Investors stripping cash from water firms ‘criminal' says ex-Wessex Water chief
Colin Skellett, who helmed the south-west England utility from 1988 to 2024, argued against nationalising water companies because of the industry requiring 'continuous levels of investment'.
He spoke as campaigners and experts urged the Government to explore public ownership during the UK River Summit in south London on Tuesday.
Ministers have promised a 'fundamental reset' following years of companies paying out large dividend that diverted money away from infrastructure investment and maintenance, leading to sewage pollution and rising bills.
However, they have ruled out nationalisation and instead are focusing efforts on tightening rules, increasing investment and strengthening penalties within the current system of regulated private firms.
Minister Emma Hardy talking about tackling sewage with @RiverActionUK but the government is ignoring the reality:
7 European countries with highest average of 90%+ bathing sites achieving 'excellent' status – all are 90%+ publicly owned 🇨🇾🇦🇹🇬🇷🇲🇹🇭🇷🇩🇪🇩🇰https://t.co/cH05zfLzC0 pic.twitter.com/d4dxz35bPV
— Cat Hobbs (@CatHobbs) July 8, 2025
Speaking at the summit, Mr Skellett said he has seen the industry change since he joined it in 1974, saying it is one that 'requires continuous levels of investment'.
'The problem with public ownership is the Government always has other things it wants to spend its money on,' the former Wessex boss said.
He argued that privatisation helped to get debt off the Government's balance sheet and boost investment but this changed when the 'wrong sort of investors' began stripping cash out of companies through high dividends.
'It was bloody criminal what happened – the amount of money that was stripped out of not just Thames (Water), but a number of companies,' he said.
'So we need that to change (in) the system. It's not so much about ownership, it's more about how you regulate it, how you control it, and how you make sure the investment continues.'
It came as the Environment Department (Defra) announced an increase in funding for the Environment Agency from £114 million in 2022/23 to £189 million this current financial year, a sum which is understood to have been welcomed by the regulator.
🚨REVEALED: Over half of adults in England don't trust the Government to end the UK's sewage crisis. And who can blame them?
💩 158,000+ sewage spills already this year.
📣 We're in London today, demanding the radical change we need. Are you with us?✊➡️ Email your MP today and… pic.twitter.com/rz02U8abgY
— Surfers Against Sewage (@sascampaigns) July 2, 2025
Ministers are also currently awaiting the publication of the independent water commission's final report and recommendations, led by Sir Jon Cunliffe, which is expected in two weeks.
The review is not exploring nationalisation as an option, with campaigners at the summit indicating they will continue to campaign on the issue following its publication.
Ewan McGaughey, professor of law at King's College London, argued that the Government should take away licences from failing water companies and transition them into a long-term sustainable model of public ownership, calling privatisation in England a 'broken model'.
Mr McGaughey said 90% of countries and cities around the world have water in public ownership and cited examples such as Berlin and Paris, which brought their sectors back into public ownership in 2013 and 2009 respectively after the privatised model failed.
'Bills go down. Water quality goes up. It's actually not really that controversial. You just have to look at the evidence, and you can see that public ownership works better,' he said.
Cat Hobbs, founder and We Own It, which campaigns for public ownership of public services, said the Government's decision to not allow the independent review to explore nationalisation is a 'scandal'.
'That has to change. They still have time to change it,' she said,
And Ashley Smith, founder of Windrush Against Sewage Pollution (WASP), called privatisation a 'ludicrous scam', arguing that there has never been a single year since the firms were privatised when shareholders put in more money than they took out of the firms.
Later, water minister Emma Hardy defended the Government's approach to reforming the sector.
'There's been a lack of sustained investment in the industry for an incredibly long time,' she told the summit.
'We have taken immediate action, but there are some things that, of course, are going to take longer to fix.
'We want to listen to you and we can have difference of opinion – that is absolutely fine but I want to make sure that we try and bring as many people with us as possible because fundamentally we're all trying to get to the same place and that place is an effective water system with reduced pollution which is better for customers and better for the environment.'
Ms Hardy called the Cunliffe report a 'once-in-a-generation opportunity to modernise (the sector)' and said the Government will give a top-level reaction to the review before looking at any potential further legislation.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
36 minutes ago
- Politico
Pentagon policy chief's rogue decisions have irked US allies and the Trump administration
'He basically asked them, 'Is it too late to call it back?'' said the person familiar with Trump administration dynamics. 'Because we don't want you there.' A second person familiar with the meeting confirmed this account. The British team on the other side of the table 'were just shocked,' the first person added. 'He was basically saying 'you have no business being in the Indo-Pacific.'' Colby has also irked allies by pushing them too hard to boost defense spending — or telling them to simply get out of America's way. 'DOD has been telling a European partner that we don't need the Europeans to be doing anything [in the Indo-Pacific],' said one U.S. official familiar with the conversations. In the spring, Japanese officials believed the Trump administration might push them for a modest increase in defense spending. Initially, Colby publicly called on Japan to spend ' at least 3 percent of GDP on defense as soon as possible,' which angered Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba. But that number soon increased to a much steeper target of 5 percent , which reportedly contributed to the collapse of plans for a high-level meeting between Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and their Japanese counterparts.'The Japanese were very frustrated,' said a person familiar with the talks. 'They thought that they were agreeing to at least negotiate on the basis of 3 or 3.5 percent. Then Colby, all of a sudden, got DOD to say 5, and the Japanese got angry, because that's not what they just agreed to.' The incident caused heartburn within Japan's ruling party, with officials worried about triggering a domestic political backlash ahead of a sensitive election, the person added. The hawkish wing of the Republican Party has expressed concerns that Colby's 'shoot first and ask questions later' approach is sapping Trump's foreign policy of its strength at a key moment. 'The president's leadership at NATO and his decision to strike Iran gave Russia and China good reason to fear America's resolve,' said a senior GOP aide. 'But Colby has just undercut the president and squandered his boss' leverage.' The AUKUS review surprised some State Department officials who dealt directly with the pact. The department's immediate guidance on how to respond to media questions about the topic appeared to underscore the lack of coordination, a State Department official said. The instructions told diplomats to say to reporters: 'We are not aware of a review of the AUKUS agreement. The secretary of Defense has not requested a review of the agreement from the secretary of State.' 'The way that one person from State put it to me is: 'Who is this fucking guy?'' said a former U.S. official familiar with the policy discussions. State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce praised Colby's leadership. 'The world is changing rapidly and Elbridge understands the moment. His innovative leadership is critical to addressing the challenges head-on and helping to deliver on President Trump's America First agenda.'
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
Trump Got the Green Light to Fire Federal Workers. Now, They Wait.
For weeks, thousands of federal employees have been waiting for the Supreme Court to make a decision about their continued employment with the government. On Tuesday, they got their answer: The Trump administration could move ahead with mass layoffs. The question of whether the layoffs are legal remains unanswered. For now, workers remain in limbo, this time waiting for their agencies to decide who stays, who goes and when. President Trump in February issued an executive order calling for mass layoffs at nearly every government agency, but the directive invited some legal challenges that led to federal workers staying in their jobs temporarily, or at least collecting a paycheck and health benefits. Many government employees have described the protracted uncertainty as a stressful, nightmarish slog. And many knew that any relief was likely temporary. For months, a number of them have described being scared to open their government emails, anticipating that they would learn they had been fired. Many feared that speaking out would put a target on their backs. One employee at the Environmental Protection Agency, which has not announced a detailed plan for layoffs, said that she and her colleagues were waiting to hear about what the Supreme Court's move meant for them. Like others still employed by the government, she spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retribution. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Wall Street Journal
an hour ago
- Wall Street Journal
The Fight Between Musk Acolytes and the White House for Control of DOGE
Elon Musk has left the government, but his clout at DOGE lives on. Weeks after the billionaire left his role at the Department of Government Efficiency amid his feud with President Trump, a small band of Musk loyalists is fighting to preserve the legacy—and power—of the government-slashing office.
