The Great Permacrises

Thames reported an increase in annual profits to £157.3m, but boss Chris Weston said the company was facing a difficult time, with strengthening its financial position “a critical priority”.

Eh? How can a company in profit be scheduled to run out cash in the next financial year?

Thames’ results showed that it paid two dividends worth a total of £158.3m to two of its holding companies in March this year.

oic

4 Likes

The Board takes the payment of dividends extremely seriously and
took the view that the payment of these dividends was required for
the financial stability of the operating company

:white_check_mark: Can’t touch us Ofwat we said we took it seriously and it’s for stability

two interim dividends totalling £158.3 million in March 2024 to enable Kemble Water Eurobond plc and Thames Water Limited to settle amounts owing to the Company for group relief surrendered, and Kemble Water Eurobond plc to make pension contribution payments to the Thames Water Pension Scheme and Thames
Water Mirror Image Pension Scheme defined benefit schemes on behalf of the Company.

Looks like it’s shifting money around

Anglian Water just been made to pay £50,000 after not handing over records in the sewage investigation. They basically need to put their hand down the back of the sofa.

The response was meh that’s hardly anything so must not be a significant failure. Not an apology for being caught withholding environmental data.

The water company said it was “disappointed” but the “low level of sentence” reflected that “this was not a significant failure”.

2 Likes

Spotted this on the Simple Politics insta

2 Likes

It’s a good thing allowing the younger generation to vote IMO.

They will have fresh views and vote for parties that they need to move forward in life.

Make opinions without being tainted from historic events, it’s their world too after all.

4 Likes

Yes to all 3! :tada:

1 Like

You could just as easily say their opinions aren’t based on their real world experiences.

Regardless, I’m all for lowering the voting age. If you’re old enough to work and pay taxes, there’s no reason your voice shouldn’t count.

Still not a fan of the smoking law. Adults should be able to make these sorts of decisions for themselves.

3 Likes

I think most kids these days are probably significantly more clued up on what’s going on than older generations, what with such easy access to information. I would imagine the older people get the more likely they are to vote for the same party without actually knowing anything about the people they’re voting for or what the policies are, they just want that party. Granted that’s a generalisation from a very small sample size but it’s the impression I get.

Agree in principle, I guess it depends if the tax revenue covers the burden on the NHS of smoking related illnesses, and there’s also second hand inhalation to consider. I think overall a smoke free world would be better but also not totally sure choice should be taken away.

For me, smoking is the same as fireworks being sold in supermarkets. It’s acceptable because it’s always been a thing, but if it was only introduced now people would think it was mad.

1 Like

I’m incredibly glad to see this being revived if true. We will one day absolutely look back on smoking as an odd thing we allowed people to do much like when we put cocaine in everything and then were shocked to find that addictive substances sell…

4 Likes

I like it, if only for the fact it helps get us closer to a smoke-free world I’d really like to enjoy, because today, there’s no escaping it. I don’t think we’re proposing to go remotely far enough on smoking imo though. The proverbial line for me is drawn by the answer to the question, does this choice harm others? The answer for smoking is a resounding and objective yes. And it causes such harm without even requiring the consent of those you put in harms way through that choice with no recourse.

By all means people should be allowed to smoke if they want to. They should not, however, be allowed to do so in a determined proximity to those who don’t wish to be subject to the effects of their decision to smoke IMO.

4 Likes

I would prefer the vaping to be looked at.

I know it’s different in parts of the UK but I can go months without spotting anyone smoking cigarettes. And then when I do it’s some old fart who’s likely done it for sixty years and will do it regardless until they die.

Vapes on the other hand it feels like taken over from those that would have had a cig in hand a decade ago.

Very few appear to have any consideration so you’re one minute following someone on the path and then breathing in a load of peach flavoured mist.

5 Likes

I was about to come and say this. I don’t think smoking is even the ‘cool’ thing anymore amongst 18/19-year-olds.

Very few people are going to be impacted by the law-change because everybody vapes now.

No problem in bringing in the law then, if it won’t affect many.

Vaping I agree with - sick of them on train platforms and even inside tube stations and always some young teen who thinks they can do what they like!

5 Likes

2 Likes

I’m a bit conflicted on the smoking issue. I agree with the sentiment that smoking is a pretty awful, addictive habit, that’s sold to us by unscrupulous companies, and I’d be glad to see the back of it. But equally the idea that, one day, smoking will be legal if you’re 39 years old but not if you’re 38 years old… that’s weird.

Tbh, I don’t think we’re in a bad place with tobacco: there’s no advertising, the brands are almost unrecognisable because of the packaging rules, they’re heavily taxed, and they’re increasingly unpopular. I’m not sure there’s much need for change, but I don’t see any positives in keeping the industry going either.

3 Likes

I’m pretty sure that is not true.

Easier access to information, yes, but much more likely to live in an echo chamber given social media.

1 Like

Have you ever looked on Facebook? Have you seen where the conspiracy theories etc come from? Who is most influenced by media?

The same statement is VERY true for older boomers. :slight_smile:

4 Likes

That was my thought too. Massive amounts of disinformation around and social media being most people’s source of news isn’t promising.

The proliferation of media also doesn’t help. Back in my day(!) you watched the news because there was nothing else to watch. There’s just an overload of options these days.

Also doesn’t help that most of the high quality news is paywalled.

2 Likes

Yeah, your pretty much right. It’s absolutely hilarious to see these smoking laws come decades too late. The market moved on, tobacco taxation made smoking too expensive to “get started” with, if anything all of the “younger” smokers I’ve seen started with vapes! I’m sure in 20-30 years we might see someone come along and ban vaping in a similar way, by which time we’ll probably have a new system

1 Like

I would say younger people would be more aware of the fact echo chambers exist and would be more exposed to a wider range of views, rather than older generations who probably get their news from the same single source they have for the last 20+ years.

6 Likes