear we are the laughing stock of the world’ (Getty)

I am a traditional Tory voter. I have never been a fan of the nationalisation of industries, and I was in favour of Brexit, despite one of the best EU policies being the introduction of laws to encourage an improvement in water quality.

But, who can justify what has happened with the water supply in this country over the last 30 years? Shareholders and senior staff paid huge bonuses rather than investing in improvements in infrastructure and water quality.

When the Thames is too dangerous for the University Boat Race to go in the water, it’s clear we are the laughing stock of the world.

More than 25 per cent of all (expensively treated) water in London is lost due to ancient sewers still needing to be repaired and replaced, even after all these years. And now Thames Water wants to increase customer bills to pay for breaches of laws around the protection of the environment and necessary improvements?

It is all too easy to blame the Conservative government, but this has been done under the watch of Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat administrations. The answer quite simply is for the government to take over ownership of the companies supplying water – without compensation to any of the shareholders. Their negligence does not need rewarding. Enough is enough!

Philip Pound

Sydenham

An insult to the consumer

What a disgrace it is to see energy giants like Centrica yet again making huge profits and paying their chief executive up to £8.2m.

In the midst of the biggest cost of living crisis for decades, this is nothing short of an insult to the British consumer.

It simply underlines how we need a government to step in and not just take back control, but to redress the balance, delivering clean energy and energy security so we are never reliant on foreign energy in the future again.

That is exactly what I believe is on offer from the Labour Party. Keir Starmer’s recent visit to Holyhead and Ed Miliband’s recent visit to Balltec in Morecambe displayed just that.

A green prosperity plan would mean more jobs, lower bills, energy security, and climate leadership.

Geoffrey Brooking

Havant

The fabric of our society is crumbling

The unexpected and unwanted consequence of the “crackdown on crime” by this government is that fewer criminals are actually being prosecuted and punished as intended, or not at all.

There appears not to be enough prison space, court time or manpower for people charged with offences, particularly knife crime, to be brought to justices as prescribed in law. And those that are eventually found guilty of a crime are often facing, what appears to me, to be lenient sentences.

This failure is yet another example of disjointed governance by the Tories. Their management style is fatally flawed and illogical.

To “crack down” on crime, the police force, courts and judges need to be capable of processing the increased numbers of transgressors. Instead, the Tories depleted our police force, reduced the number of courts/judges and reduced the amount of money funding the judicial system.

The government blames the lack of funds to pay for policing in Britain, yet still finds projects to waste what little funds we have. We have a situation now where our police force is depleted, demoralised and facing a public that has lost faith in their ability to police our streets adequately.

Rishi Sunak and his government have, over the past 14 years, managed to ruin Britain’s future through its mismanagement and dogma. They have not listened to nor acted upon the needs of the country, and the outcome that appears to be manifesting itself, thank goodness, is a swing towards a Labour administration.

If the polls are correct, the Conservatives will be annihilated in the upcoming general election. The probability of a two-term Labour government is a welcome effect of the Tory failure to improve our standard of living. But the Labour Party’s task of giving Britain financial stability will be a long road, needing sound planning and leadership.

There are basic needs for every society, of which a competent police force and judicial system are paramount for the wellbeing of the population. But it appears that the fabric of our society is crumbling, and the last 14 years have been lost years. Roll on the general election!

Keith Poole

Basingstoke

Where do they go?

Far be it for me to criticise yet another ill-thought-out government plan, but there would seem to be at least two major issues with the Tory plan to criminalise rough sleeping.

Firstly, if a rough sleeper were to have the money to pay fines, they would perhaps not be without a bed. On the other hand, despite our prisons being full to bursting point, the threat of prison may be regarded as a bonus for those seeking a bed and board.

I wonder where they are going to place all these unfortunate people when there are already not enough places for those committing knife crimes.

Geoff Forward

Stirling

You get what you vote for

The National Trust has come under a lot of criticism lately, mainly from Restore Trust members, who think the National Trust has dumbed down and become “woke”. Overall, though, I guess the majority of members are content with the way the buildings and land are run and protected. On my visits, I’ve not felt I’ve been talked down to or lectured. The volunteer staff have been keen to explain things and answer questions. It’s good to see children being allowed to explore, with less of the old “look, don’t touch” attitude.

I’m interested in where the money came from to build and buy the estates and also how they held onto them, what investments were made, and how people, tenants and workers were treated. I don’t know what percentage of members bothered to vote at the last AGM, but I wonder if many thought that if the current approach is working, why risk changing it?

Those who did vote had the choice to take the advice of the board or, like me, make up their own mind. You get what the majority vote for. Isn’t that the way democracy works?

Dave Thomas

Bristol

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in