Thames Water opts not to claw-back £2.5m of bonuses despite government disapproval
The company is beset by uncertainty, performing poorly and therefore a regular target of both political flak and public fury.
Who'd want to manage a company like Thames?
On one level, you can understand the logic of promising 21 senior managers at Thames bonuses totalling £15.7 million, just for hanging on in there until June 2026.
You can also understand why the payouts, which are not linked to performance, are being characterised as rewarding something that looks a lot like failure.
The Management Retention Plan (MRP) is targeted at a 'small number of individuals considered to be critical to both the Company's restructuring process and ongoing operational improvement,' explains Sir Adrian Montague, Thames' chairman.
His letter to the Environment Select Committee reveals that eight members of the firm's leadership team of 40 resigned in the year to March 2025, and that those who remain are 'regularly' approached with offers to jump ship.
In an attempt to hold onto 'the highest calibre of talent,' Thames Water paid nearly £2.5 million to its senior managers on April 21.
The managers, who are all paid salaries of between £100,000 and £500,000, are due to receive the same amount again in December and a further £10.8 million next June.
The company paused its MRP in May after the government expressed disapproval.
Montague says the board does not intend to recover the bonuses that have been paid to date.
He adds that the MRP 'was and remains paused' pending a decision by OFWAT on whether it should be allowed to continue.
Thames is financing the bonuses using money from an emergency loan of £3 billion which is intended to keep the firm afloat while its future is decided.
The loan carries an interest rate of 9.75% plus fees, and was advanced by the same group of investors who are collectively owed more than £11 billion by the business and who are now seeking to become its new owners.
OFWAT says it was not consulted about the bonuses and only became aware of them after they had been paid.
In his letter to MPs, the chief executive, David Black, said he was 'disappointed at the lack of transparency… at a time when remuneration in the water sector is under significant public scrutiny'.
The government had already moved to block the bonuses paid the executives at six water companies, including Thames, in 2024/25 but the rules only extend to chief executives, chief financial officer and chairs.
MPs have recalled Montague and Chris Westen, the CEO of Thames (who is not a member of the MRP), to answer questions on Tuesday July 15.
The next episode of the box set everyone hopes is coming to an end.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
4 hours ago
- The Sun
Thames Water are the latest corporate buffoons doing their utmost to bring my pub to its knees – it's time for revenge
YOU might imagine that staff at the near-bankrupt fish-killing enterprise known as Thames Water would be working round the clock. Ideally doing something about the hosepipe ban, rising bills and the torrent of sewage being pumped into the region's rivers every day. 6 6 Apparently not. A couple of weeks ago, two Thames Water inspectors arrived at my pub, with two people from the local council, and I assumed they were there to apologise for the woeful pressure, which is so low we have to harvest water overnight and store it in a 6,000-litre tank, because during the day all we get is a dribble. Nope. They were there to make sure I was complying with all their regulations. That seemed odd to me. I am one of their customers. I buy water from them so why should they be interested in what I'm doing with it. I sell beer to people, but I don't go round to their houses to make sure they're drinking it properly. Anyway, they were very thorough, even doing tests on the dog bowl taps we installed in the garden. And now I've received a massive eight-page list of changes they want us to make. It's stupid, petty stuff. Apart from one change they want making to our Rational steam ovens. Which, according to our plumber, would be impossible. Honestly, this is exactly the sort of corporate bullying that pubs really don't need right now. Menacing instruction Debt-ridden Thames Water hit with multi-million pound fine for polluting rivers as firm 'pushed to brink of collapse' One hostelry is closing every single day thanks to problems with mad Net Zero taxes, food allergy enthusiasts, staff shortages and the NI issues caused by Rachel Reeves 's idiotic Budget. And if they're now going to be hectored by water companies to change the flow rate of their taps, there won't be any pubs left at all. And it's not like we can just put the Thames Water missive in the bin because, naturally, it comes with a menacing instruction that everything must be sorted out within 21 days. Or else. Fine. Two can play at that game so here goes: Thames Water. You have 21 days to do the following. Or else. Upgrade the infrastructure so that you're able to supply your customers with a decent round-the-clock supply. Mend all the leaks in the region so the hosepipe ban can be lifted. Stop pumping faeces into our rivers. Undertake to cut bills to consumers by not paying your useless bosses massive bonuses. And know this. While you're getting on with that, we have started work on a bore hole. We're digging a 120ft-deep hole in the pub's garden so that we can pump our water from the massive underground lake down there. Unlike most of the water round these parts, there's no human s**t in it. You can drink it safely with no treatment at all. Also, we can pump it through our taps at whatever rate takes our fancy. And it'll cost us nothing at all. LATEST LECCY SHOCK THE Government recently announced a new scheme, which would give a £3,750 grant to anyone who bought an affordable electric car. They said it would only cost the taxpayer £650million and I'm afraid at that point I burst out laughing. Because I spent about ten seconds with a calculator and worked out that it would, in fact, cost billions. Turns out I was wrong. Because this idea was dreamed up by the Labourites, it doesn't really work. No one knows what cars are eligible for the discount and which ones aren't. Yes, it may have an electric motor, but unless it was built in a factory made from leaves and kale, it doesn't qualify. Salesmen in showrooms are saying the paperwork is ridiculous. It may well be then that no one can access the scheme, which means it'll actually cost the taxpayer nothing at all. ISLE SAY! SO the United Nations has decided that small countries should be allowed to sue bigger countries if they are causing too much global warming. Excellent. Because how hilarious would it be if one of those islands that only exist as an answer on Pointless sues Ed Miliband for not doing enough to save them. Can you imagine his silly little face. He'd be crestfallen. SEE THE LIGHT IN WALES I WATCHED a fascinating primetime BBC1 show this week called Guardian Of The Night. It was about the UK's taxpayer-funded 'dark sky officer' and her mission to turn off all the lights in huge chunks of Wales. Mostly this meant addressing a room full of parish councillor types and Liberal Democrats. Who were onside anyway. Her arguments were certainly amazing. She said that light pollution causes cancer and diabetes. Which is bad news if you live in, I dunno, a town or a city. But then she went on to explain that we need to be able to see the night sky so that we can spot an incoming asteroid. Er. I think if we are relying for our survival on a man called Geoff who uses a home-made observatory in Wales, we've probably had it. But don't worry, we aren't. So if you are reading this in Cardiff, don't worry. You can turn your lights on this evening. It'll make no difference. PHEW! IT'S JEZ 6 JEREMY CORBYN has announced that his new f ar-Left political party doesn't yet have a name. But he says suggestions are coming in from members of the public at the rate of 500 every minute. I bet they are. I bet they are. I must say, however, that I wish him every success. Because he will undoubtedly split the left's vote, thus ensuring that neither he nor that fool Starmer will win the next election. Maybe it should be called the 'Phew' party. HOW MY GREEDY LABS COULD COST ME DEER 6 6 TO try to train guide dogs not to tear off after every rabbit they see, boffins have strapped a toy squirrel to a radio-controlled car. Confused? I was too. But the idea seems sound. You take the trainee dog for a walk and have someone 'drive' the car back and forth so that, eventually, Rover gets used to it and won't yank the blind person's arm off as it sets off at 200mph in pursuit. I may try it with my dogs. They've learned not to chase the farm animals and will even sit quietly when our little army of guinea fowl clucks its way into the garden. But there is nothing I can do to stop them chasing deer. I spend half my life giving it the full 'Fenton' as they whizz about in a hopeless quest to catch something that's way faster than they are. So I shall buy a toy deer and strap it to a radio-controlled car. And see what happens. My only worry is that they're labradors. So if they catch it, they'd eat the toy. And the car as well.
Times
10 hours ago
- Times
Tesla poised to switch on full self-driving system in the UK
Tesla is putting its troubles behind it by pushing ahead with the first full UK trial of its Full Self-Driving (FSD) system, which allows the electric car to operate independently of its driver. A three-minute video of the test shows the Tesla Model 3 threading its way through traffic, avoiding other cars, cyclists and roadworks. A driver is seen present in the car but did not intervene during the 20-minute test as the Tesla navigated through central London at afternoon rush hour, starting south of the Thames and crossing Westminster Bridge, passing Parliament Square and Downing Street and landmarks such as Big Ben, Buckingham Palace and Nelson's Column. • Read more expert reviews, news and insights on cars and motoring Please enable cookies and other technologies to view this content. You can update your cookies preferences any time using privacy manager. Tesla has faced criticism for the fact that it has been selling the £6,800 FSD package in Britain as an option on its Model 3, and more recently Model Y, for at least six years, even though drivers cannot use it. The company blames 'regulatory issues' and says the technology is ready. One of the first to buy the package was Grant Shapps, the former transport secretary, who paid £5,800 for Full Self-Driving in 2019 but can't switch it on. Tesla says it hopes it to get approval for drivers to turn on the system within the coming months and certainly by 2026, when its £39,990 Model 3 and £44,990 Model Y fitted with Full Self-Drive will be able to self-steer and park and autonomously slow down, speed up and switch lanes. European Union countries will permit FSD to be used by the end of this year, the company predicts. • I tried the new self-driving Tesla — it was utterly terrifying The system uses eight cameras, including two forward-facing, two on each side, one at the rear and one inside the car to make sure the driver is paying attention. In the United States, where the FSD package can legally be used, accidents have been blamed on Tesla drivers allowing the car to go beyond its capabilities while they are distracted by another task. Some have filmed themselves sitting in the back seat and reading. Tesla's Full Self Driving is a level 2 on the car industry's six-point scale for autonomous vehicles, three points below full autonomy. Waymo, the operator of robot taxis in the US, uses a level 4 system that can operate without a driver on standby. Elon Musk told investors earlier this year that his company's autonomous systems would revolutionise transport. 'Once it does start to move… it will really go exponentially from there,' he said, predicting that Tesla would have 'a 99 per cent market share'.
Spectator
2 days ago
- Spectator
A new water regime must still reward private investors
The weekend's torrential Yorkshire rain amid a hosepipe ban offered a handy metaphor for the chaos that has befallen the privatised UK water industry. Sir Jon Cunliffe's Independent Water Commission report – aiming for a 'fundamental reset' to restore public confidence, clean our waterways and ensure future supply – is welcome for the clarity of its central conclusion: that unfit-for-purpose Ofwat and a jumble of other regulators should be replaced by a single body with more teeth and comprehensive oversight of the sector. So far, so good. Cunliffe – a veteran of the Treasury, the Bank of England and Brussels – can also be applauded for his bureaucratic cunning in tabling no fewer than 88 recommendations, in the hope that perhaps eight of them might actually be adopted. But one reform he was forbidden from contemplating was the renationalisation of water companies, whatever the alleged extent of their failures and dividend-gouging under foreign and private-equity ownership. And that means future investment in leak-free pipes and reservoirs, supply to new housing and elimination of sewage slicks remains dependent on the willingness of private investors to put capital at risk – a mechanism widely misunderstood by consumers and campaigners who believe all shareholder rewards from water supply are somehow exploitative and wrong. Cunliffe's report talks about creating a stable regime that reduces uncertainty and thereby attracts 'low risk, low return' long-term investors, rather than (though he doesn't quite put it this way) the fast-buck financiers who gamed Ofwat so effectively in an era when successive governments were far less concerned with infrastructure improvement than the voter optics of lower water bills. In the Commons, Environment Secretary Steve Reed gave grudging spin about 'fair' returns for shareholders who meet their obligations. I note his previous career in educational publishing and hope he has texts in praise of capitalism on his bookshelf, because having ruled out state ownership he must now embrace investors who will naturally be sceptical of Labour promises. At least Cunliffe has given him a blueprint. Man of secrets David Alliance, who has died aged 93, was a man of secrets. An Iranian immigrant trader who started buying up Lancashire cotton mills in the 1950s, he eventually controlled, in the Coats Viyella combine of the 1990s, most of what remained of the British textile industry. That he liked to hold his cards close to his chest made him a potent deal-maker but a difficult client for his ghostwriters, of whom for a year or so I was one – though my version of his memoirs remained unpublished, eventually to be overtaken by Ivan Fallon's A Bazaar Life (2015). 'You research it,' Alliance would say with a hint of irritation when I tried to probe him about his takeover battles or his clandestine role in rescuing Falasha Jews from persecution in Ethiopia. So inscrutable was he that in the end I missed the core objective of my commission, which was a book saying that treacherous boardroom colleagues had thwarted his efforts to sustain Coats Viyella as a global competitor against cheap foreign rivals, before forcing his 1999 resignation. I suspect neither a nine-digit fortune from his second business empire in mail-order, nor a Lib Dem peerage, nor his name on what is now the Alliance Manchester Business School, brought consolation to his rather lonely later life. He seemed to have few real friends and I was never one of them, but I salute him as a remarkable entrepreneur. Sinking flagship 'The knives are out for BP's Norwegian chairman Helge Lund,' I wrote in April. This followed the energy giant's shareholder-driven U-turn, refocusing on fossil fuels and dumping the commitment to renewables for which Lund and his former chief executive Bernard Looney were largely responsible. Sure enough, Lund's own plan to step down 'most likely during 2026' has been accelerated to this October. His successor, Albert Manifold, previously ran the Irish building materials group CRH whose product range, embracing concrete, aggregates and bitumen, demonstrates a relatively low level of ambition to approach net zero any time soon. Tellingly, its share price has more than doubled over the past three years while BP's has stayed exactly where it was. Underlying that difference is the fact that CRH also led the current fashion for seeking higher valuations elsewhere by shifting its primary listing to New York in 2023. As the activist BP shareholder Elliott Management shouts about a need for decisive leadership to counter chronic underperformance, watch whether this sinking flagship of the FTSE 100 follows CRH across the pond. In one dramatic move, I fear that would nullify most of Chancellor Rachel Reeves's recent initiatives to inject new life into London's capital market. Storm warning I set off for my summer sojourn in France with a nagging concern about relative values. The Financial Times reports that the global cryptocurrency market has reached $4 trillion (£3 trillion) and is likely to go higher as funds flood in following the passage of Donald Trump's pro-crypto legislation. The market capitalisation of Nvidia, the Californian AI microchip giant, has also passed $4 trillion and here too pundits say there's further to go. Both those markers easily surpass the combined market value of the FTSE 100 – the top one hundred London-listed companies – at £2.1 trillion, which itself reflects an all-time high for the index at 9000. Yet economies flatline, inflation ticks up, government debt soars and geopolitics are in perpetual turmoil. Something surely has to give, maybe next month, maybe in the more traditional crash month of October. Ah well, fine French lunches should keep me sanguine – and, I hope, beguile you when I write about them.
