
Fixing England's water isn't just the right thing to do – it can be the start of Labour's fightback
In the wake of a brutal set of local election results, MPs from across the Labour party are trying to establish what went wrong. To me, it's very clear that this was no fluke: it was the entirely foreseeable outcome of my party's approach to Reform UK. And as the party moves forward and prepares to face Reform at future elections, it's key that we learn the right lessons.
From flip-flopping on climate commitments to framing disabled people as part of the undeserving poor, Labour thus far hasn't challenged Reform's worldview – it has legitimatised it. However, there are some perhaps surprising areas where Labour isn't copying Reform: public ownership of water for one.
While keen to outbid them on immigration, we seem remarkably reluctant to do the same for the ownership of water, despite high levels of support for such a policy. The Reform party – never one to let principle get in the way of populism – has now reinvented itself as a champion of public infrastructure, with a plan that would see the government and British pension funds owning the companies that supply water and energy. That's the playbook of rightwing populists: ideological coherence is optional. If it polls well, claim it.
Public anger is hardly a surprise. Private water companies have drained the system dry. Since privatisation, they've paid billions in dividends to shareholders while piling up debt, polluting rivers and neglecting infrastructure. Sewage spills into our waterways have become routine. Reservoirs have been sold off. Executive pay has soared. And still, prices rise for the rest of us. Regulators – supposed sentinels of public interest – have acted more like apologists.
As issues go, this could have been written for Reform. The state of English water taps into something deep – something visceral. It has become a symbol of a rigged economy, a failed regulatory state and a political class that either can't or won't fix what it broke. In the eyes of many, the system is rotten, the profiteers are protected, and no one in power is willing to take them on.
And yet Reform is part of the same neoliberal project that caused and benefits from this 40-year malaise. Behind both the party and the private ownership of water companies are the same types of forces that have turned life's essentials – housing, energy, water – into speculative gambling chips, where the house always wins and the public always loses. Labour should be contesting this ground by relentlessly pummelling their hypocrisy, and blaming the Tories for being the architects of it all, while offering a real alternative.
It's an open goal, with the public crying out for the bold change promised in our manifesto. What they got instead was the Water (Special Measures) Act – a measure as underwhelming as its name. Touted as a landmark intervention, in truth it landed with all the heft of a damp sponge. Feargal Sharkey, the rock star turned river-activist and de facto conscience of the nation's waterways, dismissed it as a missed opportunity for leadership. 'Nothing but playground politics masquerading as policy,' he wrote. 'Since when has rearranging the deckchairs, regurgitating an existing, failed 30-year-old bit of legislation been seen as progress?'
As Thames Water teeters on the edge of collapse – under the weight of its own reckless finance model – the government had another chance to act. To rewrite the rules of the game. But again, it flinched. Instead of a public conversation about reclaiming essential infrastructure, we got another review. This one is led by Sir John Cunliffe, a former deputy governor of the Bank of England whose career suggests he is at home with the idea that the economy should be run in the interests of 'wealth creators': banks, private equity, financial speculators – the very orthodoxy that created this mess.
Crucially, public ownership was ruled out before the review had even begun.
This was no accident. It was a calculated abdication – a decision to preserve the financial status quo rather than challenge it and surrender to market dogma, corporate extractionism and price-gouging. By ruling it out, the government signals that it's more comfortable tweaking the edges than challenging the system that caused the crisis in the first place.
And when that system appears to include collusion with private water companies and cosy ties with foreign investment companies like BlackRock, it's no wonder people feel shut out. No wonder Reform voters feel justified in denouncing Labour as just another establishment party protecting the powerful from the people. What other conclusion is there when Labour is overseeing a continuation of the same technocratic politics that got us here? Where government appears to manage only in the interests of the wealthy, financial giants and corporations. For how else does a Labour government conclude that pensioners and disabled people should be sacrificed to preserve a fiscal rule created to ensure the maintenance of wealth for those who already have it?
Labour must reconnect with the understanding that the public are not cogs for the benefit of an abstract economy. They are the economy. Until we remember this, our current approach is not just bad strategy – it's bad for democracy. Because when voters see politicians working closely with the same kinds of firms that crashed the economy or cashed in during the pandemic, trust collapses. And without bold, people-first, democracy deepening ideas, Labour risks becoming part of the problem it promised to fix.
Four years out from the next general election, there still remains a clear path forward. Labour must rediscover its courage and reorient itself around economic democracy – public ownership that listens, responds, and empowers communities. The evidence is overwhelming that voters seek meaningful change, not more of the same dressed in the language of pragmatism.
The alternative, as the local election results underline starkly, is continuing electoral punishment from an electorate weary of unmet promises and compromised principles. If Labour truly wishes to deliver on its promise of national renewal, it must abandon the hollow rhetoric of 'tough choices' and embrace genuinely transformative ones – starting with water. This means more than just traditional renationalisation: we need public ownership where workers, customers and the new devolved strategic authorities own and run the service, and a citizens' assembly, giving the public a real say on the shape and structure of English water in the future. Because Nigel Farage offers people an agenda of fake reform. If Labour wants to beat him, it must offer the real thing.
Clive Lewis is the Labour MP for Norwich South
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Sky News
26 minutes ago
- Sky News
Starmer will be breathing a sigh of relief after clinching shock victory over SNP and Reform UK
Anything other than a win for Labour would have been a humiliation in this contest. It wasn't any old local by-election - this was a contest where Labour knew it could act as a mini barometer of Sir Keir Starmer's recent U-turn on winter fuel payments and become a test of how popular the politics of Nigel Farage are in Scotland. Labour are power hungry and have, for a long time, set their sights on forming the next Scottish government. The prime minister will this morning be breathing a sigh of relief after clinching this shock victory over the SNP and Reform UK. 1:01 This contest on the outskirts of Glasgow came at a time where Labour had been firefighting and grappling with polling suggesting they had blown their chances of ousting the SNP from power in Edinburgh after almost 20 years. The SNP had a spring in their step during this campaign after a chaotic couple of years. First Minister and SNP leader John Swinney had apparently stemmed the bleeding after the infamous police fraud investigation, endless fallout over gender identity reforms, and last year's general election where they were almost wiped out. This result leaves them no further forward than 12 months ago with questions over the party's strategy. Reform UK is very much in the Scottish picture now, finishing a few hundred votes behind the nationalists. This is a party led by a man who barely registered any support north of the border for many years. A remarkable transformation. The surge in support has spooked many because they know fine well Nigel Farage is only just getting started. One poll had Reform UK forming the next official opposition at Holyrood. After tonight, that might be a tall order but Mr Farage is shaking things up at the expense of the Conservatives. The unpredictable nature of this contest may give us a taste of what is to come.


Telegraph
32 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Kemi Badenoch to give speech on the ECHR
Kemi Badenoch is set to use a major speech to declare she is 'increasingly of the view' that the UK should withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights. The leader of the Conservative Party is expected to set out a plan to launch a commission into whether Britain should quit the treaty. The ECHR was a dividing issue in last year's Conservative leadership election, with Mrs Badenoch's rival Robert Jenrick championing the idea that Britain should pull out. Critics of the treaty want to leave it because it has been used to frustrate attempts to deport migrants from Britain. Mrs Badenoch is expected to say that she is 'increasingly of the view that we will need to leave, because I am yet to see a clear and coherent route to change within our current legal structures'. 'I have always been clear that if our national interest means that we need to leave the ECHR, we will leave,' the Conservative leader will say. She will add: 'But I say that not because of any particular obsession with international law or with our treaty arrangements. I say that because for me, the most important thing is making our country safer, richer and fairer.'


The Independent
33 minutes ago
- The Independent
Reform's Richard Tice doubles down on call for burqa ban debate after chairman quits
Reform's deputy leader has doubled down on calls for a debate on whether burqas should be banned in Britain after a furious row over the issue saw the party's chairman quit. Zia Yusuf resigned on Thursday after describing a call from the party's newest MP to ban the burqa as 'dumb'. Speaking as he entered the count for the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse Holyrood by-election, Richard Tice said MPs should 'discuss' a potential ban. 'Let's have a discussion about these things, all these important issues, as opposed to not discussing anything, smearing and labelling,' he said. Pressed on his personal view amid chaotic scenes, Mr Tice said there should be a 'national debate'. And, asked if Mr Yusuf's resignation implied the party was racist, the Boston and Skegness MP said: 'With the greatest of respect, that's nonsense.' It came after the new Runcorn and Helsby MP Sarch Pochin used her first Prime Minister's Questions question to call on Sir Keir to ban burqas 'in the interest of public safety'. She said: 'Given the prime minister's desire to strengthen strategic alignment with our European neighbours, will he, in the interest of public safety, follow the lead of France, Belgium, Denmark and others and ban the burqa?' Sir Keir welcomed Ms Pochin to the Commons, but said 'I am not going to follow her down that line'. A Reform spokesman later clarified that banning burqas was not party policy, sparking calls from the far-right for Mr Farage to adopt the proposals. Later, Mr Yusuf said it was 'dumb for a party to ask the prime minister if they would do something the party itself wouldn't do'. He quit the party on Thursday saying 'I no longer believe working to get a Reform government elected is a good use of my time, and hereby resign the office'. Asked on Wednesday night about Ms Pochin's comments on the burqa, party leader Nigel Farage also said he would welcome a broader debate about face coverings in public. He told GB News: 'I think this debate actually goes beyond the burqa… I was in Aberdeen Monday, there was a mob there to meet me, an organisation called Antifa, and half of them had complete face coverings on so they would be unidentifiable. 'I don't think face coverings in public places make sense, and I think we do deserve debate about that, which I see the burqa as being a part.' Denying his party was 'in chaos', Mr Tice paid tribute to the outgoing former chairman. 'As Nigel's said, as I've said, we're very sad that Zia has resigned,' he said. 'He's worked incredibly hard, he's been instrumental in driving the party forward. ' One of the reasons that this result could be really close – who knows which way it will go – is because of the success of what Zia has achieved.' He added: 'It's very sad, politics is difficult, it's time-consuming, but he's worked incredibly hard.'