I wouldn't strictly put all of them at the feet of the EU. While what you say is true, the Conservatives were frothing to privatise whatever they could. Labour just went along with the process (and I'm no Labour supporter either).

The one I won't forgive was our water. I believe we're the only developed country to have privatised our water, with disastrous consequences.

And that one can be squarely laid at the feet of Margaret 'Fucking" Thatcher (real name).

▲

blibble 6 hours ago | parent [-]

> The one I won't forgive was our water. I believe we're the only developed country to have privatised our water, with disastrous consequences.

100% agreed

there's no market or competition at any level (even RAIL had somewhat competitive bidding for franchises)

they're just Henry VIII style granted monopolies, with the results are the same as they were 800 years ago

(well, other than the civil war bit)

> And that one can be squarely laid at the feet of Margaret 'Fucking" Thatcher (real name).

water was another EU triggered one: the EU (EEC) kept writing new water directives, and the government couldn't figure out another way to fund their implementation

▲

iknowstuff 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

This is wrong.

A large chunk of the “classic” UK sell-offs were 1980s to early 1990s: BT (1984), British Gas (1986), British Airways (1987), and by 1991 regional electricity and water companies had been privatised.

A lot of EU single-market liberalisation in network industries ramped up later (late 1980s/1990s, and beyond). For example, telecoms EU “competition” directives begin in 1988/1990 and are amended through the 1990s. Meanwhile, the UK government had already announced plans to sell major chunks of BT by 1982, and BT’s privatization was implemented through UK legislation. England/Wales water privatization was created by Water Act 1989.

▲

wizzwizz4 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

If the government couldn't figure out a way to fund their implementation, then either the government was insufficiently-wily (in which case, they could've hired wily consultants), or it was genuinely impossible without taking money from another pot. If the latter, then selling to a for-profit corporate structure was the worst possible decision they could've made.

	▲	blibble 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I'm absolutely certain mountains of useless consultants were involved