Thames Water crisis: Ministers line up administrator for utility giant
Ministers have lined up insolvency practitioners to prepare for the potential collapse of Thames Water, Britain's biggest water utility.
Sky News can exclusively reveal that Steve Reed, the environment secretary, has signed off the appointment of FTI Consulting to advise on contingency plans for Thames Water to be placed into a Special Administration regime (SAR).
Sources said on Tuesday that the advisory role established FTI Consulting as the frontrunner to act as the company's administrator if it fails to secure a private sector bailout - although approval of such an appointment would be decided in court.
Thames Water, its largest group of creditors and Ofwat, the industry regulator, have been locked in talks for months about a deal that would see its lenders injecting about £5bn of new capital and writing off roughly £12bn of value across its capital structure.
The discussions are said to be progressing constructively, although they appear to rely in part on the prospect of the company being granted forbearance on hundreds of millions of pounds of regulatory fines.
"The company remains financially stable, but we have stepped up our preparations and stand ready for all eventualities, including applying for a Special Administration Regime if that were to become necessary."
Insiders stressed that FTI Consulting's engagement by the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) did not signal that Thames Water was about to collapse into insolvency proceedings.
A SAR would ensure that customers would continue to receive water and sewage services if Thames Water collapsed, while putting taxpayers on the hook for billions of pounds in bailout costs - a scenario the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, is keen to avoid at a time when the public finances are already severely constrained.
The SAR process can only be instigated in the event that a company becomes insolvent, can no longer fulfil its statutory duties or breaches an enforcement order, according to insiders.
Mr Reed has repeatedly stressed the government's desire to avoid taking Thames Water into temporary public ownership, but that it was ready to deal with "all eventualities".
"Thames Water must meet its statutory and regulatory obligations to its customers and to the environment--it is only right that the company is subject to the same consequences as any other water company.
The company remains financially stable, but we have stepped up our preparations and stand ready for all eventualities," he told the House of Commons in June.
Thames Water, which has about 16m customers, serves about a quarter of the UK's population.
It is drowning under close to £20bn of debt, and was previously owned by Macquarie, the Australian infrastructure and banking behemoth.
Its most recent consortium of shareholders, which included the Universities Superannuation Scheme and an Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund, have written off the value of their investments in the company.
The government's SAR process has only been tested once before, when the energy retailer Bulb failed in 2021.
Bulb was ultimately sold to Octopus Energy with the taxpayer funding used to save and run the company since having been repaid.
Thames Water is racing to secure a rescue plan involving funds such as Elliott Management and Silver Point Capital, with a deadline of late October to appeal to the Competition and Markets Authority against Ofwat's final determination on its next five-year spending plan.
Ofwat has ruled that Thames Water can spend £20.5bn during the period from 2026, with the company arguing that it requires a further sum of approximately £4bn.
Mike McTighe, a veteran corporate troubleshooter who chairs BT Group's Openreach division, has been parachuted in to work with the funds.
The company said in its accounts last month that there was "material uncertainty" over whether it could be solvently recapitalised.
Earlier this year, Thames Water was fined a record £123m over sewage leaks and the payment of dividends, with Ofwat lambasting the company over its performance and governance.
In recent weeks, Thames Water has been engulfed in a row over the legitimacy of bonuses paid to chief executive Chris Weston and other bosses, even as it attempts to secure its survival.
Under new laws, Thames Water is among half a dozen water companies which have been barred from paying bonuses this year because of their poor environmental records.
The creditor group was effectively left as the sole bidder for Thames Water after the private equity firm KKR withdrew from the process, citing political and reputational risks.
The Hong Kong-based investor CK Infrastructure Holdings (CKI), which already owns Northumbrian Water, has sought to re-engage in talks about a rescue deal but has gained little traction in doing so.
News of FTI Consulting's appointment also comes on the same day as a "nationally significant" water shortfall was declared across swathes of the country.
Last week, Sky News revealed that David Black, the Ofwat chief executive, was to step down following the publication of a government-commissioned review which recommended the regulator's abolition.
He has been replaced by Chris Walters, another Ofwat executive, on an interim basis.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
27 minutes ago
- Telegraph
We must speak up for old British values before they are destroyed by our elites
Rose Docherty is a woman of few words. You'd never have heard of the 75-year-old if it wasn't for what she didn't say. She's the activist who staged a silent protest outside the abortion clinic in Glasgow last February, holding a sign reading: 'Coercion is a crime, here to talk, only if you want'. Hers was a simple offer of conversation, made without a sound. You know what happened next. The septuagenarian was arrested under Scotland's 'buffer zone' laws, which prevent anybody engaging in harassment or intimidation in the vicinity of abortion facilities, or influencing a woman's decision to use them. Are there parallel laws protecting women from being pressured into terminating their unborn babies? Surely that would be a more sinister scenario, one that would fall more obviously under the purview of the police. There are not. Scotland's police are on the lookout for anybody offering support to women who may be doubting their decision, not those encouraging them to go ahead with it. The message is clear. There is no mistaking where the state, and the culture it grimly cultivates, now stands on the question of ending unborn life. We see it reflected in the legalisation of euthanasia. We see it in the depravity of full-term abortions. Welcome to modern Britain, where convenient death is prized higher than life. This past week, however, Scotland's Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service changed tack and decided that the case would be dropped. This was announced quietly and without fanfare, presumably in the hope that the matter would slip conveniently under the rug. So much so understandable. After all, the silent woman of Glasgow had drawn Britain's creeping authoritarianism to the attention of the world when her case caught the eye of Donald Trump. That can't have been comfortable for Scotland's Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. In May this year, the president sent a White House delegation to meet Ms Docherty and other pro-life campaigners. Afterwards, she told the press that it was 'heartening that others around the world, including the US government, have realised this injustice and voiced their support'. A few months earlier, in a speech at the Munich Security Conference, vice-president JD Vance lambasted Scotland's buffer zone laws, under which Ms Docherty had been arrested. Without these American interventions, she may still be facing conviction today. This episode draws together a number of intertwining concerns. Firstly, there is the question of freedom of speech in a Britain where citizens may be visited by the police on suspicion of a 'non-crime hate incident', and 30 arrests are made every day for offensive posts on social media. After she was detained, Ms Docherty was apparently told that she could avoid prosecution on condition that she acknowledged her actions were unlawful, accepted a warning and did not repeat them. She declined, insisting that she had not broken the law and that she was protected by her fundamental rights to free speech. 'I simply stood there, available to speak with love and compassion,' she pointed out. So much, surely, should be obvious. The fact that it took Donald 'grab 'em by the p---y' Trump, who even to his supporters is hardly the paragon of purity, to bring Scotland's Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service to its senses is an embarrassing sign of how far we have drifted from our morals. The second, deeper concern is the disdain for religious faith and traditional values which is so relentlessly advanced by our rulers. Ms Docherty embodied an older Britain that the elites have sought to tamp down for decades. It is the Britain of faith, flag and family; of a belief in borders, a love of tradition, an affection for our history and pride in our armed forces; of hard work, fair play and modest patriotism. Ever since the end of the Cold War, those at the top of society have smeared such a sensibility as the root of fascism. Whether voting for Brexit, flying the George cross or demonstrating against migrant hotels, ordinary people who refuse to respect the new taboos are immediately defamed as quasi-Nazis. What values have been imposed in their place? Moral relativism; multiculturalism; diversity; secularism; appeasement; sybaritic complacency; Israelophobia. To this we can now add an enthusiasm for death for the elderly and the unborn. This suffocating ideology, which Sir Roger Scruton described as the cult of 'down with us', seems to be imposed upon every corner of society. In some quarters it is no longer permissible, for instance, to say 'merry Christmas' or 'happy Easter', but only 'happy holidays'. No such restrictions are applied to 'Ramadan Kareem' or 'Eid Mubarak'. In the United States, so sick had people become of this dogma that they considered the outlandish proposition of Donald Trump – the obnoxiousness, the braggadocio, the allegations of racism and financial irregularities, the misogynistic audio tapes, the claims of Russian collusion, the lack of political experience and total disregard of the norms of professional society – and decided he was worth a go. Anything, they felt, would be better than this. Will it really take Trump to save Britain from itself? Maybe. But there is a better source of hope: Rose Doherty, who takes her place alongside Lucy Connolly as a martyr to old Britain, and the thousands like her who comprise the silent majority. We must be silent no longer.
Times
27 minutes ago
- Times
Rapid Russell Group expansion ‘puts smaller universities at risk'
Top universities should be prevented from 'irresponsible' expansion that places smaller institutions at risk, according to a leading vice-chancellor. Professor Graham Galbraith, of the University of Portsmouth, said there was a risk of a 'monopoly' if some universities continued to acquire UK students at their current pace to offset falling numbers of international students. He called for the government to consider a cap on the rate of university expansion. He has been backed by others in the sector, including the vice-chancellor of the University for the Creative Arts, and the University and College Union. Ten institutions from the elite Russell Group have increased places for UK students by at least 25 per cent in the past five years, analysis of data from the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (Ucas) shows.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Police make multiple arrests at Norwich protest supporting Palestine Action
Officers have arrested 13 people at a protest in Norwich in support of the proscribed terrorist group Palestine Action, Norfolk Police said. The force said a group assembled outside City Hall in St Peters Street holding placards in support of Palestine Action. 'These people were all arrested on suspicion of displaying an item in support of a proscribed organisation, contrary to Section 13 of the Terrorism Act 2000,' Norfolk Police said. 'Five of those arrested have been taken to Wymondham police investigation centre for questioning, where they remain. 'The remaining eight people were spoken to by officers and provided their details for further investigation. 'They were therefore de-arrested. 'A 14th person had their sign seized by officers during the protest and provided their details when requested.' Superintendent Wes Hornigold said: 'We will always work to facilitate peaceful protest and protect the democratic right to assembly, however the actions of this group were unlawful. 'Our officers' role is to prevent disorder, damage and disruption in the local community and they will use their powers to do this. 'Any breaches of the law will be dealt with.' The arrests came a day after the Metropolitan Police said a further 60 people will be prosecuted for support Palestine Action. The force said this followed the arrest of more than 700 people since the group was banned on July 5, including 522 in central London last Saturday. More prosecutions are expected in the coming weeks, and arrangements have been put in place 'that will enable us to investigate and prosecute significant numbers each week if necessary', the Met said. Last week, the Met confirmed the first three charges in England and Wales for offences under the Terrorism Act relating to Palestine Action. The three people charged were arrested at a protest in Parliament Square on July 5. Palestine Action was proscribed in July after the group claimed responsibility for damage to jets at RAF Brize Norton and was also linked to allegations of a serious assault on staff and police officers at a business premises in south Gloucestershire, the force said. Stephen Parkinson, director of public prosecutions, said: 'The public has a democratic right to protest peacefully in this country, and I understand the depth of feeling around the horrific scenes in Gaza. 'However, Palestine Action is now a proscribed terrorist organisation and those who have chosen to break the law will be subject to criminal proceedings under the Terrorism Act. 'When protest conduct crosses the line from lawful activity into criminality, we have a duty to enforce the law. ' People should be clear about the real-life consequences for anyone choosing to support Palestine Action. 'A terrorism conviction can severely impact your life and career – it can restrict your ability to travel overseas and work in certain professions. 'I urge people to think very carefully about their actions at protests. 'Anyone who chooses to disobey the law will have to face the consequences.'
