Court Update
- Ash
- Jul 17
- 4 min read
When our government came to power a year ago, it could have taken Thames Water into Special Administration, meaning protective public ownership, but it didn't.
A special law exists to handle this situation in recognition that this is not an ordinary company going bust, no matter how big, this is the supplier of our water and the processor of our sewage - its assets cannot be sold off for scrap and it cannot be allowed to make its staff redundant, or walk off with their pension fund.
This is the law https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2024/9780348256277/contents
At a meeting in London in October, the Water Minister told us the metric for Special Admin had not been reached and the bar was 'very high'.
We asked, "What was the metric and how high?" The Minister didn't know but would get back to us ..
We had the feeling that the government wasn't being overly transparent with the public, so when we discovered that Thames Water, despite financial crises, bizarre dividends and gross failure to invest and obey the law, was not going to be taken into Special Admin, we wondered why.
It was not going to be thoroughly and properly investigated and restructured by appointed administrators in the public interest, but instead was going to the High Court to get the green light to do its own deal, largely out of public view and with no one representing the customer or environment. WASP decided to intervene.
You should know the story that unfolded but if you don't, we have covered it in previous WASP blogs.
Our MP, Charlie Maynard, represented us with a team of excellent lawyers, all acting for free, who discovered shocking details of what the restructuring would mean for billpayers (previous blogs).
The first Trial Judge noted the bizarre absence of Steve Reed, Secretary of State and the Economic Regulator, Ofwat - it was all down to Charlie Maynard to wave the public interest flag but this hearing was really only about money and we lost and then we lost the appeal.
In the meantime, the cross-party, Environment Food and Rural Affairs (Efra) Parliamentary Committee started taking an interest in what was going on and why it was so hard to get straight answers from Thames Water bosses about a range of things, largely, money and where it had gone.
The landscape and transparency around Thames Water's approach and government's tacit support for its dealings has changed and some fog has lifted, courtesy of the professional curiosity of the Efra Committee and the continued investigation by campaigners.
Behind the scenes, WASP, Charlie Maynard and the legal team have kept focus on the proper response to the court decision, and that involved an appeal to the Appeal Court for leave to appeal its decision to the Supreme Court. That was refused by the Appeal Court Judges, and the next legal step was to appeal to the Supreme Court itself.
Barrister William Day, submitted the appeal document to the Supreme Court on Friday 13th June.
Since the Appeal Court decision, the preferred bidders for Thames Water, KKR, have dropped out of the deal, apparently over concerns about political and regulatory risk.
This was followed by news that Silverpoint and Elliot, two other large private equity funds, had expressed interest in the company, allegedly, if Thames Water could be granted immunity from prosecution for environmental crimes.
It seems fair to say that the nature and intentions of the bidders and bosses at Thames Water have become clearer.
This is what Charlie Maynard had to say for a press release:
“It’s unfair and unreasonable that customers’ interests are not protected in this process. The existing law leaves a regulatory black hole where the public’s interests are entirely ignored by the court, unless the regulator agrees. Given Ofwat’s terrible track record, this is clearly a disastrous approach. It is in the customers’ interests that Thames Water is placed into Special Administration.”
Now? We wait, and hope to hear the Supreme Court's decision within around a month.
We have also heard from the Water Minister, Emma Hardy, that Defra is preparing the ground for a transfer to Special Administration if it is required. What might look any worse than it already does, and trigger that action, is hard to say.
Two questions to conclude:
Will the government really risk being forced into this by a Lib Dem MP, a group of campaigners and the public with their pro-bono legal team? Or will Ministers try to jump first if it looks like it will happen?
What has the government's refusal to put Thames Water into Special Admin last year cost the customer and country?
We are working on finding out the answer to the second question, and when we do, we will let you know.