We are in Oxfordshire, but we think we heard a distant "OUCH!"
Could it have come from Environment Secretary, Steve Reed and his advisors, and from the Ofwat Chief Executive when Mr Justice Leech spoke these withering words in the High Court as he concluded Thames Water's hearing for an expensive customer-funded bailout?
“It would have been nice, I think, if either Ofwat or the Secretary of State had felt the need to turn up and explain the position to the court”
Wow! And precisely, where were the people who are paid to represent us?
The troubling absence of a voice for the customer and public was why WASP wrote to the High Court in the first place, to ask to fill that gap. This is our blog about the letter.
On Friday, at the end of a week-long and hugely expensive hearing to approve (or not) the super expensive customer-funded £3billion bailout plan, Mr Justice Leech summed up the case before he set off to make a decision, with just over a week to do it.
He has had to read an unimaginable list of documents and listen to five days of complex conflicting evidence and advocacy from the company and competing creditors - with the public's case being presented for us, free of charge, by a barrister team led by William Day supported by a team from Marriot Harrison, Solicitors, also for free. Massive thanks to them all.
Without this intervention, our approach to the court, our MP standing up for us and the generous help from the legal team, the public would have had zero representation, and the worst thing?
Our Government and Ofwat must have wanted it that way.
No wonder the Judge was irritated by Defra and Ofwat being deliberately absent and offering nothing to help him during one of the defining moments for the biggest water utility and the whole privatised water industry, of vital importance to the entire country.
The case is reported in detail by Gill Plimmer and Robert Smith in the Financial Times.
Here are some links to the FT article for free courtesy of the FT - all link to the same article.
The sky-high costs of this hearing and all of the preparation, advisors, witnesses, and so on, would have been avoided if the government had stepped in when it became clear, many months ago, that Thames Water was a financial and operational shambles and was fast running out of money, but it didn't. Instead, it let all of this happen and then deliberately looked the other way, while one judge had to try to understand it.
How do we know the sky-high costs?
Of course, no one was talking about the inconvenient and shocking truths but William Day, acting as MP Charlie Maynard's barrister, our barrister, and we think you can call him your barrister as well as he was speaking for you when no one else was, established during the cross-examination of witnesses that around £800- £900M of your money will be spent by Thames Water over the next six months on interest and fees to creditors, specifically,£600M+ and legal and advisory fees at £200M+ just on trying to save itself and its executives from Special Administration.
Maybe pause here to let that sink in and be utterly appalled? - we are.
Why don't they want Special Administration do we think? - After all, it is designed for crises like this one.
Possibly because in Special Admin the company will be properly controlled, scrutinised, audited, assets and liabilities properly valued, and probably the bonuses and dividends curtailed. The public interest will be protected, not ignored - and that is not how the company has shown it likes to operate.
Mr Day made this observation after his success: “It shouldn’t have taken a pro bono intervention to cross-examine the CFO for those sorts of costs to come out,”
But it did, and Thames Water spent many £millions of your money this week trying to control the narrative and speak as forcefully and persuasively as possible to represent its interests, not yours. Yet when it came to responding to the FT journalists writing this article,
Thames Water declined to comment.
The Government declined to comment.
Ofwat declined to comment.
That looks like unity - all treating the captive billpayer and public with contempt.
Behaving as if we have no right to know.
Footnote
The judge raises a vital point so let's also take a moment to consider whether the government can be relied on to represent the public when it still clings to a brutally discredited, exaggerated figure from 2018, bought and paid for by the water industry from a think tank, to try to frighten (why else) the last government and public from renationalising the industry.
It should worry us all that this government is still using what is clearly a false £90 billion figure to try to dupe and frighten the public.
Renowned Economist, Prof Sir Dieter Helm criticised the source report soon after it was published and said this about the numbers from the Social Market Foundation (SMF), a think tank shown to have been working for the water industry;
He wrote "Next the SMF argue that renationalisation is going to cost around £90 billion, and that over a long period investment will be about £100 billion. Neither of these numbers should be taken seriously."
Yet our government still chooses to use the £90bn in preference to properly derived figures from uncaptured experts - Why?
Full report from his blog https://dieterhelm.co.uk/natural-capital-environment/water/water-boarding/
The need for a truly independent forensic audit of Thames Water's accounts, its asset and liability valuations and for establishing where the money went is clear. That can be done under Special Administration and at this point, as the people who pay for what has become a complex money extraction machine with a water company bolted on, we deserve to know the truth, and so does the court.
Timeline.
12 December, WASP emails the High Court to make the case that the public interest is not represented and that we have useful evidence to give.
17 December, we deliver the letter to the court in person and in hard copy with our MP, Charlie Maynard. Fellow campaigners WeOwnIt, the Henley Mermaids, councillors from West Oxfordshire and many others support us outside the court.
Christmas happens.
Early January 2025, we secure pro bono (free) representation from Mr Day supported by a colleague and a team from instructing solicitors, Marriot Harrison.
We all start discussing and preparing. Experts from various fields help us gather and understand information.
We agree that Charlie, as the elected representative and Member of Parliament for our constituency, Witney, is the most appropriate client to be officially adopted/onboarded by the legal team.
16 January, WASP receives instruction from the High Court on how to file evidence. We proceed, with Charlie, through Marriot Harrison.
A massive amount of preparatory work is done by the legal team, Charlie (and a bit by us).
21 January, a small team of WASP volunteers sends a request for support to fellow campaigners and contacts, asking for a rapid turnaround.
We provide a letter setting out the key issues. The response is fast and positive. We publish a blog that also attracts support from individuals.
2nd February. The support messages from over 90 environmental groups, clubs, councils, councillors, riparian owners and businesses and many more members of the public, with genuine heartfelt comments included, are provided to the court to show that this intervention is not, as was alleged by one of the other barristers, Mr Maynard representing only himself - it is on behalf of many.
3 February - the sanctions hearing opens at the High Court. Public ownership campaigners WeOwnIt once again organise a peaceful and enthusiastic protest.
The barrister for the people, William Day delivers superb advocacy on our behalf and
makes an impact cross-examining Thames Water’s General Counsel, Chief Financial
Officer and the advisory firm Teneo, and in closing submissions.
I'm skipping the detail as it may go in another blog - you have seen some already.
7th February, the hearing closes and we go back to the start - Judge slams...
And that, of course, is not the end of our timeline..
Keep watching, it's about to get even more interesting.
Ironic, email I received from TW today
What a fantastic achievement by WASP and the wonderful pro-bono team. Keeping everything crossed for a sensible outcome.