Update - Wednesday 5th February. Day 3 of the High Court sanctions hearing for Thames Water's restructuring plan and the potential extra £3billion loan to add to the £19 billion that brought it to need a loan.
We say the company should go into Special Administration, where the public interest can be protected and a good solution can be found to end 35 years of putting shareholders before service delivery.
This affair reminds us of a scene in the BBC comedy 'This Country' set in Thames Water's region at Northleach in the Cotswolds. It's even in the Windrush Catchment.
One of the lead characters, Kerry, says she is taking out a loan to pay off her cousin's debt:
Kerry: 'Unfortunately it was worth #### all, but it's fine cause I've taken out a loan to pay off the first loan and also to buy a Play Station, and if I fall behind on the repayments of that, I just get out another loan, and so forth and so forth.......... It's working the system.'
And it's funny, and it resonates with what is happening with Thames Water and the entire privatised water industry but that situation is not at all funny - It affects real people and real life. It is deadly serious for everybody involved - not forgetting our environment, precious waters and future generations.
The specialist barrister representing our MP, Charlie Maynard, working with WASP, to in turn represent the public interest is William Day who has been his feet several times already, to question witnesses. (He is working pro bono - meaning, for free - along with a team of supporting lawyers also for free)
On Tuesday, Mr Day established from Thames Water's Chief Finance Officer that the fees paid for by the company for the process being examined in the court were eye-watering and could go as high as £210M including 'reasonable costs' being covered for its creditors.
'By the company' - That means covered by the customers; us and maybe you - but did anyone ask you if spending money on this and not fixing the company under special administration and fixing the infrastructure instead would be ok?
Were you asked if reneging on 112 Ofwat/customer funded schemes in the last 5-year spending cycle to 2024, yet still paying dividends and bonuses while not explaining where the over £1billion paid to do those schemes went, would be OK? Thought not.
Here is the full article about the court case by Gill Plimmer from the Financial Times
All links for same article - just use the on that works for you, please
When we walked into the courtroom on Monday morning and found it already overflowing with legal teams and then into the 'overflow' (unfortunately appropriate for a water company case) courtroom and found standing room only, the scene was set for a very serious and very expensive event.
We can't help thinking that if Secretary of State, Steve Reed, had acted, not just prevaricated, and taken Thames Water into Special Administration months ago, when it became perfectly clear that the company was not delivering its statutory duties - undeniable, and was failing financially - undeniable - this case would not have needed to happen.
Tomorrow, Mr Day will deliver his closing speech for the public interest case at about 3:30 PM (timings can change).
With help from the Court Clerk, we are applying for access to video coverage for the groups and individuals who responded to our request for support a couple of weeks ago.
If we have missed you and you would like a virtual seat, please contact us via info@windrushwasp.org
and we will try, but demand is high and space is limited even in the virtual room.
We understand that the judge, Justice Leech, will make a decision on 14th February.
Whatever he decides will represent a big moment in the fight for healthy waters, proper resourcing for water company staff, a properly functioning water company and the end of pollution for profit.
We will keep you posted.
Thanks for your support
Коментарі