logo
Water bills to see ‘small, steady' rise despite reform plans, says Reed

Water bills to see ‘small, steady' rise despite reform plans, says Reed

Steve Reed is expected to set out plans for 'root and branch reform' of the water sector on Monday, following the publication of a landmark review of the industry.
Those plans are thought to include action to tackle sewage spills, invest in water infrastructure and the abolition of the industry's beleaguered regulator Ofwat as ministers seek to avoid a repeat of this year's 26% increase in bills.
But while Mr Reed has promised that families will never again see 'huge shock hikes' to their bills, he was unable on Sunday to rule out further above-inflation increases.
Although he told Sky News's Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips that bills should be 'as low as possible', he added that there needed to be 'appropriate bill rises' to secure 'appropriate levels of investment'.
He said: 'A small, steady increase in bills is what people expect.'
Government sources have argued that the recent large rise in bills was necessary to pay for investment in long-neglected infrastructure, but expect Mr Reed's promised reforms to make further rises unnecessary.
Asked about the possibility of expanding social tariffs to help households struggling with bills – a move that could see wealthier families pay more – Mr Reed said he had 'not been convinced yet' that this was necessary.
Earlier on Sunday, Mr Reed had pledged to halve sewage pollution in England by 2030, after the Environment Agency said serious pollution incidents had risen by 60% in 2024.
Mr Reed said the measures the Government was taking would enable it to significantly reduce pollution, with the aim of completely eliminating it by 2035 should it be re-elected.
He also suggested to the BBC that he would resign if the 2030 target was not achieved, provided he was still in the same job by then.
His comments come before a major report by former Bank of England deputy governor Sir Jon Cunliffe, which is expected to recommend sweeping reform to water regulation on Monday.
Sir Jon has been widely reported to be preparing to recommend the abolition of Ofwat, which has faced criticism over its handling of sewage spills and allowing water companies to pay large dividends while taking on significant debt and missing targets for investing in infrastructure.
On Sunday, Mr Reed would not say whether he would scrap Ofwat, but also declined to say he had confidence in the regulator.
He told the BBC's Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg: 'The regulator is clearly failing.'
Sir Jon's interim report criticised regulation of the water sector, which is split between economic regulator Ofwat, the Environment Agency and the Drinking Water Inspectorate.
But on Sunday, Conservative shadow communities secretary Kevin Hollinrake said he would be concerned any changes 'might just be shuffling the deckchairs on the Titanic'.
He told the BBC: 'It's really important the regulator's effective, and we put in a lot of measures to give Ofwat more powers to regulate the water industry and a lot of those things were very effective.'
Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey said he backed scrapping Ofwat, calling for a new Clean Water Authority to 'hold these water companies to account'.
Sir Ed has also called for the Government to go further and aim to eliminate sewage pollution entirely by 2030, saying voters were 'fed up with empty promises from ministers while Britain's waterways continue to be ruined by sewage'.
He added: 'For years water companies have paid out millions in dividends and bonuses. It would be deeply unfair if customers are now made to pick up the tab for this scandal through higher bills.'
Although sweeping regulatory reform is likely to be on the table, full nationalisation of the industry will not be after the Government excluded it from Sir Jon's terms of reference.
Smaller parties such as the Greens have called for nationalisation, while on Sunday Reform UK's Nigel Farage said he would look to strike a deal with the private sector to bring 50% of the water industry under public ownership.
Mr Reed argued that nationalisation would cost 'upwards of £100 billion', diverting resources from the NHS and taking years during which pollution would get worse.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Imported dogs could carry disease or behaviour risk, RSPCA warns
Imported dogs could carry disease or behaviour risk, RSPCA warns

The Herald Scotland

timean hour ago

  • The Herald Scotland

Imported dogs could carry disease or behaviour risk, RSPCA warns

RSPCA spokesman David Bowles likened the process to 'Deliveroo for dogs' and called on the Government to tighten regulations on animal rescues. He told the BBC: 'The RSPCA's major concern is these dogs are essentially ticking time bombs – coming over, not being health tested. 'Diseases are now coming in through these dogs. They're affecting not just the dogs that are being imported, they could also affect the dogs already in this country and their owners. 'They've almost set up a Deliveroo for dogs and that is a real problem.' There is no requirement for rescue organisations to be licensed in England, Wales or Northern Ireland. It comes weeks after a bill that aims to stop animal smuggling and cruelty cleared the Commons with cross-party support. Legislation put forward by Liberal Democrat MP Dr Danny Chambers will reduce the number of animals for non-commercial entry into the UK, ban the import of puppies and kittens under six months old or heavily pregnant dogs and cats, and introduce a halt on the import of dogs and cats who have been 'mutilated', including having their ears docked. The MP for Winchester's Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Bill was supported by the Government, and will now proceed to the House of Lords on its passage to becoming law. Dr Chambers said: 'As a vet, I've seen the devastating consequences of puppy smuggling. It's unimaginably cruel to separate puppies and kittens from their mothers at a very young age, and then bring them across borders in substandard conditions where they're then sold for maximum profit by unscrupulous traders who prioritise profit over welfare.' He added: 'Careful consideration has been given to setting these limits, balancing the need to disrupt illegal trade with minimising impact on genuine pet owners. To underpin this, only an owner, not an authorised person, will be permitted to sign and declare that the movement of a dog or cat is non-commercial. He criticised the influence of social media on the increased demand for dogs with docked ears, and a party colleague hit out at the platforms' role in publishing animal abuse. He said: 'One reason that there is such an interest in dogs with cropped ears is that a lot of influencers on Instagram and other social media platforms pose with these dogs or show they have these new dogs with cropped ears. Many people aren't aware that this is a mutilation. 'They think it's how the dogs' ears normally look, and it drives a demand for dogs that look like this.'

Tory and Lib Dem peers accused of 'cynical attacks' on workers' rights - 'get out the way'
Tory and Lib Dem peers accused of 'cynical attacks' on workers' rights - 'get out the way'

Daily Mirror

time3 hours ago

  • Daily Mirror

Tory and Lib Dem peers accused of 'cynical attacks' on workers' rights - 'get out the way'

The TUC has warned Tory and Lib Dem Peers to 'get out of the way' and 'stop trying to block' stronger employment rights for millions of workers in the House of Lords The TUC has warned Tory and Lib Dem Peers to 'get out of the way' and 'stop trying to block' stronger employment rights for millions of workers. ‌ The union body is urging the government to 'stand firm' in the face of what it calls 'cynical attacks' on the Employment Rights Bill. ‌ The landmark legislation, which is currently going through the House of Lords, was a key pillar of Labour's election campaign. ‌ Spearheaded by Deputy PM Angela Rayner, the workers' rights package will end exploitative zero hours contracts, ban bad bosses from using agency staff to replace sacked employees and give expectant parents bereavement leave if they lose a pregnancy before 24 weeks. READ MORE: New workers rights law - all changes from sick pay to parental leave and how they affect you But the TUC has warned that the Tories and Lib Dems are 'doing the bidding of bad bosses' by trying to water down the legislation in the Lords. It hit out at opposition peers voting to 'attack' teaching assistants' pay and exempt voluntary work on heritage railways from restrictions on employment of children. ‌ The Bill will return to the House of Commons in September for MPs to consider the House of Lords' proposed changes to the legislation. The two Houses will continue to vote on amendments in a process known as 'ping-pong' until a way forward is agreed. A recent TUC mega poll revealed huge support across the country – including among Conservative voters – for key policies in the Bill. More than seven in 10 (72%) of UK voters support a ban on zero hours contracts – including 63% of Tory voters, the survey found. And three quarters (73%) of voters support giving all workers protection from unfair dismissal from the first day in the job - including 62% of Conservative. ‌ The TUC said peers who are trying to water down the legislation are not just 'out of touch" but are "actively defying" voters across the country. TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said: "It's time for Tory and Lib Dem Peers to get out of the way and stop trying to block stronger rights for millions of workers. They are doing the bidding of bad bosses by voting to keep workers on zero hours contracts, allowing bosses to sack workers unfairly and attacking teaching assistants' pay.' He added: "Banning zero-hours contracts and protecting workers from unfair dismissal are common-sense protections that the vast majority of the people, including Tory and Lib Dem voters, want to see become law. ‌ "These Peers are not just out of touch, they are actively defying their own voters – and the public at large. The government must stand firm in the face of cynical attacks and deliver the Employment Rights Bill in full.' A Liberal Democrat spokesman said: ' Liberal Democrats have always championed stronger rights at work, and it's disappointing that Labour chose to block (/vote against) our proposals to support carers and whistleblowers. ‌ 'Unfortunately we fear parts of Labour's rushed bill would be bad for workers in small businesses and family farms. 'They were badly let down by the Conservative Party, and Labour seems to have a blindspot when it comes to farms and small businesses too. We support the bill as a whole and have worked constructively to try and improve it.' The Tories were contacted for comment. ::: Focaldata conducted a poll of 21,270 UK adults for the TUC from Nov 30 to Jan 8.

Zero-hours contracts: peers accused of ‘trying to block stronger UK workers' rights'
Zero-hours contracts: peers accused of ‘trying to block stronger UK workers' rights'

The Guardian

time3 hours ago

  • The Guardian

Zero-hours contracts: peers accused of ‘trying to block stronger UK workers' rights'

Conservative and Liberal Democrat peers have been accused of trying to block stronger rights for millions of workers amid a growing campaign by business leaders to water down Labour's zero-hours contract plans. In a blow for the government, the Lords last week voted to curtail the manifesto promise to give workers a right to a guaranteed hours contract and day-one protections against unfair dismissal. Setting up a showdown with the upper chamber, the Lords passed a series of amendments to the employment rights bill that will must be addressed by ministers when MPs return from their summer break. In an angry intervention on Monday, the general secretary of the Trades Union Congress, Paul Nowak, said the Lords was 'doing the bidding of bad bosses' and ought to 'get out of the way' of the plans. 'The sight of hereditary peers voting to block stronger workers' rights belongs in another century. It's plain wrong,' he said. Under the Lords' amendments, a requirement for employers to offer zero-hours workers a contract covering a guaranteed number of hours would be shifted to place the onus on staff to ask for such an arrangement. Protections against unfair dismissal from the first day of employment – which the government plans to reduce from the current level of two years – would be extended to six months, and changes to free up trade unions would be curtailed. The bill will return to the Commons in September for MPs to consider the amendments. The two houses then continue to vote on the changes in a process known as 'ping-pong' until a way forward is agreed. The amendments were put forward by the Lib Dem Lord Goddard, a former leader of Stockport council, and two Tory peers: Lord Hunt, who is a shadow business minister, and Lord Sharpe, a former investment banker. Hunt did not respond to a request for comment. Sharpe said: 'Keir Starmer's unemployment bill is a disaster for employees as much as it is a threat to business. Labour politicians who have never worked in business are destroying the economy. Only the Conservatives are listening to business and making the case for growth.' Goddard said he feared Labour's 'rushed bill' would be bad for workers in small businesses and on family-owned farms. 'They were badly let down by the Conservatives, and Labour seems to have a blind spot when it comes to farms and small businesses, too. 'We support the bill as a whole and have worked constructively to try to improve it. It's a shame to see the government getting upset that we didn't simply give them a blank cheque.' Employers groups welcomed the changes, saying the Lords was responding to business concerns. Helen Dickinson, the chief executive of the British Retail Consortium, said: 'Putting forward positive, practical and pragmatic amendments to the employment rights bill [will] help to protect the availability of valuable, local, part-time and entry level jobs up and down the country.' Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion Industry chiefs have stepped up lobbying against the workers' rights changes, warning that companies were already slashing jobs and putting up prices in response to tax rises in chancellor Rachel Reeves's autumn budget. Dickinson said there was 'further to go' to curb the employment rights bill. 'Even with these amendments accepted, retailers remain worried about the consequences for jobs from other areas of the bill.' Union leaders have, though, urged ministers to stand firm. A recent mega poll of 21,000 people commissioned by the TUC found a majority of UK voters – including Conservative, Lib Dem and Reform UK supporters – backed a ban on zero-hours contracts. Nowak said the government plan included 'commonsense protections' that a majority of people wanted to see become law. 'These peers are not just out of touch, they are actively defying their own voters – and the public at large. The government must stand firm in the face of cynical attacks and deliver the employment rights bill in full.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store