People or profit? We put the Cunliffe Review up against the People’s Commission on the Water Sector

23 Jul 2025

Our water system is a mess.

• Our rivers, lakes and seas are incredibly polluted: just last week, it was recorded that serious water pollution incidents rose by 60% last year.

• Water is increasingly expensive for consumers: bills are set to increase up to 36% (before inflation) by 2030

• Water companies are wasting it: this summer four water companies have already introduced a hosepipe ban - all while 3 billion litres of drinking water are lost daily through leaky pipes

In an attempt to combat the chaos, the government commissioned Sir Jon Cunliffe - former deputy governor of the Bank of England - to write a report on the water sector. This review came out on Monday 21st July.

A few weeks before this, the People’s Commission on the Water Sector launched their own report. This was the result of evidence taken from sector experts and us - water users - gathered through public meetings held across England.

Both reports make recommendations on what should happen next for the water sector. How do they compare?

Ownership

Ministers banned Cunliffe from considering public ownership of water as an option. The remit of the review was therefore fundamentally limited. The result? A series of recommendations which plays right into the hands of the water companies, and does nothing to deliver the transformative change the sector so desperately needs.

Public ownership is one of the central recommendations of the People’s Commission report. It highlights that this is a norm in the rest of the world, where 90% of water is publicly owned. The report outlines how public ownership would make more economic sense by reducing incentives to inflate costs, and making borrowing costs lower. It would provide better value for money for the billpayer by investing their bills back into water infrastructure. And it would enable us to prioritise the environment over profit.

Pollution

Cunliffe proposes ‘regulatory forbearance’, which would mean that failing water companies could dodge the financial penalties which are incurred for things like pollution. This is something we’ve recently seen from Thames Water, who have tried to swerve fines amounting to billions. Allowing this would set a dangerous precedent for other water companies: the worse they perform, the more pollution they could freely get away with.

The People’s Commission demands that the full environmental costs of pollution be paid for by polluters. This would make polluters responsible for footing the (big) bill for any environmental damage. As a result, pollution would be disincentivised.

Regulation

One of the headline recommendations of the Cunliffe report was the decision to scrap Ofwat and bring in a single regulator - a recommendation which was immediately taken up by government. New name, same old priorities. Just as Ofwat had a statutory duty to provide investors with a profit, Cunliffe recommends that keeping the sector investable should be one of the new regulator’s duties. As long as private profit is a part of our water sector, money will be drained away from desperately needed repairs and into the pockets of investors.

The People’s Commission also recommends a single regulator. However, this would function completely differently under public ownership. In this scenario, a regulator would be freed from public-private conflicts of interest, and instead would be able to focus solely on public goals. It would provide transparent data to the public, and collaborate closely with citizen scientists.

Governance

The Cunliffe Review calls for the creation of Regional Water Authorities, which would carry out water planning and monitoring at a regional level. Cunliffe suggests that these authorities should reflect local needs and voices. But public engagement on the boards of these authorities seems a bit sparse. Cunliffe’s suggested structure features only two local government reps, and no trade unions.

The People’s Commission also recommends the creation of Regional Water Authorities. But their recommendations are based on an understanding that the ‘wealth of expertise’ in the public should be channelled into governance. They call for the public scrutiny of data alongside these Regional Water Authorities. They also suggest facilitating civil society associations (such as citizen scientists and stewards of local waterways). Public ownership would mean that the public - workers and consumers - would have real power in shaping what our water system looks like.

The case is clear. We need public ownership of water now. The longer the Government waits, the more damage is done.

Sign the petition to take back our water.