Unlock the Editor’s Digest without spending a dime
Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favorite tales on this weekly e-newsletter.
Thames Water has agreed to pause executives’ lavish retention funds that had been agreed as a part of a £3bn emergency mortgage after a livid backlash from the Labour authorities.
Disaster talks with regulator Ofwat, the federal government, the utility, and its collectors held over the weekend agreed to “pause and rethink the retention funds”, stated one particular person near Thames Water. “All of the events recognise that the funds are a distraction from the key points at hand.”
Steve Reed, atmosphere secretary, welcomed Thames Water’s resolution to withdraw the controversial funds, saying that handing the cash out would have been “the unsuitable factor to do”.
The choice by the UK’s largest water firm comes simply days after a disagreement between the Division for Setting, Meals and Rural Affairs and Thames Water’s administration over whether or not the utility would be capable to press forward with the payouts.
The corporate, which serves a couple of quarter of the nation’s inhabitants, is struggling below the burden of its £20bn debt mountain and is in unique discussions with the personal fairness agency KKR to take over the enterprise because it makes an attempt to keep away from non permanent renationalisation. The utility got here perilously near operating out of cash earlier than it agreed the £3bn mortgage this yr with its senior collectors, together with US hedge funds Elliott Administration and Silver Level.
Particulars of the corporate’s retention funds emerged final week when Thames Water chair Sir Adrian Montague informed parliamentarians that the payouts might contain as a lot as half of annual wage for among the beleaguered utility’s high executives.
The corporate initially insisted that it could be capable to sidestep makes an attempt by ministers to cease the beneficiant payouts. Defra officers in flip stated on Friday that they’d “not stand idly by if Thames bosses attempt to plunder the corporate for private achieve”.
Reed confirmed to a session of the atmosphere choose committee on Tuesday that the plans had been scrapped.
“Simply over the previous few days now we have seen a really unlucky state of affairs the place Thames Water seemed to be making an attempt to bypass that ban, calling their bonuses one thing totally different to allow them to proceed to pay them,” he stated. “I’m very completely happy certainly that Thames have now dropped these proposals.”
At subject has been whether or not the federal government has the powers to dam the funds, which might be paid for out of the £3bn mortgage, which comes with a 9.75 per cent rate of interest, plus charges.
Defra has handed a Water Act that may give Ofwat larger powers to claw again bonuses in sure circumstances, for instance the place the corporate has failed in its monetary or environmental efficiency.
However Thames Water argued final week that the retention bonuses didn’t fall below the federal government’s new laws as a result of they aren’t performance-related.
The corporate had already admitted it could increase pay packages to compensate for the bonus restrictions.
Feargal Sharkey, the pop star-turned-environmental campaigner, accused the federal government of “pantomime politics” in specializing in the bonus subject. “It’s the form of coverage that may seize headlines however obtain nothing and ship even much less,” he stated.
The fee of bonuses has grow to be a lightning rod for public anger in opposition to water corporations together with Thames, which has raised payments by at the very least a 3rd this yr.
“It has by no means been the Thames Water board’s intention to be at odds with the federal government’s ambition to reform the water business,” the corporate stated in an announcement. “Following current discussions the Board has determined to pause the retention scheme and await forthcoming steering from the regulator [ . . . ] to make sure our strategy helps each our turnaround aims and broader public expectations.”
