Latest news with #public ownership
BBC News
14 hours ago
- Business
- BBC News
West Midlands Trains transfers to public ownership in February
Rail services operated by West Midlands Trains will transfer to public ownership in February, confirms the will become part of Great British Railways, set up by the government to oversee the rail system in England, Wales and Scotland, when its current contract which operates services under the West Midlands Railway and London Northwestern Railway brands, said it was "committed to ensuring a smooth transition" to public ownership.A spokesperson added that customers could be "assured" the change would not impact its train services, timetables or stations and that all "ticket validities and conditions of carriage" were unaffected. The Department for Transport confirmed on Monday that WMT would transfer to public ownership on 1 February next year. Since the start of its franchise in 2017, more than 100 new trains had been introduced onto the network, which stretches from Liverpool to London via the West Midlands, the company director Ian McConnell said he was "extremely proud of what we have achieved under this franchise, delivering a £1bn investment in two new train fleets".Ministers have been allowed to take rail companies back into public ownership under the Passenger Railway Services (Public Ownership) Act 2024, passed by Labour in government hoped nationalisation of all services in Britain would bring savings of up to £150m while also reducing delays and Secretary Heidi Alexander said passengers had been suffering "spiralling costs, fragmentation and waste".Shadow rail minister Jerome Mayhew said he feared nationalisation would end up costing taxpayers more money in increased costs for leasing rolling said the government was "risking" successful operations for "ideological reasons". Follow BBC Birmingham on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.
Yahoo
22-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Nationalisation of train operators ‘tackling deep-rooted problems'
Bringing train operators into public ownership is 'tackling deep-rooted problems' with the railways, Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander said. The Cabinet minister made the claim ahead of c2c becoming the second operator to be nationalised by the Labour Government on Sunday. The operator, which runs services between London Fenchurch Street and south Essex, has been owned by Italy's state-owned rail company Trenitalia since 2017. The Department for Transport (DfT) said c2c is 'consistently rated one of the best performing operators in the country'. It achieved a passenger satisfaction rating for the overall journey of 89% in the most recent research by watchdog Transport Focus. This was the joint sixth best performance out of 22 operators. Ms Alexander said: 'Whether you're shopping in Lakeside or walking along the beach in Southend-on-Sea, from this Sunday you will be able to get there on a train service run by the public, for the public. 'Public ownership is already tackling deep-rooted problems we see on the railway that's led to spiralling costs, fragmentation and waste.' Customers of a nationalised train company can use their tickets on another publicly-owned operator at no extra cost during disruption. Ms Alexander added: 'A unified network under Great British Railways (GBR) will take this further with one railway under one brand with one mission – delivering excellent services for passengers wherever they travel.' GBR is an upcoming public sector body that will oversee Britain's rail infrastructure and train operation. Nationalised services are currently the responsibility of DfT Operator. South Western Railway became the first operator brought into public ownership by the Labour Government in May. It joined Northern, TransPennine Express, Southeastern and LNER, which were nationalised under the Conservative government because of performance failings by the former owners of those franchises. Rob Mullen, managing director of c2c, said: 'We are proud of the reliable and high level of service we offer our passengers, consistently being rated as one of the best performing operators in the country. 'We now have a golden opportunity to collaborate with the wider family of publicly-owned operators, sharing our successes and best practice, but also learning from a wide range of different and diverse operators who have already benefited from public ownership, to drive even more improvements for the people and places we all serve. 'A unified and focused railway can deliver more for our communities, including better growth, jobs and houses.' Eddie Dempsey, general secretary of the Rail, Maritime and Transport (RMT) union, welcomed the nationalisation of c2c but expressed frustration that staff cleaning its trains and stations will still be employed by private company Bidvest Noonan. He said: 'The injustice of outsourcing must end so all railway workers can reap the benefits of public ownership and greedy private contractors can no longer extract obscene profits from the industry. 'Our members working for Bidvest Noonan deserve decent pay and the same terms and conditions as their colleagues, and we will fight tooth and nail to achieve it.' Paul Nowak, general secretary of trade union body the TUC, said: 'We need a fully integrated national rail service that works for passengers and the rail workforce. 'That means tackling outsourcing in the sector.' The next operator to be nationalised will be Greater Anglia on October 12.
Yahoo
22-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Environment Secretary urged to apologise for ‘misleading' Scottish water claims
The Scottish Government is demanding an apology from UK Environment Secretary Steve Reed for 'inaccurate and misleading' made about water quality north of the border. Mr Reed came under fire after claiming that under publicly-owned Scottish Water 'pollution levels in Scotland are worse than they are in England'. The UK Government minister made the remarks to Channel 4 News as he dismissed calls for water services south of the border to be nationalised. Gillian Martin, the Scottish Government Secretary for Climate Action and Energy, said she was 'extremely disappointed' that Mr Reed had made the 'inaccurate and misleading comments regarding performance in Scotland' as he sought to 'dismiss out of hand the value of public ownership of a key asset like water'. She wrote to Mr Reed noting that Monday's report from the Independent Water Commission, led by Sir Jon Cunliffe, had found 66% of Scotland's water bodies to be of good ecological status, compared with 16.1% in England and 29.9% in Wales. And while she accepted the figures for the different countries were 'not calculated on the same basis', Ms Martin stated: 'It is clear that Scotland has a higher performance.' She insisted that 'much of the improvement' seen in water in Scotland was 'due to significant investment in the water industry to reduce pollution', which she said was driven by both Scottish Water and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa). My letter to UK Gov Minister Steve Reed asking him to retract his false statements about the condition of water in Scotland. IWC was able to report we're in a much better position than rUk with 87% 'high' or 'good' status. Public ownership works. — Gillian Martin (@GillianMSP) July 22, 2025 Ms Martin told the UK Environment Secretary: 'Your comments sought also to undermine the idea of public ownership in the minds of voters, yet this is clearly what the people of Scotland continue to want. 'Indeed, it is the very fact of that public ownership and control which has allowed us to keep water bills lower for people, compared to what people with privatised water supplies in England have to pay.' Noting that Sepa had found 87% of the Scottish water environment to be of 'high' of 'good' quality – up from 82% in 2014 – she insisted this was 'in part, due to water being a publicly-owned asset, allowing for investment without shareholder returns or the pressure to make profits'. The Scottish Government minister went on to tell Mr Reed: 'I am therefore asking that you acknowledge that your comments were inaccurate, that you apologise publicly for making them, and seek to correct them.' Sir Jon's review of water services south of the border did not explore renationalising water companies – with the Government at Westminster opposed to this despite demands from campaigners for a return to public ownership in England. Mr Reed however warned that nationalisation would cost £100 billion and would slow down efforts to cut pollution. The UK Government has been contacted for comment.
The Guardian
21-07-2025
- Business
- The Guardian
The Guardian view on the water industry: a return to public ownership should still be on the table
Labour could have chosen the public interest over the profit motive, as it set about its promised reorganisation of the water industry in England and Wales. Polling last year showed a higher level of support for publicly owned water companies than railways. Yet while train companies are being renationalised as contracts expire, ministers ruled out a reversal of 1989's water privatisation before they commissioned Sir Jon Cunliffe, a former central banker, to report on how they could improve this failing industry through tougher regulation. This newspaper regrets that the question of ownership was taken off the table. Water is among the most precious of all natural resources and the pro‑market logic for the sell-off was bogus. In the absence of competition, regional monopolies were created and, in the decades since, businesses have enriched themselves while failing to fulfil their responsibilities. No other European government has followed suit in offloading vital infrastructure including pipes and reservoirs, and enabling investors to extract wealth by loading up balance sheets with debt. Asking Sir Jon's commission to reconsider public ownership, alongside regulatory reform, would have offered more options. Growing pressure on the water supply, and increasing instability of hydrological cycles due to global heating, mean proper stewardship centred on human needs is more essential now than ever. It remains likely that Thames Water will end up in special administration due to its vast debt – despite this scenario having been left out of the commission's scope. The Common Wealth thinktank has proposed this as a stepping stone to long-term public control. Within the terms offered, Sir Jon has done a thorough piece of work. If they are accepted by ministers and work in the way he intends – and these are big ifs – his 88 recommendations ought to bring a shocking period of mismanagement to an end. But they probably won't prevent another from beginning. Not all of England and Wales's 11 regional water companies have the disgraceful records of Thames and Southern. The approach to pollution of these two businesses, combined with their aggressive financing structures, have undermined public confidence more deeply than all the rest. But tougher regulation is clearly overdue. The supervisory approach proposed, modelled on financial regulation, would be a significant improvement provided that the right people, including engineers, are put in charge. Rather than conduct statistical tick-box exercises, this new regulator should aim for an overview. Bringing under one new roof the various regulatory functions – including those carried out in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, and by the little-known Drinking Water Inspectorate, as well as Ofwat – makes obvious sense. The rollout of smart meters is also a good proposal, provided that a social tariff is created for low-income households. An ombudsman ought to make it easier to seek redress when local services fail. It is right to highlight the need for a longer-term approach to water policy too. It remains to be seen which of these ideas will be taken forward. Businesses in multiple sectors are experts at running rings around regulators. Making water companies value the public interest more highly, relative to private profit, will be an ongoing struggle. Without structural reform, the cycle of regulatory failure and corporate evasion remains all too likely.
Telegraph
20-07-2025
- Business
- Telegraph
Reform would nationalise half of water industry, says Nigel Farage
Nigel Farage has vowed to nationalise half of the water industry by striking a deal with the private sector. The Reform UK leader said he would attempt to fix the 'mess' blighting Britain's waterways by bringing 50 per cent of the sector under public ownership. He refused to say how much the reforms would cost but insisted it would be 'a lot less' than the £50bn that has been estimated. Mr Farage's promise comes as the Government has pledged to halve the amount of raw sewage being pumped into rivers, lakes and seas by the end of the decade. But Reform has said the British taxpayers 'need to be in control' of their own utilities. In its 2024 manifesto, the party vowed to launch a 'new model' that brings 50 per cent of all utilities under public ownership, with the other half owned by UK pension funds. Asked about the pledge on Sunday, Mr Farage said Britain had become 'completely incapable of coping' with the demands placed on the water sector by a huge increase in the population. Pressed on how much it would cost to have 50 per cent of the industry under public ownership, Mr Farage told the BBC's Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg show: 'That depends what deal you do with the private sector investors. 'We are in a hell of a mess with this – an increase of the population by 10 million has left us completely incapable of coping, companies have been badly run. 'We would look for private sector investment, the Government can be a partner.' Labour has resisted calls to nationalise the industry with Steve Reed, the Environment Secretary, saying on Sunday it would cost too much and take too long. Reform's 2024 manifesto said the British taxpayer 'needs to be in control of Britain's utilities' and vowed to 'launch a new model that brings 50 per cent of each utility into public ownership'. 'The other 50 per cent would be owned by UK pension funds, benefiting from new expertise and better management,' it added. 'We will ensure standing charges are capped to help low users and pensioners.' The Government has estimated that it would cost more than £99bn to nationalise the water industry, based on figures from Ofwat, the water regulator. But Mr Farage said it would cost 'a lot less' than half that to bring 50 per cent of the sector under Government control if the right deal was struck. The leader of Reform told the BBC: 'I'm sorry, Defra [Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs] and Ofwat are part of the problem. Everybody thinks the same. 'It's public sector thinking, we need private sector innovation.' Pressed again on whether he would spend £50bn, Mr Farage said: 'Well, I think it'd be a lot less than that if you strike the right deal.' Asked how much it would cost, he continued: 'I don't know, I haven't sat in the negotiations – but a completely different mindset is needed.' Mr Farage added: 'We don't know what negotiations we're going to have, but it doesn't need to be a big sum of money if you incentivise private capital to come in and do the job properly.' The Reform UK leader also warned that British people are being defrauded of billions of pounds to fund net zero. In an attack on Labour's environmental agenda, Mr Farage claimed that subsidising green energy schemes at the taxpayers' expense is having 'literally zero effect' on global emissions. Reform has been heavily critical of the UK's bid to achieve net zero by 2050 and vowed to scrap the target if it wins the next election, claiming it would save £225bn. Labour has pushed on with its attempts to decarbonise the economy, sticking to its pledge to achieve clean power by 2030 despite concerns about the impact on the UK's energy security. Speaking to the BBC on Sunday, Mr Farage acknowledged the impact humans have had on the climate, saying it was 'impossible to think' that billions of people have not had an effect on rising temperatures. But he insisted this did not mean Britain should 'beggar itself' by sacrificing traditional industries in favour of green initiatives when the UK accounts for around one per cent of greenhouse ga s emissions worldwide. When Laura Kuenssberg put to him that the scientific consensus is 'absolutely clear that man's activity has a significant impact on the climate', Mr Farage said: 'Well, say it does, is that sufficient reason to defraud British taxpayers of billions of pounds every year, which is what we're doing in subsidising wind energy and solar energy for literally zero effect on global CO2 emissions? 'The same goes for closing our steel plants and moving the production to India. We've got ourselves stuck in this mindset. We believe that man has an influence on changing the climate. I didn't deny that. 'I think man does... it's impossible to think that seven or eight billion people can't have some effect.' Earlier this year, research found that Britain's green energy subsidies have added an estimated £280 to household energy bills. The figure was similar to the £300 that Labour promised bills would decrease by if the party came to power and moved Britain's energy system to renewables. The Government has argued that subsidies are accelerating the move to clean energies and reducing UK vulnerability to future surges in gas and oil prices. But critics have warned against sacrificing traditional British industries if it means outsourcing carbon-intensive production to other countries, at no net benefit to the environment. Gareth Davies, shadow financial secretary to the Treasury, said: 'Nigel Farage is flogging billion-pound promises with no plans to deliver them, meaning higher taxes and more borrowing – and working families footing the bill. It's pure theatre – they are not serious. 'Only the Conservatives believe in sound money, lower taxes, and serious leadership. Britain deserves better than this circus.' A Labour Party spokesman said: 'Nigel Farage summed up his ideas for the water industry in three words: 'I don't know'. 'He has no answers, no plan and nothing to offer apart from bluster. Working families can't afford an unfunded, uncosted Reform experiment with their money.'
