{"id":35999,"date":"2023-10-06T18:38:23","date_gmt":"2023-10-06T17:38:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.themintmagazine.com\/?p=35999"},"modified":"2024-01-02T16:17:52","modified_gmt":"2024-01-02T16:17:52","slug":"which-way-will-water-flow","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.themintmagazine.com\/which-way-will-water-flow\/","title":{"rendered":"Which way will water flow?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><strong>Justin Taberham<\/strong> examines the prospects for the UK water sector.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Near daily media interest and criticism of water companies\u2019 pollution performance has lately been often stimulated by public reporting or legal action against them. In addition, debt loadings for some companies are at unsustainably high levels and investors have had to inject further capital into companies. So it is hardly a surprise that there is significant pressure on the government to act and a wide-ranging discussion has begun on the future of the industry and what reform is required.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">So how did we get to this point?\u00a0 Privatisation in 1989 seemed to make a pretty good start: the government assumed responsibility for the English water industry\u2019s total debts amounting to \u00a35bn and granted the water companies a further \u00a31.5bn in what was denoted a \u201cgreen dowry\u201d of public funds.\u00a0 Ordinary people from beyond the usual share buyers were encouraged to buy shares with the slogan \u201cYou could be an H2Owner\u2019 and the offer was hugely oversubscribed.<\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Since privatisation there has been a migration of the sector towards a model of private finance and a rise in Private Equity (PE), sovereign wealth fund and pension fund investors, which has become very common in the infrastructure sector globally.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">This, though, changed pretty quickly.\u00a0 Since privatisation there has been a migration of the sector towards a model of private finance and a rise in Private Equity (PE), sovereign wealth fund and pension fund investors, which has become very common in the infrastructure sector globally.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">As of 2021, only three privatised companies remain listed on the London Stock Exchange, three are delisted and the other nine are owned by Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) companies. Currently, <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/environment\/2022\/nov\/30\/more-than-70-per-cent-english-water-industry-foreign-ownership\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">more than 70% of the sector<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> is owned by overseas investors.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Allied with this migration is a growth in the complexity of company structures and a rapid change in the way that debt is utilised. Several companies from the early 2000s have used a structure called Whole Business Securitisation\u2019 (WBS). This model can take advantage of the fact that a company with higher debt loadings can be allied with more \u201csteady\u201d credit ratings, given the secure future income stream from customers. The WBS model also allows for increased returns on investment.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In response, debt loadings within the sector have risen rapidly. (See box: <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">English water company debt and investment<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">)<\/span><\/p>\n<div class=\"su-box su-box-style-default\" id=\"\" style=\"border-color:#46a796;border-radius:3px;\"><div class=\"su-box-title\" style=\"background-color:#79dac9;color:#03332c;border-top-left-radius:1px;border-top-right-radius:1px\">English water company debt and investment<\/div><div class=\"su-box-content su-u-clearfix su-u-trim\" style=\"border-bottom-left-radius:1px;border-bottom-right-radius:1px\">\n<h6><strong>Thames Water<\/strong><\/h6>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Thames Water has reserves of around \u00a34.4bn.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">March 2023 Thames Water statement \u201cAs of 30 September 2022, the net debt figure (on a covenant basis) for Thames Water Utilities Limited was \u00a314.3bn\u201d.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Its regulatory gearing is 80.6%, the highest in the sector.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h6><strong>Sector-wide<\/strong><\/h6>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">There has been investment totalling around \u00a3190bn of capital expenditure by 2022: about double that of the period before privatisation.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The value of water company assets has increased from \u00a39bn to \u00a385bn.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Debt raised over the same period is about \u00a357bn.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Equity is just under \u00a320bn.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Average regulatory gearing as of March 2022 &#8211; 68.5%.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">All figures from <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.ofwat.gov.uk\/thames-debt-and-water-sector-finance\/\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Ofwat, the water industry economic regulator<\/span><\/a><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><em>, July 2023<\/em><\/div><\/div><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The water sector\u2019s economic regulator, Ofwat, has become increasingly responsive to risks of financialising within the sector. It introduced a process of financial resilience reporting in 2015 following the clarification in the Water Act 2014 of its resilience duty, which requires companies to report on financial measures.\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">However, there was an investor backlash against these regulatory measures which investors saw as a threat to the level of their returns.\u00a0 Four companies appealed Ofwat\u2019s price determinations in 2019, where they decided a five-year \u201cprice structure\u201d for each company for 2020-25. Appeals were held by the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) and the resulting decision was, to a degree, in the favour of the companies. In their response to the decision, Ofwat voiced potentially a note of frustration: \u201cWe can have no confidence that these higher returns will translate into investment services for the benefit of consumers and the environment.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Performance in recent years has seen trust in the water industry deteriorate. If it is to be rebuilt, we need to see profound, long-term change across the sector.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Allied to issues around debt loadings and financial models, water companies\u2019 environmental performance has faced scrutiny. Environmental regulator, the Environment Agency (EA), publishes its annual Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) of the water and sewerage companies operating in England. The 2022 report notes: \u201cPerformance in recent years has seen trust in the water industry deteriorate. If it is to be rebuilt, we need to see profound, long-term change across the sector\u2026<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">there are some deep-rooted problems which can only be solved by significant investment. Not just this year and next, but for some decades to come.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">However the current UK government does not seem to be coming to the support of its regulators.\u00a0 A 2021 letter from the chair of the EA stated: \u201cOver the past few years, the drop in grant has forced us to reduce or stop work we used to fund, with real-world impacts (for example, on our ability to protect water quality) for which we and the government are now facing mounting criticism.\u2019\u201d\u00a0 More recently the government has sought to remove the nutrient-neutrality requirement on planning decisions undermining Natural England\u2019s ability to reduce housing development pressure on water quality.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<div class=\"su-box su-box-style-default\" id=\"\" style=\"border-color:#46a796;border-radius:3px;\"><div class=\"su-box-title\" style=\"background-color:#79dac9;color:#03332c;border-top-left-radius:1px;border-top-right-radius:1px\">Bust Water<\/div><div class=\"su-box-content su-u-clearfix su-u-trim\" style=\"border-bottom-left-radius:1px;border-bottom-right-radius:1px\">\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Earlier this year Thames Water almost went bust. So what happens if a water company goes bust?\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/theconversation.com\/renationalising-thames-water-would-be-a-gamble-but-there-is-another-way-to-help-clean-up-the-industry-208880\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Branston and Tomlinson<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> suggest that if Thames Water were to fold, the government would use the Special Administration Regime (SAR) to take over the company, but would aim to pass ownership back into private hands as soon as possible. In normal administration processes for companies that have collapsed their assets are sold to repay debts as far as possible, but water company assets cannot be sold and it is likely that the current shareholders would expect government compensation to cover this.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Ofwat has noted that the special administration regime is designed \u201cnot to keep a company in business but rather to ensure that the provision of services to customers is maintained\u201d \u2013 meaning investors \u201cbear an appropriate level of risk in relation to the decisions that they make\u201d and reducing the \u201crisk to taxpayers that they will have to bear costs relating to a failed company\u201d.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">But in reality the government could be forced to step in with funding to ensure that another company is willing to take over the failed company. The most recent example of a SAR process was the takeover of Bulb by Octopus Energy in 2021\/22. In this scenario, the <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nao.org.uk\/reports\/investigation-into-bulb-energy\/\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">government stepped in with funding<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> to ensure that Octopus Energy was willing to take over Bulb\u2019s customers. However, following the National Audit Office Investigation into the takeover, there is an expectation on the government that it will recover all taxpayer funding.\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><\/div><\/div><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">So could anything change with a new government?\u00a0 The upcoming UK election &#8211; in January 2025 at the latest \u2013 is more than likely to result in a Labour government given current polling. This is already bringing deep analysis of what Labour will and won\u2019t do when in power, but none of the options for the sector are without risk and complexity.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/labour.org.uk\/press\/jim-mcmahon-conference-speech\/\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The view from the Labour Party in 2022 was to focus on strengthening regulation, increasing company director accountability, and reducing pollution levels. There was no mention of nationalisation of the sector.<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In May 2023, there was <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.ft.com\/content\/602a009b-6a41-4528-9804-22f7a5080cc3\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">speculation in the <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Financial Time<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">s<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> that a Labour government would merge most of the EA, with Ofwat and the water quality watchdog, the\u00a0 Drinking Water Inspectorate, to create a new oversight body. The party indicated it would also create a separate flooding agency.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">There are a number of options for structural approach which a Labour government could consider:<\/span><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">keep everything as is with water companies being fully privatised but tighten up regulation;<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">nationalise into a publicly-owned utility along the lines of Scottish Water; or<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">form a single purpose, not-for-profit company in England with no shareholders, along the lines of Welsh Water.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h5><strong>Keep it the same<\/strong><\/h5>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">This option is the simplest option. But it is becoming increasingly clear that this option has challenges with companies facing high debt loadings so increased regulation may just make their collapse more likely.\u00a0 Furthermore, pushing for increased investment in measures to deal with poor environmental performance will increase bills in the midst of a cost of living crisis.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The cost of solving one key issue within the water sector \u2013 the sewage spills into water bodies from Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs) \u2013 has been <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/utilityweek.co.uk\/eliminating-combined-sewage-overflows-could-cost-100bn\/#:~:text=In%20written%20evidence%20submitted%20to,of%20measures%20beyond%20just%20nature%2D\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">suggested by the industry as \u00a3100bn<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (Environmental Audit Committee, 2021). The scale of likely investment across the sector which may be required is very significant. In addition, all policies and scenarios assessed would carry a significant cost in carbon emissions.<\/span><\/p>\n<h5><strong>Nationalise, Scottish-Water style<\/strong><\/h5>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Scottish Water is a public company accountable to Scottish Ministers and Scottish Parliament, partly funded by long-term loans from the Scottish government.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">If the water sector was taken into public hands, this is a potential model for that. However, debt would have to be taken on by government.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.bbc.co.uk\/news\/uk-scotland-66096518\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The BBC has noted, however: \u201cThe publicly-owned provider is investing at only 40% of the rate that will be required to tackle the backlog of work from old pipes and the future challenge of climate change.<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u201d <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The reason for this lack of funding is that the requested degree of funding to support the required programmes was not agreed by the regulator, under what was noted as \u201cpolitical pressure\u201d.\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<h5><strong>Single purpose not for profit\u00a0<\/strong><\/h5>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Welsh Water is owned by a public-interest company, Glas Cymru. It is a not for profit with a single purpose, with a government debt guarantee which helps keep the costs of servicing the debt down and it is financed in the capital markets. It has no shareholders and 62 trustees. Its decisions are made in the interests of wider society and any profits are reinvested or passed to customers in lower bills. There is <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.sbs.ox.ac.uk\/sites\/default\/files\/2021-04\/welsh-water-case-study.pdf\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">considerable evidence<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> that this option ensures funding is focused on the social purpose of the company.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">My view is that the Welsh option is the best, but not necessarily the easiest, option for the future structure of the UK sector. Welsh Water has been shown to have a successful social company structure, with good environmental performance over the past 20 years as well as a clear focus and the development of programmes of work which directly tackle the changing priorities that other shareholder-owned companies have generally been unable to develop. It can also access capital markets, unlike the Scottish Water model.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>One consideration is whether you could divert funds that currently are invested as \u201cshareholders\u201d in companies to \u201cdebt holders\u201d in a not-for-profit. In addition, a sector with not-for-profit utilities might be very attractive to ESG investors.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">There is the question, however, of how to migrate to this model. Do you transform any water company that goes bankrupt into a not-for-profit company rather than allow private investors to secure the company? This would mirror the happenings in 2001 when Dwr Cymru Welsh Water was formed after Hyder was broken up.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">That might create a hybrid sector of private companies, not for profits and public companies, but we have that anyway with Welsh Water and Scottish Water. One consideration is whether you could divert funds that currently are invested as \u201cshareholders\u201d in companies to \u201cdebt holders\u201d in a not-for-profit. In addition, a sector with not-for-profit utilities might be very attractive to ESG investors.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Whatever model the water sector sits in,\u00a0 considerable challenges will remain for the sector. Technical and delivery goalposts have moved over the past 20 years. There has been a change in focus and investment needs away from point source pollution control towards ecological water quality, catchment approaches, nature-based stormwater management, emerging contaminants, more complex chemical and organic pollutants, and climate change implications. And these required approaches have not been sufficiently funded.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Many commentators argue that privatisation has brought little benefit to the sector in the longer term. Professor David Hall of the University of Greenwich noted in 2022 that companies have invested \u201c<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/gala.gre.ac.uk\/id\/eprint\/34274\/14\/34274%20HALL_Water_and_Sewerage_Company_Finances_%28Rev.2%29_2021.pdf\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">no net additional shareholder funds (equity) since privatisation<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u201d meaning that \u201cmoney has been taken out, not put in\u201d.\u00a0 Professor of Economics and Public Policy at King\u2019s College London, Jonathan Portes, and a former senior civil servant, notes \u201cI worked on the privatisation of England\u2019s water in 1989. It was an <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/commentisfree\/2022\/aug\/16\/i-worked-on-privatisation-england-water-1989-failed-regime\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">organised rip-off<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">.\u2019\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The question is whether the current industry model really is fit for purpose to deliver the significant investment programmes which are needed to respond to its critical challenges. An increasing number of sector experts would argue that change is needed, but would a future Labour government make that a priority?<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Justin Taberham examines the prospects for the UK water sector. Near daily media interest and criticism of water companies\u2019 pollution performance has lately been often stimulated by public reporting or &hellip; <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1549,"featured_media":36006,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"content-type":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[1737,58,7,45,57],"tags":[2555,1653,2513,1380,1222,907,2508,2515,224,2514,877,326],"class_list":["post-35999","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-environment","category-government","category-horizon","category-uk-ireland","category-utilities","tag-2023-top-10","tag-debt-crisis","tag-justin-taberham","tag-privatisation","tag-public-policy","tag-public-services","tag-sept-2023","tag-sewage","tag-stakeholder-economy","tag-thames-water","tag-uk","tag-water"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.themintmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35999","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.themintmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.themintmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.themintmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1549"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.themintmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=35999"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.themintmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35999\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.themintmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/36006"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.themintmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=35999"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.themintmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=35999"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.themintmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=35999"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}