Mutual respect
Quoth a Minister: 鈥淲e鈥檙e just not gonnae dae it.鈥
Said SNP minister was commenting, privately, on the prospect of whether Scottish Water might be mutualised.
You remember mutual status It was enjoyed by several building societies before they started pretending to be banks.
It was the co-operative image projected by insurance companies of old.
For those who advocate public ownership of water, mutualisation presents a snag. Mutuals can and often do demutualise. Just ask the customers of Standard Life.
In May last year John Swinney, the finance secretary, responded to the Howat Report which examined Scottish Executive/Government spending.
Policy position
The report made many recommendations. .
He said: 鈥淪cottish Water will retain its current status. This is our clear policy position.鈥
Has that crisp, clear water now become just a little muddied? At Tory prompting, MSPs debated water.
Bear with me, this matters.
Tories say: review SW, look at options including mutualisation, act this parliament. LibDems say: mutualise but don鈥檛 privatise. Labour says: keep SW public but 鈥渒eep under review鈥 its status, including the option of mutualisation.
How does the Labour position differ from the Tories? One is active mood, one is passive. 鈥淩eview鈥 is active. 鈥淜eep under review鈥 is passive.
Non-starter
By definition, pretty well everything is kept under review by governments at all times.
The overnight briefings became firm statements from ministers and backbenchers in the debate that mutualisation is a non-starter.
So how to dispel the cloud? What鈥檚 going on? Firstly, I think ministers were primarily motivated to defeat the Tory motion which calls for an active review.
Hence the attraction of the (relatively imprecise) Labour amendment.
Secondly, I believe there are SNP ministers who are potentially attracted by the savings to the public purse which would follow mutualisation (and its attendant power for SW to borrow in the market.)
Thirdly, there are SNP backbenchers who adhere to the following syllogism. Mutualisation = privatisation = a victory for evil.
I think, in sum, that this little episode reflects the competing strains and stresses of minority government.
Is John Swinney signalling that he is ready, soon, to mutualise Scottish Water? No.
Is he retaining the 鈥渃lear policy position鈥 of last May that change is to be ruled out utterly? No. Scotland will return, collectively, to this issue, possibly in the next parliament.
I'm 
Comments
Who cares what Swinney does? The cost to us all will continue to escalate.
It's a sad thing that water is increasingly being treated as a commodity. Given that most of the year it's literally pouring off our hills, I think the case for mutualisation (or indeed privatisation) has yet to be demonstrated.
I may be wrong, but, was Northern Rock not a mutual once apon a time.
In the words of Private Fraser " were doomed, doomed ah tell ye"
Perhaps corporal Jones " They don't like it up them Captain Mannaring" Would be more apt.
if it is mutualised,does this mean we will be charged for flooding?
I live in London, if you know what's good for you, you will not go down the road England has. Keep Scottish Water under public control. I pay throught the teeth for water!
The Tories sold of the family silver, this foll-hardy venture continiues to be supported by newish right wing, blame the immigant, Labour party.
Down here during the long hot summers we are looking to Scotland to bridge any gap in our provision, be that via canal or tanker.
If water goes into private hands, the peope of Scotland will not have a say in how its water is distributed. Much the same as you currently do not have a say on Trident being hosted at Faslane.
From a far, many are envious you have a governemnt that appear to be doing what the public want. What a novel idea! Oh we could have that down here, we have no choice, Brown or Cameron, what's the difference?
Do not go down the route of private water!
My opinion would be to have Water in Public Hands - end of arguement. The only problem with that is that a Government of a different persuasion in the future could perhaps Privatise it, and I would never ever want that. That is, of course, a very slim possibility.
Mutualisation could be considered as a defence against this only. If it were to be mutualised and the rules put into place that a vote of say 80% was needed to change any rule, then it would probably be safe. Possibly even safer that remaining in the Public Sector.
That said the punt into the long grass will suffice.
I live in London, if you know what's good for you, you will not go down the road England has. Keep Scottish Water under public control. I pay throught the teeth for water!
The Tories sold of the family silver, this foll-hardy venture continiues to be supported by newish right wing, blame the immigant, Labour party.
Down here during the long hot summers we are looking to Scotland to bridge any gap in our provision, be that via canal or tanker.
If water goes into private hands, the peope of Scotland will not have a say in how its water is distributed. Much the same as you currently do not have a say on Trident being hosted at Faslane.
From a far, many are envious you have a governemnt that appear to be doing what the public want. What a novel idea! Oh we could have that down here, we have no choice, Brown or Cameron, what's the difference?
Do not go down the route of private water!
I live in London, if you know what's good for you, you will not go down the road England has. Keep Scottish Water under public control. I pay throught the teeth for water!
The Tories sold of the family silver, this foll-hardy venture continiues to be supported by newish right wing, blame the immigant, Labour party.
Down here during the long hot summers we are looking to Scotland to bridge any gap in our provision, be that via canal or tanker.
If water goes into private hands, the peope of Scotland will not have a say in how its water is distributed. Much the same as you currently do not have a say on Trident being hosted at Faslane.
From a far, many are envious you have a governemnt that appear to be doing what the public want. What a novel idea! Oh we could have that down here, we have no choice, Brown or Cameron, what's the difference?
Do not go down the route of private water!
While Annabel Goldie raised the Water question at FMQs, Wendy Alexander once again went on the same line: SNP's Council tax freeze means cuts in local services, therefore the SNP doesn't care about the poor and disadvantaged.
The FM has a pretty decent response:
despite worst deal for Scotland from Treasury for years, budget for Local Government has increased, therefore it's Labour at a UK level that has caused the problem and the SNP have done the best they can.
And yet, this repeated attack on the FM might actually stick. It's a bit like David Cameron's repeated use of the word "dithering" at PMQs. Even if it's not true (although to be fair DC has a point), mud sticks.
Maybe being limited in what she could ask questions about while under investigation has actually done Wendy a favour.
Once the City get its hands on utilities they will either automatically flog them off to a foreign company for a profit or suck them dry of cash.
Scottish Water should absolutely remain in public ownership. Nobody in their right mind should trust our glorious financial services sector to do the right thing with it.
I nearly had kittens when I heard them say they were going to have a review about it. It's when they say they will have a full public consultation about it that you really have to worry. Why even look at this as an option? SNP plus Labour? Wasn't this a big enough majority to just say, "nah... no thanks"?
Bringing the element of profit into an import service like this is just not on. Only today in Kilmarnock Prison (privately run) someone was killed because there wasn't enough staff present. Mutualisation is just a big thick grey line between public ownership and private ownership. A big thick grey line that can move, from one to the other. And once it's gone all the way over to privatisation it'll be really hard to get it back.
Keeping water under public ownership would ensure accountability, something that is increasingly difficult to see with the other utilities, regardless of regulatory regimes
Mutualisation could be ok as long as it was set in law never to be made private and all monies reinvested,surplus could always be exported to England.I live near a river and often think what a waste all that water just running into the Firth.
Good to see the Conservatives promoting mutuality.Most unlike their sterotype and,I suspect,their Westminster colleagues.Can we now expect them to suggest other utility firms,insurance companies,building societies etc that they would confer mutuality on(or other forms of cooperative ownership/social enterprise)?
No,I didn't think so!
As you know Brian, perception is more important than reality. You and I and thousands of other political anoraks may know the agenda was mundane, but to the voter it appears that Prime Minister Salmond is being recognised by other governments and of course the use of the castle, a little touch of genius I think.
A happy by product of this meeting of course will be the softening of the attitude of the Orange fraternity towards the SNP.
Equally the PM having Martin McGuinnes on his other side won't do him any harm with Glasgow's green and white brigade either.
All in all, another wee victory for the PM I think.
Put Scottish water as a private company with the Scottish Government owning all the voting shares and a statement in the company charter that the company cannot be sold off without a referendum held throughout Scotland.
Am I the only person who is sick to the back teeth of the rank negativity of the labour party in scotland. If I hear one more cry of poor two year olds or cold grannies i think i am going to scream. The labour party have no policies all they can do is sit and scream at the snp. When are they actually going to come up with solutions to problems instead of shouting about the problems (real or imaginary). Thats what i like about the SNP its the can do attitude. They dont sit and snipe they actually get things done. Can we not just send labour somewhere else till the next election. What about kosovo or cuba?
Muddy Waters wrote and sung
'Catfish Blues', which just about sums up my attitude to any monopoly,including Scottish Water.
Its 2008 for goodness sake get rid of organised monopolies !
Wansanshoo.
Scottish Water is increasing its charges by 3.7% soon, while half of its drinkable water is leaking away.It is grossly inefficient; yet it is better than privatisation by the back door.It needs to get its act together, so as to prove that Mutualisation is a non starter. A good solution to this would be to give water back to the Local Authorities. When my local Authority controlled it, I did not have to filter it to make it drinkable. I do now.
Last night on TV the SNP spoksman said they would review the water mutual issue as they review all departments under their governance.
They seem to be paying lip service to this issue to appease the tories,
though it is not unusual that the tories are calling for the first steps to privitisation.
Thatcher sold of all our utilities for next to nothing and now we are paying more then ever for our fundimental services.
I think we should re-nationalise all the utilities again and while were at it reclaim our oil and gas from the wastmister robbers.
Two minutes into power and already the bigwigs in the SNP are looking towards their futures, ideally as a director of some large utility company.
If Labour had even hinted at this, Alex Salmond would have been foaming at the mouth.
Have they not seen what has happened in England? Utility companies should never be passed into private ownership. Water is essential, it is not something to be traded with or to be sold to some overseas company.
But I am glad that Swinney is involved, and that finally people may realise that while Labour was not exactly useful in Scotland (I'm no supporter of them), the SNP are worse.
You can see right through the SNP considerations here: sell off the company, gain a few hundred million, use it to secure short term votes and stuff the consumer.
Charlie Gordon escapes justice, just like Wendy, and this is the lead story on the blog?! The difference between "review" and "keep under review"!
I presume the SNP are trying to appease the tories with the review. Mutuality will lead down the dark road of privatisation. Review aside Scotland's charge of water will grow under the rate of inflation if things reside the same, however viewing the Welsh mutual company's charges are above inflation. I get the non-profit patter as much as the next person but mutuality is wrong for something we have in abundance.
We have it it is relatively clean and the Tories want to privatise it does this sound familiar.
I hope I gained the right impression I hope Alex Salmond is simply doing what he thinks is right and fair as First Minister when he offers a review. I hope he is paying lip service I would be disappointed in him were it otherwise. This country has lost too much to consider letting something as basic as our water supply be raided by the fat cats in industry. We should be working to return our basic needs to public ownership.
Isn't it amazing that these issues look so "clearer" from the outside.
The SNP are finding just how hard it is to get things done one elected.
Im totaly against the Mutualisationor giving away of the control of Scottish Water. Water is becoming a comoditty to sell and with movement towards Devolution it will increasingly become an exportable asset in just plain water as well as Hydro form. It will hopefully in turn become self financing and actually contribute to the Coffers in an Independant Scotland. Dont be fooled the Union Tories are trying to Asset strip. All we have is an abundance of natural resource to make Scotland sucessful on its own. Dont give it away.
Ask yourself if there was no profit to make in the future who would want to be part of the Mutual group. I dont think this would be seen as a charitable investment.
now now brian, i think you are trying to make some "havoc" and a diversion,you KNOW fine well, that nothing will change,"review" is another way of kicking things into the long grass,that said its also a good way to see whats going on,this was set up under the (last lot) so no more surprises,goodness knows, what is lurking below the surface,
ofcource its another thing for wendy to get airiated about along with the poor,vulnarable children,discarded humans,pestulants, fleas,and probable rat infestation, she blames on alex,just because he's outwitted
her,and is doing a fine job.
Utilities should stay in public hands.
However, without "competition" there is no incentive for Scottish Water to improve and make things more efficient so we get better value for our money.
There has to be some way of getting the benefit of both.
oh come on PMK charlie says he has known for 2 weeks .more like 2 months
so it's not actually news and if you thought he was going to be done for any of this you have a lot to learn. in scotland it is not the media that choose the headlines they just do as they are told!
Leave sotlands water in the hands of the scottish government, otherwise we will all be paying more for it to make shareholders even richer.
There are some things that are just simply right and this is one of them.
180 m per year is 20 quid per year per person, for washing, bathing, swimming, drinking, etc Ive paid 5 times that when I got my water from a private company in england and in germany I now pay 25 quid a month.
I think the scottish people are getting a good deal here, lets not spoil it
Handing Scottish Water into private ownership will mean escalating water costs for the public, Directorships for retiring M.S.P's and a water supply company which will not deliver an acceptable level of service, but will deliver enormous profits for its corporate investors. Once out of public control the organization will become another money cow for the London Finance market.
Keep Scottish Water public.
Reviews are keeping the Tories sweet for the next time the Nats need them.
Scottish Water may not be the most efficient water comapany on the globe but it's said to be the best in the UK. Mutualisation will lead to privatisation and then some global comapany will own it from afar and not give a monkey's about Scots.
It's got to stay in public hands and keep the Tories out of it. Anyone who is seriously connsidering the future of Scottish Water should read *5. I'll turn my back on the Nats if they turn on their pledge.
Water is THE necessity of life.
You can live about 6 days without water.
Thatcher sold the family silver for peanuts, followed by Blair, so leave us our water at least.
It鈥檚 the people鈥檚 water, so in no way should water be mutualised or privatised.
Water is Scotland鈥檚 pot of gold, worth more than whisky, gas, oil or any other commodity you care to mention.
Soon enough, with climate change increasing, countries will be going to war over water, and Scotland will be sitting pretty.
We can then sell or exchange water for gold or whatever our country needs.
England unfortunately is overheating, especially in the South East corner, and that is commercially as well as thermally.
Britain is not playing fair with the rest of the country by keeping all the jobs and wealth in the South East, so it is no wonder if the folks of Berwick-upon-Tweed want to leave England along with the Scots. The next in the queue will be folks from Newcastle, because they get an unfair deal also.
The discontent in the country is massive and down to bad governance, but Government ignores it at it鈥檚 peril, and it鈥檚 their responsibility, so people just want out of a system that doesn鈥檛 work for them.
It鈥檚 Time For Change.
.
Water is a natural monopoly.
Public Monopoly = poor service, gross inefficiency, high handed attitude to customers
Mutualised or Private Monopoly = poor service, gross inefficiency, high handed attitude to customers,
make no difference to me
It's a shame no-one is mentioning the 'p' word....privatisation (not even the Tories).
Public ownership is a complete misnomer.Scottish Water is terrible. But the lefties refuse to recognise this. Their position is simple - socialism isn't working, so let's try it some more.
Scottish Water is the worst performing water authority in the UK BELOW all of those nasty, privatised English water utilities. Scottish consumers pay MORE for their water and recieve a poorer service.
Privatise Scottish Water - it's a no brainer!
After seeing the profits at British Gas - I am amazed anyone is pushing privatisation here (when even the Tories are refusing to).
Privatisation has not worked for any of the British industries, be it our water, electricity, railways or steelworks. The public should be clawing back these for the sake of the future.
SW to stay public or we will suffer later on.