National Grid prefers to invest profits in USA

Underinvestment in the UK was blamed for recent blackouts …

“National Grid has ploughed a record of almost £2bn into its booming US-based business this year as increasing political pressure raises questions over the multinational’s future in the UK.

The energy network provider spent nearly £1.6bn growing its regulated US business over the first six months of the year, and also invested £200m into its US-based renewables company Geronimo.

Over the same period, National Grid spent less than £650m running the gas and electricity networks in the UK, where policymakers are squeezing energy company profits and proposals to renationalise utilities have won public support.

The London-listed company has built its US presence in recent years amid growing calls for UK utilities to be renationalised. It distributes gas and electricity to businesses and homes in New York, Rhode Island and Massachusetts.

John Pettigrew, National Grid’s chief executive, said the record spending was in response to strong demand from north-eastern US states to transform their energy system to run on renewables. There was also healthy investor appetite for infrastructure projects, he said.

The US business helped drive National Grid’s underlying operating profits to £1.3bn for the first half of the year. In the UK, profits from its electricity networks rose by 5% to £583m, while profits from its gas grid business fell by more than a quarter to £66m. In the US, underlying operating profits rose 16% from the year before to £525m. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/nov/14/national-grid-us-uk-business-renationalise-utilities?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

“Freezing home forces disabled Cranbrook mum to be separated from her young twins”

Is this the district heating? Not a good ad for Eon or Cranbrook …

“A young disabled mum with 15-month-old twins has told how the dream of finally moving into a permanent home in Cranbrook – after being rehoused four times since they were born – has turned into a nightmare.

Amber Owen-Jones has not seen her children for five days because they are having to live with her mother in Somerset as their new ‘freezing’ two-bedroom housing association property has no hot water or heating.

Last Friday, the 19-year-old and her partner Michael Korth, 21, picked up the keys to their new home and say that when they realised not all the utility services were working, a LiveWest employee notified energy provider Eon by emailing them their tenancy agreement to get a new account set up. …

However, they say they were told someone won’t be coming until today, October 30, and no time was confirmed.

Amber said: “Eon were refusing to turn our hot water and heating on. The house is absolutely freezing.

“My children even had blue feet as we have no carpets. Eon kept saying they will sort it out on Wednesday, but it’s not acceptable. …”

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/freezing-home-forces-disabled-cranbrook-3478804

How company debt (and greed and tax avoidance) will sink us all

“Corporate addition to high debt threatens to destabilise the world economy. Not my words – those of the International Monetary Fund.

A recent report by the IMF says that “in a material economic slowdown scenario, half as severe as the global financial crisis, corporate debt-at-risk could rise to $19 trillion —or nearly 40 percent of total corporate debt in major economies—above [2008] crisis levels.”

In other words, in an economic slowdown, many firms will be unable to cover even their interest expenses with their earnings. Countries most at risk are US, China, Japan, Germany, Britain, France, Italy and Spain.

One study estimated that in 2018 UK s FTSE 100 companies alone had debt of £406bn.

Sinking in debt

Low interest rates have persuaded companies to pile-up debt in the belief that they will be able to use it to maximise shareholder returns. The key to this is tax relief on interest payments.

Ordinary folk don’t get tax relief on interest payments for mortgages or anything else because successive governments argued that such reliefs distort markets and encourage irresponsible behaviour.

However, corporations get tax relief on all interest payments. Currently for every £100 of interest payment, companies get tax relief of 19%, the prevailing rate of corporation tax, which reduces the net cost to £81. The tax subsidy enables companies to report higher profits.

Companies do not necessarily use debt to finance investment in productive assets. The UK languishes near the bottom of the major advanced economies league table for investment in productive assets and also lags in research and development expenditure.

British companies appease stock markets by paying almost the highest proportion of their earnings as dividends. BHS famously borrowed £1 billion to pay a dividend of £1.3bn. Carillion used its debt to finance executive pay and dividends. Thomas Cook had at least £1.7bn of debt but that did not stop lavish executive pay and bonuses.

Fatal effects

Corporate debt facilitates profiteering and tax avoidance. Water companies have long used ‘intragroup debt‘ to dodge taxes. Typically, they borrow money from an affiliate in a low/no tax jurisdiction. The UK-based company pays interest which qualifies for tax relief and reduces the UK tax liability.

Many a tax haven either does not levy corporation tax or exempts foreign profits from its tax regime. As a result, the affiliate receives the interest payment tax free.

It is important to note that the company is effectively paying interest to another member of the group and no cash leaves the group. The inclusion of interest payments in the paying company’s cost base can also enable it to push up charges to customers, especially if has monopoly rights on supply of goods and services.

Thames Water is an interesting example here. From 2006 to 2017, it was owned by Macquarie Bank and operated through a labyrinth of companies, with some registered in Caymans.

During the period, Thames’ debt increased from £2.4bn to £10bn, mostly from tax haven affiliates, and interest payments swelled the charges for customers. Macquarie and its investors made returns of between 15.5% and 19% a year.

For the period 2007 to 2015, the company’s accounts show that it paid £3.186bn in interest to other entities in the group alone. Tax relief on interest payments reduced UK corporate tax liability. For the years 2007-2016, Thames Water paid about £100,000 in corporation tax.

Private equity entities use debt to secure control of companies and engage in asset-stripping. A good example is the demise of Bernard Mathews, a poultry company.

In 2013, Rutland Partners acquired the company and loaded it with debt, which carried an interest rate of 20%. This debt was secured which meant that in the event of bankruptcy Rutland and its backers would be paid before unsecured creditors.

In 2016, Bernard Matthews’ directors, appointed by Rutland, decided that the business was no longer viable and sought to sell it. However, they only sold the assets of the company which realised enough to pay secured creditors, Rutland and banks.

The big losers were unsecured creditors, which included employee pension scheme, HMRC and suppliers. The purchaser of the assets told the House of Commons Work and Pensions Committee that it offered to buy the whole company, including its liabilities, but the offer was declined by Rutland because by dumping liabilities it collected a higher amount.

What needs to change

There is some recognition that corporate addiction to debt poses a threat to the economy. Following recommendations by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the UK has placed some restrictions on the tax relief for interest payments, but that is not enough.

An independent enforcer of company law is needed to ensure that companies maintain adequate capital. Companies need workers on boards to ensure that directors do not squander corporate resources on unwarranted dividends and executive pay.

The insolvency laws need to be reformed to ensure that secured creditors can’t walk away with almost all of the proceeds from the sale of assets and dump liabilities.

And finally, tax relief on debt needs to be abolished altogether.”

https://leftfootforward.org/2019/10/prem-sikka-how-companies-use-debt-to-line-their-pockets/

Water companies enraged that OFWAT is putting consumers before investors

“Top investors in the water industry have complained to the Treasury that the regulator Ofwat is being politicised and warned of a flood of appeals against its financial demands.

International investors that control suppliers including Anglian, Yorkshire, Affinity, South East and South Staffs led a delegation this month ahead of a crunch ruling on prices by Ofwat, due in December. They are reeling from the toughest draft settlement from the regulator in years and fearful of Labour’s pledge to renationalise the sector at a big discount to market value.

After years of taking huge dividends from water companies and piling debt onto them, while paying minimal corporation tax and overseeing scandals such as sewage spills and water leaks, utility investors have seen the industry and political environment turn toxic.

Ofwat, chaired by former Anglian Water boss Jonson Cox, stunned the sector in July when it rejected the spending plans of all but three companies and sent the other 14 back to the drawing board, demanding more efficiency, faster paydown of debt and better customer service. It will publish its final ruling on their 2020-25 spending plans in December.

The meeting on October 14 is believed to have included blue-chip investors such as German insurer Allianz, Singapore sovereign wealth fund GIC, Deutsche Bank’s wealth division and Australia’s IFM Investors. Among the issues raised was Ofwat’s independence and the dangers of it reacting to political pressure.

Cox has been on a crusade to clean up the sector. In an interview last year, Cox told The Sunday Times: “This industry still doesn’t accept that customers should be at the heart of this business. We are unwinding one of the last bits of the pre-crash bonanza: buying an asset and gearing it up.”

Investors also asked senior mandarins whether the Competition and Markets Authority had the resources to deal with simultaneous appeals against Ofwat’s financial stipulations. At least five suppliers are believed to considering appeals.

The funds called on the Treasury to assess the financial resilience of the sector, after companies including Thames and Northumbrian complained that Ofwat’s demands were “unfinanceable”.

Global investors have ploughed billions of pounds into former state-owned companies since the privatisation wave of the 1980s and 1990s, yet are increasingly reassessing whether the UK is still an attractive place to park their cash.

Ultra-low interest rates and the need for returns inflated asset values and led to a bidding war for infrastructure companies. However, the appetite for water companies has cooled over the past two years. The Sunday Times revealed in April that Labour planned to renationalise the industry at a big discount to market value, making deductions for “asset-stripping since privatisation”.

That and Ofwat’s clampdown have spooked local authority pension funds, which have belatedly begun pouring cash into infrastructure. GLIL, which invests the pensions of council staff, was among the attendees at the Treasury meeting.

Last month, Alain Carrier, European boss of the CAN$400bn (£239bn) Canada Pension Plan Investment Board, which owns a stake in Anglian, said: “It’s difficult for the regulator under the current political climate not to be seen to be very tough. The independence of the regulator is under some pressure.”

Ofwat said: “Our decision-making is independent from government and based on delivering the very best for customers. Investors have always made clear they value the independence of the regulatory regime.”

Source: Sunday Times (pay wall)

How fat cats get fatter

“The regulator has allowed energy network companies to make bigger than expected profits at the expense of household bills, according to its own state of the market report.

Ofgem admitted the companies that run Britain’s energy pipes and wires had earned double-digit returns in the last year despite its efforts to keep a lid on energy bills.

The regulator oversees the business plans of regional gas and electricity networks to keep a rein on how much each firms can spend on their infrastructure, and how much they can claim back through energy bills.

It said that with hindsight it had set the rate of return too high, and that some companies had managed to spend less than planned, to rake in higher profits.

The uncomfortable evaluation has emerged following Ofgem’s decision to appoint its head of networks as its new chief executive. Jonathan Brearley will replace Dermot Nolan when he steps down in February next year.

It said: “The overall costs to consumers of the transmission and distribution networks have turned out to be higher than they needed to be.”

The admission is likely to anger critics of the companies, including UK Power Networks and National Grid, who have warned that networks are hiking up household energy bills while paying bumper shareholder payouts to foreign investors. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/oct/03/energy-network-firms-allowed-to-make-bigger-than-expected-profits-ofgem-admits?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

“EDF warns Hinkley nuclear plant could cost extra £2.9 billion, see more delays”

Note to our Local Enterprise Partnership:
1. Don’t whatever you do go for a day at the races and bet any money – your track record advises against it.
2. You have (and always have had) developers on your Board. Surely one of you could have tipped off EDF about “challenging ground conditions”!

“The British project cost hike also comes just days after the country saw an auction for offshore wind projects clear at a record low, raising questions of the cost competitiveness of new nuclear.

EDF said Hinkley Point C was estimated to cost 21.5-22.5 billion pounds ($26.8-$28 billion), up 1.9-2.9 billion pounds from its latest estimate. …

Crooks said the cost increase was related to challenging ground conditions at the site. …”

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-nuclear-hinkley-edf/edf-warns-hinkley-nuclear-plant-could-cost-extra-2-9-billion-see-more-delays-idUKKBN1WA0K1?

“Rivers used as ‘open sewers’, says WWF charity”

As a district well-provided with rivers and estuaries, a worrying issue:

Targets for 75% of rivers to be healthy by 2027 are “very unlikely” to be met in England, a charity has warned.

The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) says rivers are “used as open sewers”.
The Environment Agency predicts 75% of rivers in England and along the Scottish and Welsh borders will meet EU expectations by 2027, compared with just 14% now.

It is planning an autumn consultation on “challenges and choices” faced in cleaning up water. The agency said it would review the target based on “what can realistically be achieved”.

Sewage discharging into rivers has been one of the most common reasons for ecological health tests being failed, while water companies in England have been told their efforts to protect the environment were “unacceptable”. …”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-49131405

Fracking: shale gas reserves vastly over-estimated

Owl says: But just enough to desecreate the countryside and line a few pockets.

“The UK’s underground shale gas reserves may deliver only a fraction of the gas promised by fracking firms and government ministers, according to a study.

Research by the University of Nottingham found that early estimates may have exaggerated the UK’s shale reserves up to sixfold.

Last week government officials hinted that a review could be launched looking into loosening UK limits on fracking because shale “could be an important new domestic energy source”.

The University of Nottingham said it had used a new technique to measure the shale gas trapped in the Bowland shale basin in central England and found significantly lower levels than was suggested by a widely quoted study six years ago.

In 2013 the British Geological Survey (BGS) found there were likely to be 1,300tn cubic feet of gas. The latest study found there may be 200tn cubic feet, enough to meet the UK’s gas demand for around a decade.

Prof Colin Snape, of the University of Nottingham, said the BGS’s study had involved desk-based research based on the findings of shale developers in the US rather than actual reserves. The new research was based on studies of actual UK shales, using gas absorption data and field data, he said.

“We have made great strides in developing a laboratory test procedure to determine shale gas potential,” Snape said. “This can only serve to improve people’s understanding and government decisions around the future of what role shale gas can make to the UK’s energy demand as we move to being carbon neutral by 2050.”

It is the second major study in recent years to cast doubt on economic claims made by the shale gas industry. Researchers at Heriot-Watt University said the UK’s most promising shale gas reservoirs had been warped by tectonic shifts that could thwart efforts to tap them. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/aug/20/uk-shale-gas-reserves-may-be-six-times-less-than-claimed-study?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

“Hinkley Point C: rising costs and long delays at vast new power station”

“The Hinkley Point nuclear site, on the Somerset coast, should have begun powering around 6m homes well over a year ago.

Instead, the 160-hectare (400-acre) sprawl is still the UK’s largest construction site more than a decade after the plan for Britain’s nuclear renaissance first emerged.

It will be at least another six years before Hinkley Point C, the first nuclear plant to be built in the UK since 1995, begins generating 7% of the nation’s electricity.

The price tag is expected to exceed £20bn, almost double that suggested in 2008 by EDF Energy, which is spearheading the project alongside a Chinese project partner.

At the time, EDF Energy’s chief executive, Vincent de Rivaz, said the mega-project would power millions of homes by late 2017. He pegged the cost at £45 for every megawatt-hour.

De Rivaz retired a decade later, but the promised switch-on moment remains distant. Delays have been blamed on protracted Whitehall wrangling over the project’s eye-watering costs: the price per megawatt-hour has since more than doubled.

Still, this summer workers carried out the UK’s largest concrete pour to complete the base of the first reactor. Simone Rossi, EDF Energy’s incumbent chief, said the milestone was “good news for anyone concerned about the climate change crisis”.

“Its reliable, low-carbon power will be essential for a future with no unabated coal and gas and a large expansion of renewable power,” he said.

The cost concerns have proved more difficult for executives and ministers to address.

The National Audit Office condemned the government’s deal to support the Hinkley Point project through consumer energy bills in a damning report, which accused ministers of putting households on the hook for a “risky and expensive” project with “uncertain strategic and economic benefits”.

Hinkley Point will add between £10 and £15 a year to the average energy bill for 35 years, making it one of the most expensive energy projects undertaken.

Under EDF Energy’s contract with the government, the French state-backed energy giant will earn at least £92.50 for every megawatt-hour produced at Hinkley Point for 35 years by charging households an extra levy on top of the market price for power.

The average electricity price on the UK’s wholesale electricity market was between £55 and £65 per megawatt-hour last year.

The dramatic collapse in the cost of wind, solar and battery technologies has made nuclear power even harder to swallow.

Despite its detractors, Hinkley Point has soldiered on because concerns over the project’s costs, although considerable, are still smaller than the concerns over the UK’s future energy supplies.

The project was first mooted under Tony Blair’s Labour government as an answer to the UK’s looming energy supply gap after years of underinvestment in the UK’s fleet of power plants.

The nuclear mantle was taken up in the coalition years by the Liberal Democrat energy secretary Ed Davey, before it was given the green light by the Conservative government.

Andrew Stephenson, the minister in charge of nuclear, said Hinkley was “key to meeting our ambitious target of net zero emissions by 2050”.

Nuclear power is controversial among environmentalists, many of whom do not consider the uranium-fuelled energy to be a sustainable option. But according to the government’s official climate advisers new nuclear reactors are needed.

The Committee on Climate Change expects renewable energy to play a major role filling the gap in energy supplies. Offshore wind will increase tenfold to help meet its 2050 target to reduce emissions to net zero, and the climate watchdog has called for onshore wind and solar to play a far larger role too.

But the advisers predict that at least two new nuclear reactors, in addition to Hinkley Point, will be required to help the UK meet its climate goals.

The verdict means households are likely to be called on to stump up for EDF Energy’s follow-on project at the Sizewell site in Suffolk. It also leaves the door open for a resurrection of plans to build reactors in north Wales, and possibly a Chinese-led nuclear project in Bradwell in Essex too.”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/aug/13/hinkley-point-c-rising-costs-long-delays-power-station?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

“One in 10 [South West Water] pollution incidents in 2018 happened in East Devon, figures reveal”

“An Environment Agency (EA) report on the performance of water companies at managing pollution levels said South West Water (SWW) had a total of 98 incidents in 2018 per 10,000km of sewer.

An FOI request made by the Journal has revealed that 14 of those happened in East Devon.

Four of these incidents happened in Honiton – three of them over a 20 day spell in January 2018.

Axminster had four relating to the River Axe and the River Yarty.

Exmouth and Ottery St Mary had two each while Sidmouth and Woodbury had one.

SWW, which had the most pollution incidents in 2018 of nine companies across the UK, said it achieved the best wastewater performance last year but recognised there is still more work to do. …”

https://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/locations-of-2018-pollution-incidents-revealed-1-6191933

“Households could foot the bill for new nuclear plants”

Ministers are set to unveil a controversial new method for funding nuclear power stations and carbon-capture projects — one that heaps cost and risk onto consumers.

The business department is expected to publish a consultation this week on regulated asset base (RAB) financing in the nuclear sector. It is a method used by water companies and Heathrow airport, allowing them to begin charging households years before a project has been built.

French giant EDF wants to pioneer the financing model at its proposed Sizewell C power plant in Suffolk. EDF is building the £20bn Hinkley Point C station in Somerset, but argues that it cannot afford to build any future plants in the UK without a new financing approach.

Ministers are wrestling with how to meet the UK’s power needs, with ageing coal and nuclear stations set to close. However, government plans to publish a full energy white paper this week seem to have been dashed by concerns over how to pay for the programme, and the change in Tory leader. The white paper is now expected in the autumn.”

Source: Sunday Times (pay wall)

Environment Agency severely criticises water companies about pollution risks

Water companies – you know, those privatised companies (with monopolies in their areas) that hand massive bonuses and dividends to their (often foreign) owners and shareholders.

From the report:

“… “This report shows that:

• with one exception, none of the companies are performing at the level the environment needs

• rather than improving, the performance of most companies has deteriorated, reversing the trend of gradual improvement since we introduced the EPA in 2011

• serious pollution incidents which damage the local environment, threaten wildlife and in the worst cases put the public at risk, have increased

This report is about 2018, but I am sad to say we are not seeing dramatic improvements in 2019. As a result we will toughen our regulatory approach!”

Click to access Water_company_performance_report_2018.pdf

Water, water everywhere, but ne’er a drop to drink …

“The owners of Britain’s water companies received almost £5 billion in dividends over the past five years, according to analysis by a union campaigning for renationalisation.

The GMB union said shareholders had “pocketed eye-watering sums” from the privatised water industry, which it called an “abject failure”, including a further £1.4 billion in the form of interest on loans.

Industry returns are in the spotlight after Labour vowed to renationalise the industry and after Southern Water was fined a record £126 million in penalties last week after systematically covering up sewage leaks over seven years.

There are 17 water companies in England and Wales. Three are listed — Severn Trent, United Utilities and South West Water, part of Pennon Group — and the rest privately owned.

The GMB analysis calculates £4.7 billion in dividends were paid out to shareholders between 2014 and 2018, including more than £800 million last year. It counted a further £264 million in other payouts such as share buybacks. It said owners of the water companies had also received £1.4 billion in interest on loans and had accrued a further £520 million in interest, giving a total of almost £6.9 billion it said shareholders had made.

Tim Roache, general secretary of the GMB, said: “If you needed a poster child for abject failure, the privatisation of the water industry is it. Bills up 40 per cent above inflation, billions of litres of water lost in leaks as families face hose-pipe bans and all the while shareholders are trousering billions in profit.”

A spokesman for Water UK, the industry’s representative body, said: “Privatisation of the water and sewerage industry has achieved a great deal over the last 30 years — nearly £160 billion of investment, a healthier environment, better water quality and improved service to customers.

“Customers are now five times less likely to suffer from supply interruptions, eight times less likely to suffer from sewer flooding and 100 times less likely to have low water pressure than when the industry was in government hands. Nationalisation would risk turning back the clock to the days when service and quality failures were far more common, and cash-strapped governments wouldn’t pay for the improvements needed.”

Mr Roache called it a “complete disgrace” and urged the government to do “something about it”.”

Source: The Times (pay wall)

“Calls for compensation after regulator error causes £24.1 billion hike in everyday bills”

Owl cannot believe this was accidental.

“Regulators have allowed water, energy, broadband and telephone networks to overcharge customers by £24.1 billion over the past fifteen years, according to stark new figures from Citizens Advice.

The news comes after research found an initial investigation that unearthed £7.5bn of overcharging for connection to key services was just ‘the tip of the iceberg’.

In 2017 Citizens Advice found Ofgem made errors in setting price controls for energy networks, resulting in energy customers being overcharged £7.5 billion over an 8-year period. After the charity highlighted these concerns, three energy network companies returned a total of £287m to consumers.

But now the charity has found the same errors have been made by Ofgem over a much longer period and by regulators in other markets including water, broadband and phone networks.

This research shows misjudgements by the regulators Ofgem, Ofwat and Ofcom on key decisions have meant customers have been paying far too much for the pipes and wires that connect their homes to essential services over the last 15 years.

These sectors include companies that face little, or no, competition to drive down the price they can charge their customers. Instead, regulators tell the network companies how much they can charge by setting a price control. Customers then pay the charges for these networks as part of their water, energy, broadband and phone bills.

These overpayments partly occurred because regulators made forecasting errors. They predicted that costs, such as debt, would be higher than they became. Regulators also over-estimated how risky these businesses were for investors.

Citizens Advice is now calling for both widespread compensation and a fundamental change in the way these calculations are made.

Instead of forecasting costs, regulators should use available market data to calculate costs and adjust their estimates of investment risk, it argues. This would avoid consumers paying too much in future.

While several energy and water companies have taken steps to return some money to customers, Citizens Advice is calling for all firms to provide a voluntary rebate to their customers. If they don’t, the government should step in.

“Regulator error has meant customers have been charged too much by energy, broadband and phone networks for far too long,” says Gillian Guy, chief executive of Citizens Advice.

“At a time when so many people are struggling to pay their essential bills, regulators need to do more to protect customers from unfair prices. They have started to take steps in the right direction but it is vital they continue to learn from their past mistakes when finalising their next price controls.

“Companies need to play their part in putting this multi-billion pound blunder right. They must compensate customers where they have been paying over the odds. If they don’t government needs to intervene.”

In a statement responding to the research, the energy regulator Ofgem said: “Ofgem remains determined to drive the best deal possible for consumers. Overall, energy network regulation has delivered for consumers, with £100 billion invested, power cuts halved, record customer satisfaction and reduced costs.

“While we do not agree with Citizens Advice’s estimate of excess profits, we welcome their report and recommendations. We will continue to work closely with them and wider stakeholders to apply lessons learnt from previous price controls for the next price control period (RIIO2).”

Last week Ofgem confirmed its methodology for calculating their next set of price controls, including a lower return on equity of 4.3 per cent and a lower allowed return on debt. This would lead to customers’ bills being reduced by £6 billion over five years from 2021, calculations it says Citizens Advice supports.

Meanwhile, households were warned they could be hit with average annual energy bill rise of almost £210, or 20 per cent, as 60 fixed dual fuel energy tariffs come to an end this week according to switching service weflip, charities have called for immediate action to better support energy customers in vulnerable circumstances.

An independent report published this week says urgent action is required by all energy companies, regulators and government as well as price comparison websites – with support from consumer groups and charities – to better identify customers in vulnerable circumstances and improve the help and support given to them.

Joanna Elson, chief executive of the Money Advice Trust, who served as a member of the Commission for Customers in Vulnerable Circumstances, which produced the report, said the charity is increasingly hearing from people struggling to meet everyday household costs.

“This report puts the energy industry firmly under the spotlight. Significant work is needed to improve support for energy customers in vulnerable circumstances. As the report notes, there is good practice out there, but this support is inconsistent and varies greatly across the sector.

“Training frontline staff to identify customers in vulnerable circumstances is a crucial first step, while actions such as committing to not use High Court Enforcement Officers, can also make a big difference for the most vulnerable.

“There is also an important role for the third sector to play alongside suppliers through greater partnership working. This could be through signposting to debt or energy saving advice, and helping people access financial help and other essential costs.”

https://www.independent.co.uk/money/spend-save/regulator-error-24-billion-energy-broadband-telephone-connection-costs-a8937546.html

British Gas shares plummet – CEO’s salary soars

“The boss of Centrica [formerly British Gas] is fighting for his job as investors lose faith in his leadership.

Iain Conn has been chief executive of the British Gas owner since 2015 – picking up £11.1 million in pay along the way.

But the FTSE 100 group’s shares have tumbled 60 per cent on his watch and are at their lowest level since 1999.

The father-of-three’s position is seen as particularly vulnerable since the arrival of Charles Berry, who succeeded Rick Haythornthwaite as chairman in February. …

Conn has also attracted the ire of retail investors who have seen the value of their savings plummet from 279p a share when he took over in 2015 to 109.05p at the close of business yesterday.

The slump has slashed Centrica’s value from £15.9 billion to £6.2 billion.

The backlash among shareholders comes a week after it emerged that Conn, 56, enjoyed a 44 per cent pay rise to £2.4million in 2018.

The rise of £740,000 covered a year when British Gas hiked bills for millions of families and saw 742,000 customers leave. …

Centrica this month announced another 500 jobs are at risk – 400 of which are based in Glasgow –- as part of the company’s plan to cut 2,000 jobs this year. It has axed 7,700 jobs since 2015.

Centrica declined to comment last night. …”

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-6925171/British-Gas-boss-fights-job-Iain-Conn-fire-shares-hit-20-year-low.html

Much cheaper water bills in south west – thanks to Jeremy Corbyn!

Threatened with nationalisation, South West Water cuts bills by 15% – interesting!

“Under threat of nationalisation from a putative Jeremy Corbyn-led Labour government, Britain’s three listed water companies have agreed to the largest cuts in customer bills since privatisation by Margaret Thatcher 30 years ago.

The reductions will mean that households in the West Country will pay 15 per cent less at 2019 prices over the next five years. In the northwest of England, bills will fall by 11 per cent before inflation.

While the inflation link in water charges will mean bills will fall by less, new penalties for missing environmental and operational targets could mean suppliers having to cut household charges by even more as a means of compensating their communities.

Of the 17 water companies in England and Wales, three have made a fast-track agreement with Ofwat, the regulator, to set customer charges from April 2020 to March 2025.

The other 14 suppliers have been given a must-do-better notice by Ofwat. Having been told by the regulator to resubmit their plans and make them more ambitious, the 14 will be told by Ofwat in July whether their revised proposals are acceptable.

As there is no competition in the supply of water to households, the 17 suppliers are all local monopolies and as such are tightly regulated by Ofwat. However, critics of the regulatory regime, including MPs on both sides of the House of Commons, have argued that Ofwat has for too long allowed suppliers to put up prices without investing enough in, for instance, stopping leaks, which in some areas lead to 25 per cent of the treated water in the mains system going missing.

The three suppliers who have been fast-tracked by Ofwat for presenting credible business plans for the 2020-25 price review are, coincidentally, the three remaining stock market-quoted water companies: United Utilities, formerly known as North West Water, which serves 3 million homes from Cheshire to the Scottish border; Severn Trent, which serves 4.3 million customers in the Midlands; and South West Water, which supplies 1.8 million people in the West Country and is a subsidiary of Pennon Group.

Household customers of South West Water have long had the largest bills in the country. Ofwat has agreed with the group that those bills will fall before inflation by 15 per cent, or £77, from this year’s £527 average to £450.

However, South West Water has also agreed with Ofwat that if it does not clean up its act with the Environment Agency — it is the most regularly fined for pollution incidents — then it could face further cuts to the charges it makes.

United Utilities has agreed to a £49, or 11 per cent, cut in bills over the next five years but has been told it will have to cut charges more if it does not hit targets to reduce its leaks by 20 per cent.

Severn Trent is to cut bills by 5 per cent, or £16, over the five years. It has committed to more than halving the average time its customers are without water every year or face penalties.

Under Ofwat’s rules, bills will go up every year in line with CPIH, the consumer price index that includes housing costs, now running at 1.8 per cent.

The suppliers’ charges will get final clearance in December. David Black, the Ofwat director in charge of the process, said: “Our draft decisions for these companies show that investment in service and infrastructure can go hand in hand with more affordable bills.”

Source: The Times (pay wall)

Two more utility franchises cost taxpayers dear – very, very dear


VIRGIN EAST COAST

The East Coast rail franchise will be terminated three years early, avoiding the embarrassment of another private firm handing back the keys to the government but potentially forfeiting hundreds of millions in premiums due to the Treasury.

Under a rail strategy announced by the transport secretary, Chris Grayling, a new partnership model will replace the franchise contract of Virgin Trains East Coast (Vtec).

The train operator, a joint venture led by Stagecoach with Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group, had pledged to pay £3.3bn to run the service until 2023 when it was reprivatised in 2015 after six years in public hands.

Instead, Vtec is likely to pay a fraction of that sum, with the bulk of payments due in the final years of the franchise.

The firm signalled that it also expects its payments for the next three years to be cut. In the first full year of operation, it paid £204m. Shares in Stagecoach jumped 12% on the news.

Andy MacDonald, the shadow transport secretary, told the Commons that the strategy announcement was “a total smokescreen”. He said: “The real issue is that the East Coast franchise has failed again and the taxpayer will bail it out.”

Pointing to the share price rise, he said: “Markets don’t lie. The secretary of state has let Stagecoach off the hook for hundreds of millions of pounds. He’s tough on everyone except the private sector.”

GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY

More questions were raised by a separate decision to give First Group another contract to run Great Western Railway (GWR) up to 2024 after it was controversially allowed to continue running the service, despite dodging £800m due to the government in an original contract.

The franchise, which runs commuter services into London Paddington and long-distance trains to Wales and the south-west, is likely to be broken up, under plans published by the DfT. The biggest commuter franchise, Govia, which operates the Thameslink, Great Northern and troubled Southern services, will also be broken up.

DfT will extend First’s current GWR franchise contract by another year, to April 2020, and then give a direct award for two more years, with an option to double the tenure.

First has run the trains during the botched upgrade of the route by Network Rail, which has seen costs overrun to almost treble the original budget and stretches of the electrification project abandoned to save money.”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/nov/29/east-coast-rail-franchise-terminated-three-years-early-virgin-trains

Two (of many) privatised water scandals

1. SOUTH WEST WATER

“A water firm has been slammed for handing more money to its owners than it spent on upgrading equipment.

South West Water paid a £213.1million dividend to its parent group Pennon last year, while investing £190million in drinking and wastewater operations.

Research group Corporate Watch said that over past ten years, it has paid £1.7billion to its owner and banks, and invested £1.4billion on upgrades.
Last December the firm was fined £1.7million by the regulator Ofwat for missing pollution targets.

Its minor spills increased from 222 to 252 during 2016, according to is latest annual report. The firm says 82m litres of water leak a day, within its target of 84m litres. …

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-5086339/South-West-Water-paid-owner-upgrading.html

THAMES WATER

Enough has been written about a Conservative government that knows its electoral success depends on Britain remaining a property-owning democracy, yet offers nothing beyond token gestures to stop the young being priced out of home ownership. Enough, too, has been said about graduates being overcharged, pensioners soaking up the largesse of the tax and benefit systems, the failure to upgrade infrastructure, the obesity crisis, and all the other problems that can’t be tackled because of half-thought-through Tory prejudices.

Allow me instead to concentrate on the scandal of the privatised water industry. Journalists and academics have been banging on for what feels like an age about an ‘organised rip-off’, to use the words of the usually sedate Financial Times. Few took notice, and that should not surprise you. Causes can appear marginal for years. Politicians see no need to address them. Then, with no warning to those who haven’t been paying attention, they explode.

Last week Michael Robinson of the BBC presented a superb documentary on what Thames Water had done to London and the southeast. Most infamously, the company poured 1.4 billion litres of sewage into the Thames near Marlow alone, destroying fish and fouling the home lives of river-side residents. The residents were also its customers. Not that Thames Water seemed to care. Water is a private monopoly. Why should it bother itself about the feelings of people who had nowhere else to go? After hearing how managers ignored warnings from workers about persistent equipment failures, Judge Francis Sheridan encapsulated their attitude when he said that the company had presided over ‘a shocking and disgraceful state of affairs’.

As shocking is the way that the former owners of Thames, the Australian bank Macquarie, was able to pass its costs on to the public. Macquarie took on £2.8 billion of debt to buy the company; it then loaded £2 billion of Cayman Islands debt on to Thames Water and its customers, despite giving assurances to the water regulator Ofwat that it would do no such thing. Macquarie has taken its profits. According to Martin Blaiklock, an infrastructure consultant, its investors received returns of 15 to 19 per cent over 11 years — twice the expected level. All it has left behind is a £2 billion debt and a very bad smell.

Now Thames Water is owned by a Kuwaiti investment fund and a Canadian pension fund. Its managers talk the soothing language of customer service and corporate responsibility. But when pressed by the BBC to say that they would not seek to imitate Macquarie and extract rapacious returns from a captive market, they refused to answer the question.

What interest do Kuwaiti and Canadian investment funds, Australian banks and Cayman Islands financiers have in ensuring the quality and affordability of our water? The hopeless regulators have no answers. Since Margaret Thatcher privatised English water companies in 1989, six out of the nine have pulled themselves off the stock market, meaning they do not have to release to their shareholders information that the regulators can scrutinise.

They promised to bring efficiency. Instead they have brought unsustainable levels of debt that, one way or another, the public will have to redeem. Researchers at Greenwich University say that in the past decade, the nine companies have made £18.8 billion of post-tax profits. Far from using the money to make the water system better, they have paid out £18.1 billion in dividends, and financed investment through loading £42 billion of debt on to consumers.

The university estimates the English are paying £2.3 billion more a year in water and sewerage bills than if the utility companies had remained in state ownership. These costs might have been bearable in good times, but as the Brexit-induced fall in the pound pushes real wages back down again, the prices of water, gas and electricity are bound to be political issues. Customers may not be overly keen to subsidise shareholders and lavishly overpaid managers.

I am not surprised that the Conservatives haven’t joined Labour in demanding the renationalisation of the water industry. It would cost about £70 billion, and in any case, Tories don’t nationalise. But why, after the Macquarie shambles, aren’t ministers and the regulators saying that secretive private equity and Middle East funds should not be allowed to control utilities? Why have they allowed Macquarie to move to the National Grid’s gas division? Ofwat is huffing that it has got tough, but it imposes no penalties on managers who break their commitments. After loading Thames Water with debt and flooding the Thames Valley with excrement, its then boss, the unimprovably named Martin Baggs, bagged a 60 per cent pay rise in 2015.

Conservatives claim to believe in the free market. If they did, they would view monopolies as Adam Smith viewed them — as conspiracies against the public interest. They would not care whether the monopolies were public or private. Both give consumers no choice. Both can put their customers’ interests last. But to the Tory mind, a distinction without a difference makes all the difference.

Because water companies are private monopolies, politicians and regulators back away from confronting them with the necessary anger and vigour. If a nationalised industry behaved as Thames Water has, they would be outraged. As it is, the mere fact that the monopolies are private is enough to persuade politicians to stand aside and let a scandal grow. No one will be more surprised than them when it explodes.”

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/09/even-the-tories-should-admit-that-its-time-to-renationalise-the-water-companies/