Allow us to just interpret Willy Hutton and Andy Haldane for you here

On the subject of what to do with the utilities we get:

Having done so, what alternative governance structures strike a better balance than the extremes of nationalisation or privatisation? Aligning the incentives of utilities with those of the public could be done most easily and effectively by turning them into public-benefit companies with a primary, constitutional objective of delivering high-quality services, with profitability subordinate to that broader aim.

This has the advantage that it could be introduced within the current ownership and licensing regime. While not without potential legal challenge, in principle it would not require expensive compensation to shareholders who have already considered a level of regulatory risk when making their investment. The government itself could take a special or “golden share” at a nominal cost of £1, of the type used to maintain BAE Systems and Rolls-Royce (and latterly Royal Mail) in domestic ownership.

To translate the core of that second paragraph. “As the shareholders in the utilities already worry that government might steal their stuff we’ll not have to compensate them very much when government does steal their stuff”. We’re really not sure whether the law does work quite that way and we’re absolutely certain it’s immoral even if it does.

But that is the heart, the nest egg, of this plan. We’ll fiddle some method of taking it all off ‘em and the fiddle’ll be so we don’t have to pay them very much.

Umm, no. We are aware that certain aspects of statecraft are, by definition, vile. But we see no reason why this one should be.

Tim Worstall