It seems that we are building a solid case for critical infrastructure being state owned because the current investment structure is incapable of supporting industries with substantial long term investment requirements that will not increase profitability.
The state is not well regarded for delivering infrastructure projects on time and within budget.....quite the reverse actually, it has a track record of failing miserably. Secondly, the state may not want to raise increase/maintain the current tax burden to fund such infrastructure projects, as the UK is now becoming less attractive to investors due to its tax burden. So the question will be who picks up the tab, and most likely it will be the consumer. I'm not so sure the government wants the water companies and its future infrastructure costs/liabilities on the UK balance sheet.
The government does as a minimum need to restrict the dividend distribution policies of ex public sector industries, whilst they undertake massive capital investment programmes to update our infrastructure, which will of course have an impact on future returns for pension funds etc..
