Water firms would be foolish to increase salaries to get around bonus ban
Six firms have been banned from paying bonuses to senior bosses under new rules that came into force on Friday.
Thames Water, Yorkshire Water, Anglian Water, Wessex Water, United Utilities and Southern Water have been told that they cannot issue bonuses for the financial year 2024/25, which concluded in April.
Mr Reed said that customers need to have 'confidence' in what water firms are doing, but also said it would not be 'right' for the Government or regulator to be 'capping' salaries in private sector businesses.
Asked if he was going to make sure that firms cannot raise base salaries to compensate for any bonus ban, Mr Reed told Times Radio: 'I think they would be extremely foolish to do anything of the sort that you're describing, because (…) these companies need to rebuild their broken relationship with their customers.
'Their customers need to have confidence in what they're doing, their customers are furious at the fact that they're seeing local waterways being polluted, but bosses taking multimillion-pound bonuses.'
He later told the BBC that it would not be 'right' for the Government or regulator to be setting salaries.
He told Radio 4's Today programme: ''I don't think it's right that government or regulators should be capping the salaries in private sector businesses.
Promise made. Promise delivered. pic.twitter.com/eIxHWYno2D
— Steve Reed MP (@SteveReedMP) June 6, 2025
'But those businesses need to have an eye on how their customers are feeling about what they are doing, and there are steps that you can take that are appropriate within regulation.'
The firms have all been banned under new rules which prevent bonuses from being paid if a water company does not meet environmental or consumer standards, does not meet financial resilience requirements, or is convicted of a criminal offence.
The six companies are not under an indefinite ban, and those firms may be able to offer rewards for the 2025/26 year, provided they stick within the Ofwat rules, under the Water (Special Measures) Act which comes into force on Friday.
If a company pays a bonus while it is under a ban, the water regulator Ofwat has the power to get the money back.
Under the new rules, Yorkshire Water, United Utilities, Thames Water, and Southern Water will all be unable to pay bonuses to the chief executive or chief financial officer, for the 24/25 financial year.
Anglian Water will be banned from paying its chief executive a bonus, but the chief financial officer will not be banned.
Wessex Water will be banned from paying its chief financial officer any extra, but the chief executive will be exempt.
The exemptions are because people were not in post when the incident that broke Ofwat's rules happened.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
4 hours ago
- The Guardian
Bidders demand Thames Water granted immunity over environmental crimes
Lenders vying to take over Thames Water have demanded that the struggling company and its management be granted immunity from prosecution for serious environmental crimes as a condition of acquiring it, the Guardian can reveal. Creditors want the environment secretary, Steve Reed, to grant the water company extraordinary clemency from a series of strict rules covering everything from sewage spills to failure to upgrade its water treatment works. The demands, if successful, would render the Environment Agency (EA) largely powerless to take enforcement action against Britain's biggest water company for some of the most serious criminal breaches of its licences and permits. Thames Water has been a serial offender in recent years, paying tens of millions of pounds in fines and penalties, with multiple convictions for dumping raw sewage into rivers and streams and dozens more investigations under way. The fate of the heavily indebted utility was thrown into further doubt this week when the US private equity firm KKR quit an auction to buy it, citing concerns about politicisation and the poor state of its assets. That has left a disparate band of about 100 bondholders, who have collectively lent the company about £13bn, as the sole bidder. If the creditors' bid fails, Thames Water is likely to fall into state ownership via the special administration regime – a fate the Treasury is desperate to avoid. Sources described the creditors' list of demands as a 'ransom note' that underlined their powerful negotiating position as the 'last show in town'. Creditors argue that failure to secure leniency from fines and enforcement will mean Thames Water is caught in a 'doom loop' that prevents it from recovering and injecting enough money into its tired network. The company, which has 16 million customers in the London and Thames Valley regions and 8,000 employees, is labouring under about £20bn of debt and is running out of cash. The requests formed part of the creditors' turnaround plan that was put to the water regulator, Ofwat, in recent days. Among the proposals were that the EA stops enforcing personal liability for managers at Thames Water and does not pursue enforcement over the company's failure to deliver a huge number of infrastructure upgrades, known as the water industry national environment programme (Winep). The Guardian revealed in December that Thames Water intentionally diverted millions of pounds pledged for Winep environmental clean-ups towards bonuses and dividends, sparking an Ofwat investigation. Customers have already paid for those projects via their bills. Thames Water failed to deliver more than 100 of 812 Winep schemes it was due to between 2020 and 2025. Other creditor requests include not prosecuting Thames Water for sewage spills on dry days or for 'flow to full treatment' licence breaches – where the EA and Ofwat police how much wastewater its plants can treat at any time. They also want Thames Water to be exempt from prosecution for breaches of the industrial emissions directive, which governs pollution into rivers, streams, land and the atmosphere. To achieve these requests, the creditors want Reed to give a strategic decision statement ordering the EA to deprioritise enforcement. The Guardian revealed in March that Thames Water was demanding leniency for fines and penalties in order to attract bidders and stop cash they might inject from leaking out of the business. However, the extent of the creditor demands, and request for near-blanket immunity for serious environmental crimes, has surprised water industry insiders, who warned it could spark legal challenges from rivals or lead to more requests for special treatment. Sign up to Headlines UK Get the day's headlines and highlights emailed direct to you every morning after newsletter promotion Last month Ofwat fined the company£123m over sewage and dividend breaches. The regulator said its investigation had uncovered failings around Thames's handling of sewage and wastewater, which amounted to a 'significant breach' of its legal obligations. The EA is still pursuing parallel investigations into Thames Water over alleged failure to comply with environmental permits, and has powers to prosecute the company. Creditors are expected to write down a significant proportion of their debt in return for taking over the company. Time is running out to find a solution to keep it afloat as it burns through £3bn of high-interest rescue loans. A spokesperson for the creditors declined to comment on commercial discussions but confirmed their plan required 'regulatory support'. 'The creditors' proposal will fix the fundamentals, protect public health and prioritise improved customer and environmental outcomes,' they said. 'In addition to a detailed operational plan and billions in fresh investment proposed by the creditors, Thames Water requires a fundamental reset and regulatory support so that asset health and performance can be restored to the levels that customers and the environment deserve. 'The creditors are committed to working with the government and regulators to achieve that outcome as quickly as possible and expect Thames Water to be held to account to deliver a realistic but ambitious trajectory for the company's return to compliance.' A government spokesperson said: 'The company is stable and government is carefully monitoring the situation. We expect the company to continue to meet its obligations to both customers and the environment.' An Ofwat spokesperson said: 'Our focus is on ensuring that the company takes the right steps to deliver a turnaround in its operational performance and strengthen its financial resilience to the benefit of customers. We are assessing whether the [creditors'] plans are realistic, deliverable and will bring substantial benefits for customers and the environment.' Thames Water said: 'In order to be investable, we and prospective investors would need to engage in discussions with our regulators.'
Powys County Times
6 hours ago
- Powys County Times
Home Office plans to spend £2.2bn of foreign aid on asylum support this year
The Home Office plans to spend about £2.2 billion of foreign aid to support asylum seekers this financial year, according to new figures. The amount of overseas development assistance (ODA) budgeted by the Home Office – which is largely used to cover accommodation costs such as hotels for asylum seekers – is slightly less than the £2.3 billion it spent in 2024/25. International rules allow countries to count first-year costs of supporting refugees as overseas development assistance (ODA). The figures, first reported by the BBC, were published in recent days on the Home Office website. The Home Office said it is 'urgently taking action to restore order and reduce costs' which will cut the amount spent to support asylum seekers and refugees in the UK. It also said it was expected to have saved £500 million in asylum support costs in the last financial year, and that this had saved £200 million in ODA which had been passed back to the Treasury. A total of 32,345 asylum seekers were being housed temporarily in UK hotels at the end of March this year. This figure is down 15% from the end of December, when the total was 38,079, and 6% lower than the 34,530 at the same point a year earlier. Asylum seekers and their families are housed in temporary accommodation if they are waiting for the outcome of a claim or an appeal and have been assessed as not being able to support themselves independently. They are housed in hotels if there is not enough space in accommodation provided by local authorities or other organisations. Labour has previously said it is 'committed to end the use of asylum hotels over time', adding that under the previous Conservative government at one stage 'more than 400 hotels were in use and almost £9 million per day was being spent'. Jo White, chairwoman of the Red Wall group of Labour MPs, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme on Saturday: 'We need to be looking at things like ECHR article eight. I don't think anything's off the table … including looking at new options such as processing abroad. 'So, we have to be open to see how we can move move that backlog as quickly as possible. I'm getting impatient. 'I know my colleagues in parliament are getting impatient and we're pressing the Government as hard as we can on this.' A Home Office spokesperson said: 'We inherited an asylum system under exceptional pressure and are urgently taking action to restore order and reduce costs. 'This will ultimately reduce the amount of official development assistance spent to support asylum seekers and refugees in the UK. 'We are immediately speeding up decisions and increasing returns so that we can end the use of hotels and save the taxpayer £4 billion by 2026. 'The Rwanda scheme also wasted £700 million to remove just four volunteers – instead, we have surged removals to nearly 30,000 since the election, are giving law enforcement new counter-terror style powers, and increasing intelligence sharing through our Border Security Command to tackle the heart of the issue, vile people-smuggling gangs.'
BBC News
13 hours ago
- BBC News
Yorkshire Water boss 'already rejected' bonus before new law
The boss of Yorkshire Water said she had decided to turn her bonus down before new legislation was introduced that would prevent her from receiving Shaw, who accepted a £371,000 bonus last year, said it would "not be appropriate" to accept the payment on top of her salary this comes as Yorkshire Water recognised it needed to "do better" when it came to its performance on pollution. The water company was most recently prosecuted and fined £350,000 after a water course was polluted with sewage near York. Under the new rules, which came into effect yesterday, six firms were banned from paying "unfair" bonuses to their executives this included Yorkshire Water, Anglian Water, Southern Water, Thames Water, United Utilities and Wessex Water. The measures apply to water companies that do not meet environmental and consumer standards, are not financially resilient or have been convicted of a criminal offence. A Yorkshire Water spokesperson said: "Our CEO, Nicola Shaw, had already made the decision that it would not be appropriate for her to receive an annual bonus this year due to the company's performance on pollution and a recognition that we need to do better for the communities we serve and earn trust. "She has also taken the decision to waive her entitlement to an additional bonus that would have vested under our longer-term incentive scheme."We are determined to make improvements to our performance so we can deliver our part in creating a thriving Yorkshire, doing right for our customers and the environment."The company received public backlash in December when its CEO took home a six-figure bonus despite plans to increase bills by 41%. At the time, Nicola Shaw told the BBC the price hike would pay for supply upgrades and go towards reducing sewage discharges and storm overflows and her bonus came from shareholders rather than customers. However, she previously declined a bonus in 2023, based on the company's record on river health. Listen to highlights from West Yorkshire on BBC Sounds, catch up with the latest episode of Look North.
