The Guardian view on water boss's undisclosed bonus: Labour won't fix a system it won't confront
In March, the company was ordered to pay £40m for the 'unacceptable impact' of sewage spills blamed on poor maintenance. It was one of six firms caught by Labour's new bonus ban for the most serious polluters, passed under the Water (Special Measures) Act earlier this year. But the company confirmed to the Guardian that its chief executive, Nicola Shaw, received an additional £660,000 for 'investor-related' work last year – on top of her £689,000 take home pay.
The money did not come from Yorkshire Water directly, but from Kelda Holdings, the firm's offshore parent. Using complex corporate structures to sidestep regulatory scrutiny is not a new trick. Many water companies are structured to allow financial engineering to take place at one remove from the regulated business. But Yorkshire's executive reward scheme reveals something important about the nature of the bonus ban itself: its design left scope for avoidance. If companies can reclassify pay or shift it between entities, enforcement becomes a matter of interpretation.
Ministers say they are 'aware' of the payments and Ofwat is 'assessing' them. But this is a now-familiar Whitehall formulation – passive, conditional and hollow. The environment secretary, Steve Reed, appears to have a habit of making threats he doesn't back up. When Southern Water, also under the bonus ban, nearly doubled the pay package awarded to its CEO to £1.4m, Mr Reed's response was to urge him to turn it down. No ministerial direction to investigate. No legal challenge or legislative amendment. Just a suggestion.
Why the timidity? Because Labour's tough talk on water is just words. It won't touch the system that enables this behaviour, and ministers bend over backwards to reassure markets they never will. The Treasury wants Thames Water kept private – warning Mr Reed a £4bn rescue through nationalisation would gut his entire budget. No wonder he keeps shroud-waving about the cost of public ownership
The government seems dazzled by private providers. Regulators are being asked to offer 'forbearance', as Mr Reed's Independent Water Commission suggested. No doubt they had in mind Thames Water, which is facing an estimated £1bn in Ofwat performance penalties. The logic seems to be that enforcement risks spooking the investors needed to fund long-overdue infrastructure upgrades.
But this reveals the real problem. England's water system has been financialised to the point of dysfunction. Layered holding companies, offshore entities and opaque capital structures mean regulators are chasing shadows. Attempts to govern via gesture – bonus bans, naming and shaming – are no substitute for structural reform.
Most countries retain public ownership, recognising water as a public good, not a commodity. The idea that better people could fix the system is a fantasy – decades of extraction, debt-loading and dividend grabs show the model itself is broken. If Labour truly wants to clean up the nation's waterways, it must confront a hard truth: the incentives of private capital and the obligations of public interest, health and accountability do not align. Until then, expect more sewage, more euphemisms and more payments that defy the spirit – if not always the letter – of the law.
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
19 minutes ago
- The Sun
Was it Starmer's plan all along to make us so subservient to the EU that we'd be better off back in?
WERE we fooled too easily by Sir Keir Starmer's assurances that he had no intention of taking Britain back into the EU? With the publication of the EU's draft documents for the 'reset' in relations between Britain and the bloc, it is tempting to wonder whether there has been a scheme in the PM's mind all along: to make Britain so subservient to the EU that eventually a return to full membership becomes a less-worse option. 3 3 As announced by Starmer and EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen at their summit in London in May, a new 'common sanitary and phyto-sanitary' area will be created. That should mean the end of checks on food imports and exports — as well as petty customs officers confiscating sandwiches from lorry drivers. Needless to say, it comes at a price. In order to escape the border checks, Britain will have to agree to full alignment with EU food standards. And it is becoming increasingly clear what this means in practice: Britain simply agreeing to enact EU standards. French farmers In contrast to when we were members of the EU, however, we will have little say in what those standards should be. We may be consulted, but it is the EU which will make the rules and Britain which is forced to accept them. It is obvious from past experience what is going to happen. EU legislators, heavily lobbied by French farmers and the like, will pass laws which are designed to discriminate against UK-made produce, in order to keep it out of EU markets. We will have no power to stop them. To take an example, Britain spent 27 years fighting the EU for the right to sell our chocolate bars across the Continent. Keir Starmer- hopes for reset with EU do not mean 'reversing Brexit' The EU, under pressure from French and Belgian manufacturers, wanted to impose a limit on the milk content and vegetable fat content of chocolate bars — which just happened to permit products made in France and Belgium but exclude those which were popular in Britain. In a typical piece of EU-style bureaucratic invention, officials tried to come up with a compromise: where UK-made bars would be labelled 'vegelate' — presumably to make them sound so unappetising that no one would want to buy them anyway. Britain eventually won that battle — in 2000, after nearly three decades of bruising political and legal battle. But in future? Britain will have no say. The European Commission will be able to pass a law banning British chocolate bars and there will be little we can do about it. British food manufacturers could, perhaps, appeal to the new 'independent arbitrary tribunal' which will be set up to judge trade disputes, but it won't really be worthy of the name 'independent'. As the EU draft documents make clear, the EU's Court of Justice will become 'the ultimate authority for all questions of EU law'. Needless to say, the EU wants Britain to pay for the privilege of joining its common sanitary area. We will also be under obligation to align our carbon levies with the EU, making it more difficult for a future UK government to escape the straitjacket of Net Zero. Both Britain and the EU are in the process of imposing carbon border taxes — levies on imports according to their embedded carbon emissions. Under the reset, Britain will be expected to align its own system with the EU's. It was exactly these kinds of arrangement which Theresa May and Boris Johnson's governments fought so hard to avoid — not very satisfactorily, it has to be said. We actually ended up with an arrangement which created an internal UK border between Britain and Northern Ireland. But the system which will come about as a result of Starmer's reset will be far worse. It will take us close to being the 'vassal state' that Jacob Rees-Mogg warned about — a vassal state being the name given to states in medieval Europe which were notionally independent but in practice were under the control of, and under obligation to pay taxes to, a much larger empire. No UK PM ever really tried to play the EU at its game — even though they ought to have been in the driving seat in negotiations At the moment, the reset will cover food, animal and plant products as well as a number of high-carbon materials such as steel and cement. Second referendum But this will almost certainly mark just a beginning. Under a Starmer government we will be sucked further and further into the EU's orbit until it becomes a mere tidying-up exercise to rejoin the bloc in full. Donald Trump has just shown what you can do if you negotiate hard with the EU — European Commission president Von der Leyen ended up agreeing to 15 per cent tariffs on EU exports to the US, as well as a commitment to buy more US oil and gas — all for very little in return. Yet no UK PM ever really tried to play the EU at its game — even though they ought to have been in the driving seat in negotiations with the EU because they sell more to us than we sell to them. While Conservatives were trying and failing to get a good deal, Starmer, you might remember, was campaigning for a second Brexit referendum in which — he hoped — Britons would vote to reverse the result of the first. He didn't get his way on that, of course. But that doesn't mean he has given up on trying to reinstate Britain in the EU. To judge by his actions, that may very well be his undeclared ambition.
The Sun
19 minutes ago
- The Sun
Immigration piling ‘unsustainable' pressure on public services, warns top UK financial watchdog
IMMIGRATION is creating a strain on public services, a top official at the UK's fiscal watchdog has warned. Economist David Miles said the country's reliance on overseas workers 'could not be sustained'. 2 The Office for Budget Responsibility official urged Labour to target worklessness at home rather than relying on mass migration. Mr Miles wrote: ' Immigration, which primarily involves those of working age, delays the impact of the ageing of the population and is the driver of population growth. 'Some conclude a faster rise in the population will be beneficial in alleviating acute underlying fiscal pressures. 'But there are serious problems with that idea.' He argued migrants still use schools, hospitals and other services and eventually become eligible for benefits. Mr Miles said the answer lies in tackling the post-Covid — which was mainly driven by Brits. He wrote: 'The fiscal benefits of helping people, especially young people, back into employment are substantial.' It comes as Labour faces a backlash over Britain's soaring benefits bill after caving to backbench rebels and watering down reforms. Mr Miles' comments mark a major intervention from a senior figure at the OBR, which has long treated immigration as an economic good. The OBR has admitted low-paid migrants are a net drain — costing taxpayers £150,000 each by the time they hit state pension age. Data shows immigration fuelled England and Wales' population growth by 700,000 in a year to June 2024. 2 The Sun watches as hundreds of illegal migrants arrive at Dover
The Sun
19 minutes ago
- The Sun
Banks see share prices rocket after being saved from paying out billions in car finance scandal
BANKS saw rocketing share prices yesterday after being saved from paying out tens of billions of pounds in the car finance scandal. Lloyds saw a jump after the Supreme Court removed the threat of £44billion industry pay-outs. Shares at the banking group rose eight per cent while Close Brothers soared by as much as 34 per cent at one stage after the Friday ruling. Barclays saw a jump of two per cent. Around 14 million drivers could still be entitled to pay worth up to £18billion but only for large commissions seen as unfair, going back to 2007. The case focuses on commissions paid by the lenders to car dealers with some higher interest rates which were not then properly relayed to buyers. But judges found dealers did not owe a 'fiduciary duty' of loyalty to customers. There is now concern over the fact firms might have to keep records from decades ago. John Phillipou of the Finance & Leasing Association said: 'I don't think it's good for investability that the reason for keeping the data is that you might get sued in 15 years time.' Chancellor Rachel Reeves was said to be ready to intervene if the bill hit £44billion — due to the damage it could do to the UK as a place of business. A compensation scheme will be consulted on in October. Drivers are set to see pay-outs of less than £950 from as early as next year, the Financial Conduct Authority said. eBay payment shake-up, Lloyds Bank sets aside £1.2billion for car finance payouts and little-known benefit Lloyds had put aside more than £1billion for the fall-out but said any change is 'unlikely to be material' for the group. 1
