Paul Davies MP: speeches

Speeches

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  I am going to make a little bit of progress. Ash calls for a referendum because, in his words, “I think people are sick of being told they can’t have healthy rivers and seas, just because powerful financiers want to keep making money from our water bills. Our government is listening to them but not to us, so this is how we stop being victims and start fighting back.” I appreciate where Ash is coming from— [ Interruption. ] I will make a little progress; I am conscious of time. Despite its popularity and the strength of the case behind it, there has been a total failure from successive Governments to consider the merits of public ownership. I believe we have a strong opportunity to rectify that. It is no secret that our politics has undergone significant change in recent months. We now have a Prime Minister, Andy Burnham, who proudly states a commitment to delivering “stronger public control” of essential services. In his first statement delivered to the Commons as Prime Minister, he criticised the political path of the past 40 years, which had taken control away from communities, and cited the water sector “as a leaking monument to that approach—a country run in the private rather than public interest.” —[ Official Report , 1 September 2026; Vol. 790, c. 27.] I commend the Prime Minister for those words, but words must become action. There are practical steps that this Government can take now.

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree with and support the hon. Gentleman’s point. The issue is also about how we look after our water in the future; unfortunately, it would appear from the last few years that such innovative and sustainable initiatives would not happen under private models.

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  The short answer is yes—I absolutely agree.

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  I will make some progress, and then I will. The current model is absolutely an economic failure. Private companies have paid out, in 2024 prices, around £83 billion—an average of £2.4 billion a year—as dividends, while loading the companies in debt. Often, those loans were taken out simply to increase the amount of cash extracted as dividends when profits alone were not enough. As we know, crucial infrastructure has been left to fail. Not a single new reservoir has been built since 1992, and water companies have overseen the waste of around 3 billion litres of water a day through leaky pipes.

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree. Many of us are now customers of Thames Water; I have Yorkshire Water and Thames Water. I am sad to say that I have not been impressed as a customer with either, but what has happened to that gentleman is just not acceptable. There are practical steps that the Government can take now. One option is for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to conduct a feasibility study of alternative models to ensure that public ownership has been given due, fair and full consideration. I understand that previously the Department has cited a total cost of £100 billion for full nationalisation, which it based on the regulatory capital value of the sector. However, that approach has been widely criticised as misleading for failing to represent the accurate market value of a company. For example, Thames Water’s RCV is more than £20 billion, yet the 2025 rescue bid from Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co., before it walked away, valued the equity at around £4 billion because the company’s debts had all but wiped out the value of the capital base. A feasibility study would provide full transparency and accuracy. It is also true that the Government face a more imminent crisis with the likely collapse of Thames Water. Here there are several options, including a special administration regime. Although that is technically a temporary form of nationalisation, it would allow the Government to test the waters for more far-reaching reform. Without an SAR water companies will know that, no matter how bad it gets, there is no real sanction. The credibility of the regulation will be fundamentally undermined. In the spirit of devolution we must strive for a water sector that is decentralised, democratic and that serves the interests of our communities. There are strong precedents for that. Some hon. Members may be familiar with the example of Berlin’s water utility, which was re-municipalised following a grassroots campaign in the early 2010s. That was driven by demands for greater transparency and accountability, issues that have already been raised several times in interventions in this debate. Today, Berlin’s water provision is managed by a 16-person board with eight shareholder representatives appointed by the state of Berlin and eight employee representatives elected through workforce representation mechanisms. International evidence shows that long-term democratic involvement in running our water sector is essential to rebuild trust and to secure stronger outcomes. It also has practical benefits. The cost of regulation will fall when information becomes open and transparent, and it will provide a lasting guarantee that water is run in the interests of the public, not those of the private sector. At its heart, this debate is about the right of the public to have their say over one of the most basic and essential services. If we are serious about setting a new political path, as the Prime Minister has said, we must heed the call of campaigners such as Ash and deliver a water system that is innovative and sustainable to underpin the essential infrastructure of our economy and the health of our nations. We must be brave in our approach. We need to look at history and the decisions of past Governments. We do not remember small-scale reforms or tinkering with a broken system. We remember those who had the courage to rewire the state and deliver lasting change. This Government now face that moment. They must choose whether to preserve a failed model or to deliver a system that is stronger and more accountable. The choice is clear: it is time to put water back into public ownership.

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  I start by thanking not just Ash for the petition, but the many campaigners who have worked so hard and tirelessly on this issue. You have made sure that there is no hiding place for the water companies, and that is the most important thing; this is out in the open and it is clearly understood by the public. We know that the public view the model as completely broken and are demanding significant change. I know that you will keep the work going, and you need to keep it going because you need to keep all of us on our toes and pin us down to make sure that we deliver as well. I thank all hon. Members. There has been a clear consensus across the House that the model is broken. There are some nuances in terms of views on the solutions, but the starting point is clearly that the privatised model does not work. If we go back to 1989, the architect of the model, Margaret Thatcher, told Members not to pontificate and to look in the “light of the facts”. Well, I think we have all looked in the light of the facts. We know where we are. We know that we need to make that change. I said in my speech that the Government have to be brave, and I say it again. We have to be brave. There are clearly many issues on the road to public ownership, but that does not mean that we give up at the first hurdle. We have a direction that many of us have talked about, and we have to find solutions and ways to overcome those obstacles and make this a reality. Again, I give many thanks to Ash and everybody else, and to all the Members who contributed to the discussion.

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  Again, as I run through my speech, my hon. Friend will see the position that I am taking on public ownership. I absolutely agree that it beggars belief to see money being siphoned off from the water sector into private hands. As has already been mentioned, many shareholders are not even in the UK while our citizens are suffering badly. The £22 billion earmarked for shareholder returns alone would help address water poverty, which 1.8 million households faced between 2024-25. Look across the water: Paris took water back into public hands in 2010. Once that move was made, a range of social subsidies were introduced to help safeguard access to water for all. Crucially, public ownership is essential if we want to restore public trust. Last year, the Consumer Council for Water’s annual survey found that trust in the water sector had hit an all-time low. The high cost of bills, repeated violations of environmental standards and continued enrichment of company bosses has left the public disillusioned.

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  I will certainly come to that subject later in my speech. My view is absolutely that there needs to be fundamental change in how we ensure that people have access to affordable, safe and secure water supplies.

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  I will make a little progress first. According to Environment Agency data, today, just one in seven of England’s waters is in good ecological condition.

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  I will, and then I will have to make some progress—that is just a warning to other hon. Members.

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  As I run through my speech, the hon. Gentleman will find a theme of strong support for public ownership of the water sector throughout. We absolutely must look at that option. Ash’s petition calls for “a binding national referendum on whether the water industry should be returned to public ownership…A referendum would give the public back its voice about its water.” For too long, our water sector has been in the hands of shareholders rather than the public, who pay for and rely on its delivery.

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree, and under this Government work has been taking place to ensure that we have control over our vital services in the UK. The Government are aware of the failures; their response so far has been to tighten regulation of the sector. In January, Ministers published a White Paper titled “A New Vision for Water”, which was broadly in line with the recommendations made by the Independent Water Commission, also known as the Cunliffe commission. The commission was tasked with establishing key changes to improve the water sector regulatory system, including the creation of a stronger integrated water regulator that is more streamlined and more closely embedded in the affairs of the water companies; regional planning systems; a new water ombudsman; a clearer national strategy through revamped strategic policy statements to regulators; and national targets.

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  Go on.

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered e-petition 762640 relating to a referendum on public ownership of the water sector. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Barker. I begin by thanking Ashley Paul Smith, who is sitting in the Public Gallery, for pulling together this petition. It has now received 208,000 signatures, and counting—I am sure that that number is already out of date. As the founder and chair of Windrush Against Sewage Pollution, Ash has been investigating the sewage scandal since 2016. Members will likely be aware that his efforts were dramatised earlier this year in Channel 4’s “Dirty Business”, which exposed the long-term impact of the private model on our water sector.

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  I will bring in the hon. Gentleman later, but first I will make a bit of progress. While the steps I mentioned signify some progress—and they are welcome—they only tinker at the edges of reform. I am concerned that the Government have failed to address the fundamental error of the past four decades: while water remains a commodity, it will never deliver an outcome in the interests of the public or the environment. It was disappointing to learn that the Government did not even permit the Independent Water Commission to consider alternative ownership models, including whether public ownership was an option. That signifies a further issue, which is the continued lack of democratic inclusion in the decisions that affect the sector.

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree that transparency and accountability are crucial. As will be made clear in my speech, and, I am sure, the contributions of other Members, that is a major issue in the current model. The model has also been a health disaster. According to Government advice, swimming in open water can increase the risk of gastrointestinal illness. Bathing water quality in England seriously lags behind that of its European counterparts. According to Best for Britain, the percentage of bathing waters in England that are rated poor quality is more than five times that in the European Union.

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree that there is huge frustration out there, which I will refer to later in my speech. I give way to my other hon. Friend.

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree. As a former councillor, I have sat on many planning committees and in many instances I was extremely frustrated by the lack of engagement or, where there was engagement, by it not being up to the standard needed. I believe the move into public ownership would help us resolve that. Regulation alone cannot fix the crisis of confidence and, as we all know, the Government’s ban on bonuses for water companies that fail to meet high standards has been widely bypassed, with reports indicating that bosses’ total pay actually increased in the past year. Even when under an intense spotlight from academics and campaigners such as Ash, the industry is willing to blatantly outwit regulation. To rebuild trust, the public must know for certain that their bills are being used to fund services, not profits.

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely do not think that is fair. That comes to the nub of what we are talking about: the total lack of fairness in how the sector is operated and its impact on all our citizens.

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  I will make a little progress; otherwise, I am not going to get past the next few paragraphs. In 1989, Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher sold off our then publicly owned water and sewerage industry for £5.2 billion, arguing that privatisation would bring desperately needed investment to the sector. She told the Commons that she believed it would be a better deal than nationalised water. She hoped it would “proceed successfully”, encouraging the Opposition at the time to “wait and see in the light of the facts rather than pontificate.” —[ Official Report , 28 November 1989; Vol. 162, c. 577.] Years later, here we are: we can see in the light of the facts that the private model for water has been far from a success. It has been an economic, environmental and public health failure. I will take an intervention now.

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree. As my hon. Friend will hear throughout my speech, the evidence clearly shows us that the model is failing in a range of areas. I know that my hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth West (Jessica Toale) and the right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes) want to get in; I will make a little progress first, then I will give way. The model has also been an environmental disaster. In 2024, under the administration of water companies, raw sewage was discharged into rivers and seas in England for a record 3.61 million hours. In the first six months of this year alone, raw sewage was discharged into rivers and seas during dry weather a total of 7,280 times.

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree. I am old enough to remember when raw sewage was pumped into the coastal waters where I was born in south Wales. We started to change that and it changed quite dramatically. We seem to have regressed badly and we have seen a complete failure by the private sector to control that problem. People must be able to see that their concerns are being listened to and that they have a meaningful say in how the industry operates. That brings me to the purpose of Ash’s petition.

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree. As a fellow Yorkshire MP, I know only too well the issues with Yorkshire Water and their impact on citizens in our region. Public ownership is incredibly popular among the public—Ash’s petition demonstrates that, as does opinion polling. In May this year, YouGov reported that 82% of Brits believe that the water companies should be run in the public sector, compared with just 8% who believe that that they should remain private. That is a marked increase from the 59% in favour in 2017. That support is not limited to Labour voters, of whom 84% are in favour: 66% of Conservative and Reform, 83% of Liberal Democrat and 87% of Green voters are also in favour. The public overwhelmingly back the public ownership of water—in my view, with good reason. Public ownership would mean that the £22 billion earmarked for shareholder returns and interest over the next five years would go instead towards repairing our broken water infrastructure, paying off debts and letting water company staff do their jobs properly.

• 13 Jul 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T4. Pennine Domestic Abuse Partnership is a strong example of non-judgmental, trauma-informed support for victims of domestic abuse. For many women, it is the first point of contact; however, for others, the emergency services are the first to respond. Will the Minister clarify what steps can be taken to ensure that this non-judgmental, victim-centred approach is consistently reflected in the police’s engagement with victims?

• 9 Jul 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Later this month, Holmfirth Pride will take place in my constituency. I welcome the strong support shown by the many local businesses that are sponsoring events, such as a pink picnic in the park. Events such as those help foster respect and acceptance in our communities, and counter the hate and division that we too often see. Will the Leader of the House reaffirm this Government’s commitment to inclusive communities and the huge benefits that diversity brings to our society?