Oxon clean water campaigners thank Thames Water staff but blast 'corporate monster'


Clean water campaigners in north Oxfordshire have thanked water company staff for continuing their efforts for customers but have blasted the 'corporate monster' of Thames Water (TW).
Windrush Against Sewage Pollution said criticism of TW was aimed at those at the top, not the loyal workers.
Vaughan Lewis said: “Recently the Banbury Guardian covered the scandal of the failure of Thames Water. On social media, concern was expressed by some (at least two of whom appeared to be Thames Water staff) that the story was not fair and accurate.
"The TW we all see driving around in their vans, repairing water leaks and operating sewage treatment works are generally decent, hard-working and rightly proud of their work.


"Working for a company like TW ought to be rewarding; maintaining an essential public service we all value. But it’s not. Talking to many, they share the anger and frustration many of us have regarding systems and money constraints that make their jobs at times almost impossible.”
Mr Lewis described a ‘second’ Thames Water – a ‘corporate monster that has systematically robbed us of our money without delivering the promised service’.
“Driven by greed, this TW has systematically misled the public and regulators, while failing to spend our money as required to upgrade vital assets. These are the shareholders and bondholders – often foreign - and executives who watch cricket on their laptop as their company falls apart,” he said.
“The Banbury Guardian recently covered the ‘good news’ story of the planned upgrade of Banbury Sewage Treatment Works (STW). Banbury’s MP and Women’s institute were invited to witness this marvel. Except it was nothing of the kind.


"The previous MP Victoria Prentis was treated to the same tour and announcement in 2023. The upgrade should have been completed by April 2025 but was not. The cost estimate has risen from £10m to an eye-watering £14.7m.”
“This failure was one of a total of 122 schemes TW failed to deliver - schemes we had paid for already and TW then demanded an extra £1.18bn to carry out.
A TW spokesman said: “The upgrades at Banbury STW have been delayed following our initial announcement, however the initial £10 million is inclusive of the updated figure, so customers are not paying twice.
“There has been an increase in the overall costs of work, as upgrade and improvements costs have changed over the years due to market fluctuation. As a utility company we must work in an agile way to ensure our budgets reflect this.”
Mr Lewis accused TW of operating on a ‘pollute for profit’ basis for a long time.
"The same labyrinthine structure has allowed them to easily evade the control of the financial regulator Ofwat. Stripping funds from the operating company, introducing debt at eye-watering interest rates and writing off over £1billion owed to the operating company on the grounds that it is not recoverable.
"TW’s chairman Sir Adrian Montague was forced back to the Environment Food and Rural Affairs committee (twice) to apologise for having ‘miss-spoken’ the true nature of financial transactions involving TW. The committee chair has been scathing about evidence provided by the company.
“Where does this leave us, the billpayers, our health and that of the rivers we need and love?
"Local sewage works will continue to spill unacceptable amounts of untreated sewage into rivers. There were 921 hours from Banbury STW, 1,461 hours from Cropredy STW, 1,434 from Bloxham in 2023,” he said.
“Despite claims to the contrary this sewage is untreated, apart from being passed through a 6mm screen. TW’s failure to upgrade their sewage works as required means an increasing amount will be discharged illegally, posing a real enforcement challenge to the Environment Agency.”
He said meanwhile, bill-payers face excessive increases.
"Not only must we fund the required upgrades but we are paying more than 35% of our total bill to fund unjustified and un-necessary payments to shareholders and bondholders. More than 35% of bill-payers’ money is being given to the greedy corporate entities who have NEVER invested any money into TW in any year since privatisation.
"Despite government and water industry mis-information, all upgrades in TW have been paid for by us, the billpayers. The concept of water industry ‘investors’ is a fallacy. The only logical path to take is to create a not-for-profit industry run for the public good.
"Don’t believe the scare-mongering rhetoric by Steve Reed. It will not take £100bn to nationalise the industry. That figure came from a water industry-sponsored think tank study, rubbished as ‘economically illiterate’ by British economist Sir Dieter Helm.
"Putting TW into Special Administration could be done at ZERO cost to the taxpayer. The desire of the public (over 75%) to take water companies into public ownership is overwhelming.
"There are many models; municipal, mutual, community interest and full nationalisation. The cost will not include the excessive charges from the greedy corporates whose involvement has blighted the water industry since privatisation. Seemingly the only ones who cannot see that this is a good and popular idea, are the government.”
Thames Water, which was given a copy of Mr Lewis’s argument, said: “Thames Water is committed to improving outcomes for the environment and its customers. We are focused on a market-led solution to deliver a holistic and fundamental recapitalisation of the business in the best interests of customers, the environment, UK taxpayers and the wider economy.
“We are targeting a record £9.5 billion (in 2022/23 prices) of investment across our wastewater assets over the next five years. This includes upgrades to Banbury STW by increasing the treatment capacity from 266 to 490 litres per second, reducing the risk of discharges during wet weather.”
“TW made a record capital investment of £2.225 billion in 2024/25. We will be investing nearly double over the next five years compared to 2020-2025. To deliver this sharp increase in capital expenditure we need to secure the financing that is necessary to fund it.”