Transcript

Good evening, I'm Councillor Nick Wayne, Labour Member for Canterbury Ward, and I'm chairing tonight's meeting. I'm going to begin with just a little bit of background. In 1904, the New River Company and eight other water companies serving London were taken into public ownership under the control of the newly founded Metropolitan Water Board. In 1973, responsibility for water supply and sewage in the Thames catchment area was transferred to the Thames Water Authority. Then, in 1989, as part of water privatisation, Thames Water came into existence. Many of us in this room will think that the model of a private monopoly provider for water was fundamentally flawed and inevitably ran the risk of placing returns for shareholders above the interests of residents. Thames Water have been through a variety of owners. There are many in this room who will feel that a combination of weak regulation and corporate greed have brought Thames Water to the position that they now find themselves in financially and reputationally. The representatives of Thames Water here tonight are not responsible for the decisions taken by previous custodians of our water, but they are representatives of the present custodians. Thames Water on their website say this, we take care of water for 16 million people, enabling our customers, communities and environment to thrive. Our job as counsellors to thrive. Our job as counsellors is to hold them to that pledge and to scrutinise their performance, and that is what we will do tonight. This is a meeting of the corporate resources and economy. This is a meeting of the corporate resources and economy scrutiny committee, together with the environment scrutiny committee. This committee, in a slightly different form, conducted a review of Thames Water in 2017, following on from the catastrophic burst water main in Upper Street. And I'm delighted that Richard Greening, who chaired that scrutiny, is with us tonight. We also, in 2022, had what I would describe as a mini scrutiny session with Thames Water. It is something that this committee, and also the environment scrutiny committee, has kept a close focus on. Part of our job tonight will be to see if Thames Water have up their act since our scrutiny report in 2017. Have adopted our recommendations in spirit, as well as to the letter, and whether they are truly committed to serving Islington residents. In the second part of the meeting, we will be having a look, in particular, at existing and future works that we expect to take place in the borough. A few house rules. This is a meeting of the council in public. It's not a public meeting, but it may be that members of the public will be attending. And if they do, there will be an opportunity for public questions, but we have to follow formalities. So just a few formalities that I have to go through. We are not expecting a fire alarm test this evening, so if the alarm is sounded, please evacuate the building. The meeting is being broadcast live on the council's website, so please turn on your microphone when speaking and turn it off when you have finished. I am not going to do a round of introductions for the councillors, rather a lot of us, and we have all got our names here. But councillors, when you do speak for the first time, can you just say who you are and the ward that you represent? But I will ask the committee officers to identify themselves. Emma Taylor-Clark to the committee. Nick Burgess, Islington Emergency Planning. Dan Lawson, Assistant Director of Civil Protection. Liz Wathen, Head of Highways and Street Works, Islington Council. I am the Executive Member for Environment, Air Quality and Transport. And can I ask the representatives from Thames Water to introduce themselves? I am Mike Benke, I am the Stakeholder, Liaison Manager for North London for Thames Water. Good evening, I am Paul Wethan, I am the Water Asset Director. Hi, good evening everyone, I am Tim Davis, I look after the wastewater infrastructure in North London. Hello everyone, my name is Martin Paddle, I am the Water Director for Thames Water. Thank you and I should add, we also have the Leader of the Council present tonight. Just a few more formalities. Firstly, apologies for absence. I have had apologies from Councillor James Potts and Councillor Rulyn Kondoga. Substitute members, Councillor Heather is substituting for Councillor Potts. Any declarations of interest from any of the councillors? No, and just to say, we asked for questions from members of the public in advance. I have some of those questions and I will be weaving those in to the questions from the committee. And as I say, there will be an opportunity for any members of the public who are here and any of our guests, if they want to contribute to the meeting, to contribute. So, I think that covers off all of the formalities. Just in terms of time keeping, presentation first off from Thames Water, which I think will take us to about eight o'clock. We have until 9.30 for questions. That is a hard cut off, councillors. And then myself and Councillor Clarke will just make a few concluding remarks. And, of course, just for all of you who will be contributing tonight, can everybody treat everyone else with the courtesy and respect that Islington is known for? Thames Water didn't have to come tonight and we are extremely grateful for them giving up their time tonight to answer the questions of the committee. So, without further ado, I will pass over to Thames. And, Mike, I think you are going to be leading on the presentation. Martin. Martin. Thank you. Hello, everyone. So, what I am going to do is just, Paul and I will do a bit of a double act as we go through. We will cover off Water Quarter, which you have asked us to come and talk about. We will also then talk about mains replacement in Islington and also look into the future. And then, in response to the comment that Councillor Wayne made, we will also talk about event response too. So, in terms of water quality, we, in Thames Water, and me personally, are very proud of the water quality that we supply. We carry out, as it says on the slide, over half a million tests every year. They are conducted at random. We turn to people's properties at random. And those tests show that water is and remains safe and among the best in the world, if not the best in the world. We have, the standards we test to are set out by the government regulators, the drinking water inspectorate. The way we test is set out by that and the way we sample is set out by that. We are aware, and I don't know whether this is why we were asked to come and talk about this, about some media reports in Beckenham and Sydenham, associated with illness last year. That followed an outbreak of a disease called Cryptosporidiosum in Brixton, in Devon, and not Brixton. And we, there was a number of reports suggesting that there was a problem with the water. There was not. There is absolutely zero evidence. And we looked very, very hard to find any evidence. I'm also aware there was a report recently, a couple of weeks ago, in one of the Guardian X feed, where they talked about E. coli in the water. That was a single property. So we, as I said earlier, we routinely, and at random, test people's houses. We test them. We don't test them at the entry to the property. We test them at their own customer's tab. That result showed elevated levels of E. coli. As is normal in these situations, we advised the customer not to drink that water and to boil the water for use. But we tested both sides of the property affected. The water was clear and in line with what we'd normally expect. We then went back to the property, retested, and then we retested after the property had had a deep clean. The test after the property had a deep clean was clear. Or more simply, it was an internal plumbing issue. But I don't, I can't stress enough, we take this so seriously, that whenever we find anything, we immediately act. And so that's why, that's the situation there. Paul, I think we're talking, I think we're over to you. Yeah, good evening everybody. So this slide just gives you a very quick overview of the mains across Islington. And I think we, we know that so far from 20, from 2000 to 2020, we've replaced 80% of the mains. But I'm sure you would appreciate that when you look at the graph, it really does show that we are behind in this borough compared to others. And that's why for, for the AMP that we're about to go into, we'll be prioritising as much work as we can when it comes to the Islington mains. And it does show their age that 53% of them were before the 1950s. What I do just want to draw your attention to though, is that when you look at how much mains we're, we want to replace in the next five year period, we are aiming to replace 550 kilometres. If you compare that to what we replaced in the five year period that we're coming towards the end of, we replaced 150. So you can see that there is a significant step up in the amount of mains replacement that we're going to be completing. That is across the whole of our catchment area. And our aim is that we continue that and push that rate even further as we go into the five year period that follows. Unfortunately, I'm not going to be able to take you into a lot of detail of what we're going to be doing in Islington at this stage, because I'm sure many of you will appreciate that we're going through the end of the price review period. Um, where we thought we was at the draft period in the summer has changed a hell of a lot from where we are now with the final determination from off lot. Um, and that means they are now starting to dictate to us the mains that we replace. Um, so we grade all of our mains and the mains that we're replacing and the ones that are of, of, of age or have the most amount of births are the ones that they want us to focus on. Um, to make that even more challenging, they're also dictating to us how much we do each year. Um, and they've asked us to try and do 74 kilometers in the first year. So starting from the 1st of April. Um, but I'm sure you can appreciate that if we started to ask for access to streets to do that work that quickly, um, that would have a massive impact on the amount of work that's already planned in in the borough. Um, perhaps from yourself and, and, and other utilities. Um, and we all appreciate and understanding the amount of planning that goes in before we start that work. So we are talking with off lot to see if we can get that change so that we can make sure that we've got a realistic plan that we can deliver. We absolutely agree that we want to tackle the areas that, that have got the biggest problems. Um, but we also need to make sure we've got the right level of funding to do that. Um, so more than happy that once we've gone through that process and you know that, that we've got to complete that process by the 18th of February. After that process, more than happy to come back and share those detailed plans. Um, thank you. The next slide, um, just pulls out three of the, three of the investments that we've done. Um, so you can see from Seven Sisters Road, um, you know, a large investment, um, 2.4 kilometers of mains that we've replaced. Um, and, and perhaps that's sometimes why, why, why some, um, residents see us in the area for a long while, or they see us working and coming back. That is because we're completing quite a lot of mains replacement and quite long lengths. Um, but just wanting to point out that we do look to try and use all technologies available to us to keep that, that disruption to an absolute minimum. Um, for Offward Road, um, that was very much one of the challenges that we got from, from the last session and our response. Pleased to say that we should have that completed by May. And then Pentonville Road, um, the last one now. We, we started working Pentonville Road in one of those areas that we wanted to, to replace. Um, we did have a large burst while some of that work was going on. Um, and we didn't waste time in extending that scope to make sure that picked up that, that, that area too. So that's all due to complete by 2027, but we do, we do fully understand and appreciate the disruption that caused while we're trying to do that work. But just to give you an idea of cost and scale, that's, that's really the schemes that we've picked out. But again, if you've got other schemes that you'd like to understand more on, then happy to, happy to pick those up too. Um, the next slide is really just trying to, to show one with the picture on the right there, what some of the works that we do and, and you know, how intrusive it can be to the local area. But hopefully that gives you an idea of the scale of work that we're trying to do. Um, but just wanted to really just to, to highlight that when it comes to main, mains replacement, um, water quality is absolutely the priority. So we will always prioritize where we are spending money and sending out our, our supply chain and workforce wherever we've got water quality issues. Um, we also look at where we've got bursts. So if you have got areas where we see an increase in bursts, where we've got leakage, um, and also where we are doing an increased number of mains repairs ourselves as part of our maintenance programs. Um, and obviously we do keep an eye on the cost because at some point we, it would be foolish for us to be spending more money on repairing. When actually it'd be more cost effective for us to replace. Um, we also consider other things as such as supply interruptions, risk, customer complaints, um, stakeholder concerns. Um, obviously traffic disruption is a major one for everybody. Um, health and safety is, is, is, you know, is an absolute, um, and also the risk of, um, pollutions. When we think about when we do have bursts for some of our mains, there is quite a large volume of work that can be displaced. Thank you. Um, and then just on trunk mains, um, again, the picture will hopefully give you, give you an idea of the size of some of the trunk mains that we have. Um, they are, you know, they are significant and we do know that, that when they do burst, um, we absolutely understand the risk to basements, hospitals, um, and the underground. Um, and we continue to monitor, um, to make sure we understand the conditions of those assets. And we've got detailed models that allow us to understand that. Um, we also do a lot of preventative maintenance. Um, one to, to make sure we understand what's happening to the main within its daily operation. And also for us to trend that information, um, so we can see if there's a deterioration. But as you'd expect us to be doing checks on valves, um, monitoring protection of the mains itself, obviously around leakage and also on maintenance, especially around air valves. Um, you know, that, that picture there really does give you a sense of the scale of some of the mains that we've got and the some of the streets. Thank you, Paul. Uh, so I, what I thought we'd do now is just explain how the, uh, just a reminder for those who live and breathe this every day, how the industry works. So the, the industry works in five year business cycles. So every five years we, uh, apply to our economic regulator, that's off what, and ask them for a, uh, you know, we submit our plans and ask them for a level of investment. That investment is actually largely governed by statutory requirements. Uh, both, uh, water quality statutory requirements, but also statutory requirements for wastewater discharges, those sorts of things. Uh, so the, uh, that, that process concluded, it's called the, uh, final determination. The final determination includes the name, that's the end of it. Uh, that came on the 19th of December, uh, and, uh, we, that concludes their position for bills between April 25 to March, 2030. So there's no, so it, you know, if we accept that, uh, determination, I'll talk about what might happen next, then, uh, that is it. So, uh, the liquidity runway that I know has been a concern to a number of people, does that mean that we're going to be, uh, the, the extra loan we're taking, does that mean we get that, because we would never go back to the regulator and ask for more money on that basis. It doesn't work that way. Uh, in terms of, uh, what might happen next, we have until the 18th of February, to decide whether to accept that determination, uh, and, and the, uh, proposed investment, or whether to, uh, appeal it. The, there is a one chance appeal, and that's to the Competitions and Markets Authority. Uh, and we, uh, when, if, if, when we do that, uh, they, it will be a full re-determination. So, we can't go and say, we like this bit, but we don't like this bit. It doesn't work that way. Everything gets taken to account, so it's completely start again. The process, uh, takes six weeks, months, uh, but the CMA had the ability to ask for a further six months, so it can take a year. Uh, the decision on, uh, what we do here has not been made. It needs to be made by the Board, uh, but by the 18th of February, there will be certainty one way or the other. Uh, following, so on the basis, uh, on the, on the, uh, following that, we'll then be able to start to share information in terms, as Paul's already said, in terms of local investment plans. Uh, and just to recap the sort of things that might be of interest to councillors, uh, that's includes replacing, as Paul said, 170 clums of mains, upgrading 150 clums of sewers. Uh, and interestingly, and I think important, it often goes into the radar, this, providing, uh, support to customers who are struggling to pay their bills. So we have a, uh, process where 647,000 households will get some meaningful support for this next, uh, five-year period. So that equates to about 10% of households. Now in Islington, the current rate of support is 16%. So 16% of households in Islington already receive help with their water bills. Uh, I would imagine that would increase as part of the, uh, this determination. Uh, but I don't have any numbers, uh, at the, at the moment. And then also, uh, some additional works in terms of, uh, reduced overflows and pollutions. As I say in this slide. Moving away from the, uh, main road in Islington, just thinking more generally about London's water supply. So the way London's, uh, way London's water supply works, there are a number of, there are a number of, small number of very, very large works. And just to give you a scale of some of these works, uh, there's five large works. Three of those five supply more water than Southern water, and its entirety does each day. The scale is immense. Uh, as you would expect, the demand is huge. Most of the treatment is in the West. And it's transferred, the, the, uh, black line you can see is what we call the ring main. So this transfers water from the West, where it's, where most of it's treated into the heart of the city. And there are two spokes, one to the south, uh, one to the south that goes to Honor Oak. And then one to the north goes to Copper Mills, which is where the Walthamstow wetlands are. Uh, and that we've got a very large works there too, that supplies that area. And also into the city of London. During this period, the five year period, we will spend in excess of three quarters of a billion pounds, uh, uh, investing and improving the resilience of treatment. Uh, the, for me, there are a few key things that are important for, for our water quality, for water. One is obviously water quality. Uh, and the, the second is resilience. So a lot of this actually improves the resilience of supply. And it reduces the risk of supply interruptions. Now, if I look back, uh, five years ago, uh, that the supply interruptions that we, uh, uh, so when we measure supply interruptions, we take the total amount of supply of interruptions to customers. We then divide it by the number of customer times, times by the number of customer affected, and then divide it by the total number of customers. And that gives you the total number of minutes, on average, that each customer experienced in terms of supply interruptions. Five years ago, that was 90 minutes. This year, it's seven minutes. We have major bursts. And that's not maximum. That's due to direct intervention. But you can see the scale of, you know, and you've gotten the detail, uh, which obviously we're very happy to share, uh, is, uh, in, is on this side. But, you know, at Copper Mills, uh, you're talking over half a billion pounds worth of investment in the next five year period. The sums are immense because the size of the works is immense. And because our desire to protect the residents to London is very ambitious. Uh, so that's, that's, that's, I thought it's, it's something that people just don't appreciate is happening, uh, behind the gates. But it's, it's very important, we feel, to protect the supply to London. And then finally, we talked earlier about major event resistance. So, uh, we, uh, as, uh, Councillor Way said earlier, we'd had, we have had a number of incidents in this borough. We're very aware of those. We made, uh, a number of changes in response to those, uh, all of which we, uh, enacted. Uh, we have, uh, the communication. There's a lot more focus on it. I think, I think it'd be foolish to say that there's not more we could do. Clearly there's more we could do. Uh, but we have made a lot of, uh, strides, I think, in this area. As I say, we have had fewer bursts. I always touch wood and say things like that, but we've had fewer bursts. Uh, the, and that is not an accident. It is not, nor is it because we've replaced all them in. Because as you can see walking around the borough, how many mains were replaced. What it is, is we've changed the way we operate or operate in the system, which happens, again, behind closed doors in terms of the pump. I think it's pumped in Islington. So in terms of the way we run the pumps, in terms of the shock that we, you know, managing the shock to the system of the pumps come on and off, all of that has contributed to the improved performance that residents will have enjoyed, uh, over the last couple of years. That said, things do go wrong, and Pentafill is a very good example of that. Uh, as, but we knew this was a, we knew this was a high risk. We had a project actually physically on site when this happened, uh, and we extended the project, uh, very quickly to make sure that that area effectively was replaced. Uh, in terms of the mechanics of the event, uh, everybody stayed in their home. Uh, new entrance of the construct, as it says there, to, uh, enable our businesses to reopen. There were 25 businesses, uh, 25 customers affected, 21 of which were businesses, four of which were residentials. Uh, we reconfigured layouts to enable customers in and out. We agreed interim payments, uh, and we've, we've actually, uh, I think fairly innovative, it's not only companies, water companies do this. We've supplied accountants to help businesses quantify their losses and claims. So, I think to answer the challenge at the staff meeting, I think we have responded positively. And I think we, I think we can also say with some pride that we responded in terms of, not just the letter, but also the intent. I think that's the end of the presentation. Well, thank you for that. The first, um, questions are going to come from Councillor Clark. Okay. Uh, well, I'm Councillor Clark, Councillor in Tuffington Park Ward. I'm the chair of the environment, climate change and transport committee. And I just would like to say thank you very much for coming, coming back to this committee. And I'd also like to say thank you for fixing the leak outside Crystal's restaurant on Holloway Road, which I reported last Saturday. That's really good. But however, Thames Water's poor performance has been in the news, as you said, lately. And it's symptomatic of great, great underinvestment and financial mismanagement. I've read that 19 billion pounds is needed to fix repair, to repair the assets. And, uh, as you reported, you referred to the Guardian report that talked about cracks in reservoirs. And, you know, in reservoirs, if we haven't got them, then the water supply into London is a threat. Uh, digesters which store gas from waste are being taken offline because of safety issues. And I know when I flush the toilet, I actually think, off you go to the Thames River. Because I have lost faith in Thames Water's ability to actually deal with sewage effectively. Um, off what I've said that Thames Water is the least resilient water company. And there's 630 billion litres of water leak a day in London. Um, the drinking water inspector, as you said, I'm really pleased to hear how you, you prioritize drinking water. As that's exactly what the drinking water inspector expect. They want a continuous, safe supply of clean drinking water. And the Environment Agency has said the security of water supply to London and the southeast is at risk. Because of, if, if Thames don't fix the leaks and meet customers, you know, deal with customers' demand for water. I mean, we still had a lot of rain today in London. Thames, please collect, harvest rainwater. We, we have water. Please, you know, recycle it. And just in, in light of all these points I've made, can Thames Water assure us that given the extreme change in weather because of climate change, that Islington's water supply is safe from, you know, extreme drought or flooding. And could you tell us, assure us, but also give us the steps you're taking and, uh, I'd be happy to hear. Thank you. Yes. Thank you very much. I never, ever, ever defend what has happened in the company in the past. Uh, it's not about, as you say, I wasn't here, actually. I was, I've been in the company over four years now, but I've been in the industry for 30. Uh, so, uh, we, we, we, we never, as a company, defend what's happened in the past. So, uh, and I also recognize we've got an awful long way to go in terms of regaining public trust, which is why things like, uh, the people getting back, uh, Brickson and Brickson confused is so frustrating. And why people don't trust it when they see a single property having a notice to boil based on internal plumbing issues. So, I completely recognize everything you've said. And I say, I have no intention of defending it. In terms of, uh, investment, I think it's worth just sort of, before I answer the question, I will answer it directly. Before I answer the question, just to explain, uh, the investment that we've, we've undertaken in the last five year period. Uh, I can't speak for proof before that, obviously. In the last five year period, we invested 1.7 billion pound more than we were allowed to collect from customers. And that, all that 1.7 billion pound came, uh, from shareholders who have subsequently, uh, decided to step away. Uh, it didn't come from customers. It came from shareholders at what extra 1.7 billion pounds. In terms of the, uh, next price view, in terms of the price view we appear to walk in on the assumption we accept it. Uh, we, uh, have been allowed 17 point, uh, 19.7 billion pounds. Uh, but the investment that we will spend will be 23.7 billion pounds. So, that's an additional 4 billion pounds over and above what we collect from customers. So, there is a, uh, I, I, I share those numbers just to explain the commitment that the company has to London and to the, and to its entire area actually outside London. Uh, in terms of, uh, you raise the point of it's raining a lot. Can't, why can't we store the water? Uh, I'm afraid the reservoir storage we have in London is quite small relative to the demand. We can store about 100 days round numbers in terms of real water. Uh, and that's what we, and we operate pumps continuously from the Thames to keep them topped up. And the reservoirs at the moment are full. Uh, so there's no way else for me to put it. And that's why the, uh, new reservoir we talk about in Oxfordshire is so important. Because that will enable us to collect more water when it's available freely, uh, and then release it back into the southeast. In terms of your question in terms of climate change, you're absolutely right. I mean, as I said earlier, I've been in this for 30 years and I, I, there's no doubt at all the weather has changed. No doubt at all. I don't care what any politician says. There is no doubt the weather has changed. Uh, 30 years ago, I joined an industry where it was a drizzly country. It's not anymore. It's either throwing it down or it's, or, or it's absolutely baking. And all those things put stress on the water system. Uh, so how do we deal with that? Well, we deal with that, uh, in a number of ways. So I deal with leakage first. So as you say, leakage is higher than it needs to be. Uh, the, we outturned last year's leakage at the lowest ever, uh, leakage. And we will outturn this year's leakage at the lowest ever leakage too. It's, it's, it's an improvement to gain. But we've got a target to reduce by 26% in the next five year period. Uh, when I contrast that with southern water, they've got a target to reduce by 2%. We've been incredibly ambitious in terms. Now, leakage is one of those things that people, it's very easy. People, when people think of leakage, they think of the, you know, the massive sort of burst that you sometimes see, uh, on the television or like Pentable Road when it's pouring down the road. But most leakage is not like that. Most leakage is in the, is hidden. It's underground. It's quite hard to find actually. And actually it's quite often quite difficult to distinguish it from leakage and usage, which is why the smart meter program is so important. Because not only does it help customers pay for what they use, but it also helps us identify what's actually usage and what's actually leakage. So part of the equation is leakage. Uh, and part of the equation is encouraging customers to use, uh, water wisely. And there, there are government targets, not our targets, they're government targets to, uh, encourage customers to use 110 litres per person per day. And we, we're doing everything we can to encourage that. And we have an active program of home visits, et cetera, to encourage that. The final part of that, so that's water not being used properly. And then moving on to the water available for use. There are a number of schemes that we have as part of this, uh, future five year period. Uh, the first is a new reservoir. I talked about that already. I've been done up in Oxfordshire and that released water back down the Thames to both ourselves, affinity water, and also Southern water. Uh, the second one is the, uh, Teddington reuse scheme, which will allow water to be transferred from, uh, Teddington at Weir up to the northeast, along to the copper mill system. Uh, there's also, there's a, the third thing is the, uh, lower Thames transfer. That's, that's transferring water from Teddington Weir back up to the west, where most of the treatment is, as I showed you earlier. Uh, the reason we can do that is because there are a number of rivers that weigh in the mole coming downstream of the abstraction from those western reservoirs. So we've got extra water at Teddington Weir. And so that pumping it back allows us to reuse that water that's coming from a different source. Uh, and, uh, I hope, uh, let me just check I've covered everything. And then also we're working with United Utilities and Seven Trends, uh, looking at the feasibility of transfer water from North Wales via the Seven Transfer. So, I hope that gives you, answers your question directly in terms of, we're trying to reduce the amount of water by 26% that's leaking. Uh, we are making sure that help to support customers use water more wisely, but actually, we're doing an awful lot and spending a really large amount of money to, uh, put more capacity in the system. Can I, can I just push? Can I put, please? Um, I just also wanted to, where you mentioned about the concern around reservoirs and reservoirs having cracks in them. Um, just to reassure everybody that if you go to our large raw water reservoirs, so the ones that are up in Lee Valley in Walthamstone, the ones that are in West London, um, we visually inspect those every 48 hours. Um, and that's done by trained technicians that, that walk around the reservoir at all levels. Um, and they're also, um, there's oversight from external panel, panel engineers as per the Reservoir Act to make sure that there's a high level of scrutiny, um, placed on the structure and, and safety of those reservoirs. Um, for service reservoirs, so they're the ones that hold the water that then comes out of your tap. Um, and for where we are, you've got Claremont Square, Stoke Newington, um, Maiden Lane. Um, Maiden Lane's a really good example of where you've got a large reservoir that's up on the top of a hill when, when you look at the way the, the bank drops, drops down. Um, those reservoirs are inspected, um, every other day. Um, we also do an internal inspection where we drain the cells and go into, do a full, thorough inspection from a structural point of view and from a quality point of view. Um, they're done on a risk-based approach. So between three and 10 years. Um, so we actually take service reservoir and raw water reservoir structures very, very seriously. Um, and the impact of them going wrong, um, is just not going to happen, um, because of the level of focus that we put on them. So I'm afraid if you do hear stuff in the papers that talks about cracks in our reservoirs, one, that would contradict our, our statement about water quality, um, and two, the amount of rigour we put in inspecting and understand their condition. That just wouldn't be the case. Um, and I can assure you that if we have any concerns on reservoirs, we do not hesitate to take them out of supply. Thank you, Paul. Thank you, Paul. Thank you, Paul. Thank you, Paul. Only briefly, my point about collecting rainwater, and it makes me very unhappy that to think that we're leaking 630 billion litres a day, and then extracting more water from Wales. And, um, I can't remember where the other place was, but you know, that makes me very unhappy. We shouldn't be doing that. Yeah, I mean, the, the, the leakage, uh, on average is, is, I don't know where those numbers have come from. The leakage is actually, uh, it's 570 megalitres a day. So 570 million litres, and there's no, not billion litres. But, but I admit it's still too high, which I agree with. Councillor Jeeps, I know you have a couple of questions. I'll stand up for a bit. Yeah, I'm Claire Jeeps, uh, and my ward is Canterbury Ward, which is the same ward as the Chair. Uh, within Canterbury Ward, we have two 36-inch, uh, water mains that are cast iron, and at least 150, 160, I don't know, loads of years old. For, some years ago that you, uh, installed Sahara, or whatever you call them, detectors. Because I am very concerned about the, the age of these, uh, pipes. You were going to, um, improve them, or change the pipes. It would be a bit difficult where they're going through our ward. But I would like, uh, well, I'm not sure what your plans are with whether that will happen. But apart from that, I mean, I would say that I, I actually love Thames Water. You were based in Islington. It's one of our businesses, which is why we, which is why I feel very strongly about it. Also, drinking the water is better than drinking bottled water. I believe that. I want to keep that. You're really important to us. However, residents have raised concerns with me. And I'm equally concerned about the large increase in water bills that you have requested, and that could be coming. An example of this is, if you increase the bills, you increase it for businesses. One of those businesses that people on poor, low incomes, et cetera, rely on or need, are use of laundrettes. So, if they're finding it harder to use a laundrette, because they've got less money, people are going to go around dirty, and they're going around smelling. And I don't want that. This is the only cost. This is what happens when you decide, or you, whoever it is, decide what, what is going to, what the bit, what your increase is going to be. And I am prepared to pay, and I will, I'm fine, it's okay to pay you for water. However, I want the resource and the physical work involved in delivering clean, unpolluted water. I want the money that I pay to go on, on your workers doing the work. And I'm unhappy, and I don't really want it to go on paying, servicing excessive debts that have been incurred, or paying for high remunerations for some of your people. May not be you here, but we are unhappy if the money we pay, you increase the bills, and you then say, well, one of your directors is going to get paid an awful lot more. This is making people very unhappy. And we're also unhappy about money going to pay dividends. All the money you will take, ask us for more money, that money needs to go on paying to improve the pipes and everything else in our borough. Now, I would like a very clear acknowledgement from you that you understand the severity and the financial pressures that this places upon our residents. Particularly those on income. Because I'll make regard to your investment plan there, which says, we received Ofwot's final determination, which concludes the regulators' review for April 2025, which is in a couple of months, to March 2030. And I'm now assessing whether or not to accept this. We have until the 8th of February to decide whether we will refer this determination to the Competition and Markets Authority. Well, that is a concern that you clearly want more than what I thought it was going to give you. And then this, again, is putting pressure on people on very low incomes who are really struggling because we've had 14 years of Tories messing things up. So, I just hope that you understand the strong feelings of people, particularly in Islington, probably all around, but certainly from people that are spoken to me, people in our borough. And my concerns, too, about our pipes in Canby Ward. So, personally, I'm glad that you picked up on Sir Hugh Middleton, because I do agree that actually the water industry as we know it today, as in having piped water supplies to dwellings that has been replicated around the world, I think we can say that that started here. So, I think it's good to hear you say that. As far as bottled water, absolutely agree. And to try and put it into context for you, if you look at, you know, a little bottle of water, as a company, we produce 5 billion of those a day. So, we try to visualise how much water we're actually providing to customers across the London and Thames Valley area is really significant. And from a quality point of view, there is no better, no safer water than that that comes out your tap. So, it's really good to hear you say that. As far as the mains itself for your ward, I'm more than happy, I know it's not great to say that we're in this forum together, but I'm more than happy to come back to you once we've got through the next month and share with you where we're planning on doing the work. And where you mentioned about the Sahara surveys, that's one of the techniques we use to make sure we have good monitoring and understanding about any potential leakage on the main. We also have critical pressure points, we're also monitoring the mains 24-7 as well to make sure we understand what's happening with them. But with many customers that I've met, when they realise the size of some of the water mains that are running down their streets, it is quite surprising. And the amount of water that passes through them every day, it can be quite daunting when you realise it, but more than happy to come back and share with you what we're going to be doing. Thank you, Paul, for that. Water is one of those things that's emotional, isn't it? I always think it's not like anything else, it's an emotional connection that people have to it. So in terms of answering your questions, which I'll do directly. So the CMA thing you mentioned first, do we go back to the CMA or not? We have until the 18th of February to decide whether we go back. No decision has been taken, I can say that with absolute confidence, no decision has been taken. If we go back, then it's quite possible that it could say less. It's because it's a complete redetermination. So that's the thing about the CMA. So that we're not saying, well, we've not had enough. What we're saying is we, like all companies, all water companies are in exactly the same position. And when I used to work at my last water company, we used to take exactly the same position there too. And that's just part of the process. In terms of the bills, yeah, I do recognise it actually. I genuinely do recognise it. I mean, what I will say in terms of bills, so if you look back to 2010, bills, had they increased by inflation, would now be £110 greater than they currently are. That's just how it is. And I don't think you can say any utilities, about any other utility, certainly not electricity, certainly not gas. So I think it has, I think we can hold our head high and say we have kept bills low. In fact, that's part of the problem. We've kept bills artificially low for too long. So we've built up a backlog of investment. Now, part of that's the company's previous decisions it's taken, and part of that's the regulators' previous decisions it took. So, for example, this period, we asked for £13 billion, the one that we're about to end, and we got £9 billion. So, £9 billion, sorry. So it's part of the, I mean, bills are low, but it's actually part of the problem we now face. We've got this backlog of stuff that just needs, as you say, stuff's not getting any younger. Stuff does need to be resolved. The other reason that bills have gone up is because of the statutory requirements, the new statutory requirements we've got. So in terms of, so I'll give you an example from water. In the Kennett Valley, we've been asked to protect chalk streams. To do that, we need to take less water out of the ground water. That means we need to build new pipes, new treatment works from other facilities to bring water to those customers. And all that costs money. In terms of the debt, yeah, you're right, we do pay part of the bill that does go to service debt. But that's how the industry is designed to operate. So, as I said earlier, this period, we've spent £1.7 billion more than was allowed for. And the price and the period we're just about to walk into, we are going to spend from March, and you saw some of the stuff we talked about earlier, £23.7 billion. And off what have allowed us, £19.7 billion. So that gap of £4 billion doesn't just come out of nowhere. It needs to be provided by other shareholders, which would have to be new shareholders, because the existing ones have told us they don't want to spend any more money on us, having lost probably a lot. But it also comes from debt. And that is how the industry is designed to operate, and every water company in the UK operates that way. Now, in terms of where does that money go, you might ask. Well, the day-to-day run of the water and waste water business across Townswater costs £7.5 billion. And the investment is £16.2 billion. So the vast majority of that money we're talking about is actually new investment. In terms of dividends, which I think was your final point, the last time this company paid a dividend to shareholders was in 2017. So there has been no dividend paid since 2017. Now, you will have seen reports where you paid a dividend to you via this probably quite over-complicated structure that owns us. In reality, all of that was two – those payments were two things. The first one was a debt. It just so happens some of our shareholders were also like bondholders. So they also issued the debt. So it was paying the interest on the debt. There was no dividend. The second thing we've spent money on is pensions. So we had a pension, like many companies, a pension deficit, or whatever you want to call it. So we have paid money to repair that too, which, you know, for the people that work in the company. So I hope that answers your question. I mean, I do genuinely, and I mean this in absolutely heartfelt, understand the pressure this puts on it, puts on people, which is why I was at pains to say earlier, that by the end of this, in this next period, one in 10 properties, or customers of Thames Water will receive some form of support, which we're very proud of, actually. In Islington, that's currently 16% of all customers receive some kind of support. And, you know, there's a process that customers can go through if they think that they are eligible. And we are always happy to talk to customers about that thing. As I say, I do get it, because I've been in the industry a long time. And it is, water's emotional, I think, if I'm honest. I hope that answers your questions. Yeah, can I just say thank you very much for the answer there? I'm going to be taking some more questions from the committee in a moment. But there are some questions that we've had from members of the public and stakeholders in advance, and it takes opportunity to put them. The very first question that I'm going to put is from the Islington South MP, Emily Thornberry. She can't be with us tonight, but she has asked me to ask this question. I'm afraid it's quite long. Over the past 12 months, my office has seen consistent failures in Thames Water service. Thames Water serves Islington with slimy rivers, grinning creditors and taps that run dry. The broad picture is utterly shameful, and this is reflected in the correspondence I receive from my constituents. Time and time again, Thames Water have been found wanting. My constituents got in touch with me when the water stopped running on Horton Road last year. The residents of three blocks of flats, hundreds of people, were without running water for over a week. Three days into the situation, Thames Water and the freeholders were still engaged in finger pointing. Residents reported feeling completely lost with no leadership or crisis plan. Whilst they were fed information in a piecemeal fashion by the external management agents, they only had access to one outside tap and each home was given six bottles of water for the day. Four days in, without running water, the freeholder arranged for a 30,000 litre tanker for residents to use for their water supply. This was enough for only three hours of water. At this point, Thames Water engineers were still not on site. It was only after five days that Thames Water thanked us for raising it with them, and said they would send someone over. They did, and reported that nothing was wrong with the flow or pressure. Exasperated, I called the Environmental Health Team. Eventually, the flow of water was slowly restored. For some families, it was over 11 days. There have been times when my constituents' taps have run dry. And Thames Water have even refused bottled water, and that was the old school buildings in York Way in April 2024. There is not enough investment in infrastructure in Islington. Even when there is renewal, it is not extensive enough. Someone made a decision to renew some of the trunk mains on Penthamville Road. And whilst that was going on, another point burst. Only then was it decided to extend the trunk works. Homes and businesses were flooded. Is it right that after such poor performance and increasing bills, that creditors and bosses are rewarded? I cannot believe those who run Thames Water continue to be paid increasing amounts. When attempts are made to stop bonuses, wages are simply increased. The American hedge funds continue to extract money from Thames Water, with their latest bailout having an interest rate of 9.75%. I have come to the conclusion that the relationship between Thames Water and my constituents is the relationship between the parasite and the host. Why do Thames Water expect my constituents to bear paying higher and higher bills for poor service and lack of adequate contingency measures when water supply fails? And what efforts are Thames Water making to increase response times in Islington? And perhaps you could focus in on those last two questions. Well, thank you for that, as you say, rather long question. I think what I would say to that is I'd refer you to a comment I made earlier. So, four years ago, the average interruption for everybody was 19 minutes. This year, it's seven. So, in terms of the interruptions that we've seen across the whole of Thames Water, it has improved. But those are just the facts. In terms of the agent, in terms of the block of floods, I think I need to see full details to make sure I've got the facts right. But I think I recall this project. The way the water system works is this. We are responsible, as Thames Water, for the water being treated, abstracted, treated, and distributed through our pipes to the boundary of the property. It's not like electricity. In electricity, the electricity company is responsible to the fuse box in your home. Water is not like that. The company is responsible for the same across the whole country, including Scotland, which is publicly owned, and Wales, which is also publicly owned. We are responsible for the water to the boundary of the property. So, when we sent our engineers, we will have confirmed that there was water at the boundary of the property. We can't enter people's property if there is an internal issue, which I think is what happened at the blocks of floods that you're talking about, which is why Ms. Thornsby had to go to the environmental health people. But we will, if we get the details of the blocks of floods, we will confirm them, and I'm very, very happy to write back to confirm that in, just to check my recollection is correct. But that is my recollection of that issue. In terms of Pentonville Road, I think we covered this earlier. I'm very happy, you know, we know there was a problem on Pentonville Road. That's why we're doing the investment over the next two years, spending, what, I'm sure, is it 14 million, 15 million? So, we know about that, which is why we were there. It wasn't as if we weren't on site. We knew there was a problem in that area, and we were in the middle of replacing it. Sometimes, things go wrong just before you're about to replace it. And that was the case at Pentonville Road. In terms of bonuses and payments, those are decided by Renewation Committees. And I note that the Government is currently passing through Parliament in terms of executive bonuses. And on that basis, I'm not sure it's appropriate for me to comment on that any further. Because it's a government matter. Yes, of course you can, Paul. I just wanted to add with regards to, if we take that incident as an example. When it is a tall building where it would normally be the freeholder's responsibility with regards to internal plumbing and increasing pump pressures, we do offer support and technical advice when they have problems. We don't just say it's not our problem and leave them to it. But I'm sure you can appreciate that if the building owner doesn't want our help and tells us they've got it under control, then we are limited on what we can do. And quite often, when you have an event of that type, after the event, you've got all the information. So you've got the benefit of hindsight and you can piece together where things went wrong and what you would do differently. But when you're in the event and you're managing the situation at the time, you can only offer and make decisions based on what you know. And if our control room and our customer teams are talking to the building owners and the facilities management team and offering support and being told it's okay, we think we know what it is or we're working on it, we think it will be back soon, we think it will be back soon, we can only keep offering and responding based on the information we know. You know, quite often we get challenged and criticised of why we didn't do things during an event or during a situation. But that generally means you've got all the information, you're able to piece it back to see why you didn't do different things. But when you're managing that situation at the time, you only know what you know at that time. But we absolutely always offer support, especially if it's on the grounds of no waters, especially if it's on the grounds of water quality, because fundamentally we are here for public health. So, please rest assured that if people get in contact with us, we are very serious about offering them support. Yeah. I think... I think to just come back before I invite you. I think the frustration that Dame Emily Thornberry is expressing there and the frustration for many of us in this room is that we have all had experience of our constituents telling us that the response and the communications from Thames Water when things go wrong is woefully inadequate. And we're going to be coming on to some of those a bit later on. That's the frustration. Water main bursts will happen. Water supply interruptions will happen. But it's about how you as a corporate organisation respond to that. And that's not a question of funding. It's about culture. Do you think, over the past two years, that there has been a change in culture? And how can you demonstrate that? Yeah, I mean, it's a really super important point. And I do agree with you. You know, communication is king here. I think we have improved in terms of communication. I think we showcase what happened at Pentaville Road as part of the presentation. But there's always more you can do and we recognise that. So I'm going to let Michael come in and talk about the wider issue. But in terms of the organisational change we're going through at the moment as part of our turnaround plan, I think we've recognised there's more that we need to do in terms of customer communication when things do go wrong. As you say, sadly, they do. So in terms of, I think we're quite good in terms of responding physically to the event. I knew Pentaville Road was a great example of that. I think we're quite good in terms of now. We weren't before, but I think we're better now in terms of making sure that we respond and support customers. I mentioned the accountants that we now supply to businesses. I think we are less good in terms of closing the loop, if I'm being absolutely honest and being completely transparent. So in terms of what do we do to make sure that it's actually fixed properly and actually that customers fully understand the loop closed and they're not left wondering. So part of the organisational change we're currently implementing is to fix that problem. But Michael, you probably want to. Yeah. So part of my job as well is I look at and help improve our communications during events or we call them incidents. So if I refer to incidents events, that's what we're referring to. When I started with a business, well, six, well, maybe seven years ago now, it's safe to say that our communications to incident was dreadful. There's no, there's no other word for it. And I'm sure that some of your, many of your residents will have had experience of that. Obviously, it was just before my time, but having, having read back on it. In the last couple of years, probably I think about three or four years ago, we introduced a completely new structure to our incidents. It's, I think it's quite a few organisations use it known as, it's kind of a tower structure. One of those towers is communications. And whereas before we didn't really out of hours really have anyone on, we now have a number of communications specialists on a rotor round the clock. Someone to sort out, make sure customer communications, our websites and text messages can go out. Someone to update yourselves, councillors and members of parliament for the area. Someone to field media questions, so we can get our message out, out that way. And that's, that was kind of largely what that is, largely run on a volunteer basis. So sometimes it doesn't quite work as, as we'd like it. It's certainly an improvement. I know during the Tollington Road burst two and a half years ago, speaking to some of the directors at the time quite regularly, actually said yes, things at the burst was not good, but actually you spoke to us, you told us what was happening. And I think during the Penton-Bill Road as well, I've certainly sent some emails out to councillors and update that. But as I say, a lot of it is run on a bit of a volunteer basis, people who care, people who go out, because they want to help. But we're now in the process of hiring more people, kind of on a full time. That will be their, their role to kind of oversee and manage communications during incidents, events, round, round the clock. To make sure that for some, that to us are the slightly smaller incidents, but for the customers impacted, it's just as big as a big one. To make sure we can have that consistent level of communications throughout. As, as Martin says, we can always improve. We are always striving for perfection. And after every incident, we do have, we call them wash ups, but we sit down, what lessons can we learn? How can we improve on this? And I think, I can say confidently that when it comes to communicating on the back of incidents, there has been a culture change, absolutely. I think just finally to close that out. People don't join and stay with Thames Water. For, well, I'll restart that. People join the industry because they care. I mentioned earlier about the emotional thing about water. Certainly the case for me, I could quite easily go and work somewhere else, but I stay because I care about the industry. So people that work for Thames Water do genuinely care. So I just wanted to make that point because I think it's often lost in the sort of maelstrom of bad news and talk about creditors, etc. But the people who actually run in the business do genuinely care. I think what I'm going to do, I know that Councillor Jagarrovis Armstrong has got a question specifically about communications, and then I'll bring you back in. Thank you, Chair, and thank you to your responses on incident responses. I'd like to stick with communications, but pivot to planned works. So, again, from our experience that we had a means that was being replaced, and for the Islington context where we have low traffic neighbourhoods and want to make sure that as many residents are informed, what kind of communications plans do you have that take that into account, the Islington nature? So, yeah, that falls slightly into my day job. So we do have a team of, for emergency works, we often can't, but for planned works, whose their role is to communicate with customers and to go out. And so, as a general rule, for most mains replacements, they'll send out a letter for the bigger ones like Pentaville Road. They'll do a drop-in session in advance. It's not always consistent. Sometimes there's not enough notice. We recognise that a letter a week before work starts saying we're going to be here for six months isn't particularly helpful. So, again, moving into the next amp, there's a lot of work being done on that. We're looking at bringing in people who can make, to really, what we brought someone in, specifically do that, to improve that, make sure that it's consistent, it's early where we can. But we're also looking to bring people in, or someone in, for a stakeholder role. So, what we also are not very good at, and I'd say we often don't give councillors yourselves enough, or sometimes any notice at all. So, to bring in a team. So, we come and talk to the councillor champion, well in advance of the works. This is our long-term plan. And then when we come closer to the work starting in your wards, we come and speak to you. And if there's a neighbourhood session, we'll come out and talk to businesses as well, to really start communicating. Because I think we do, as has been said here, we do a good job, or we do a much better job of replacing pipes. And we are seeing the benefits of that. But I think a lot of customers, as I'm sure you all know, just see us closing down roads with minimal notice. Yeah, I mean, I checked with my team, because I came to the last one of these in 2022, and I paid a lot of attention to that point. So, I went back to my team and made sure that we were doing more of that. And I went out and checked, I was really pleased to hear that we'd been on the 10th of December, the operational team. That's the operational team that run the network, but also the operational team that dig the road up. So, I'm more content than I was, but as Mike just said, there was more to do. Tim, did you want to make a point about culture? Yeah, I was just going to say, yeah. Sorry, just a finger, because it's still relevant. I will do so. I'm sorry. Sorry, no problem. Thank you. Just in regards to the letter, from our experience, is that it doesn't have enough reach to cover those who are actually affected by the works that are taking place. Again, whatever distance, I think it's like, you can tell us how far it kind of reaches out. It just doesn't encompass those residents who live in a specific type of neighbourhood. So, do you have any plans to kind of work maybe closer with the council to make sure that as many people as needed to do actually receive that letter? Yes, we can do. So, just so I understand your point, to feed it back, is essentially we'll send a letter to those on the street affected that we're digging on, but actually the neighbouring streets are affected by traffic and they're not getting letters. Okay, cool. Yeah, I didn't look at that. Because I think when we plan the work, we base that on people that we think are impacted on their water supply, but actually it's that wider area that's impacted by road closures and street works. And that's why I'll be coming to talk to you as water councillors in advance. You've got that local knowledge that perhaps, well, that we don't have. Thanks. I just want to add to what had been said about culture, and Martin's quite right that we do absolutely, deeply care about giving our customers a positive service. And I think, you know, irrespective of what we say, one external measure of that is how many times do our customers complain? And we look at that all the time, obviously. And I think one of the things that hopefully would give some confidence that things are moving in the right direction is that our customer complaints have reduced by about 20% year on year compared to last year. So that's definitely something we're focused on indication of things moving in the right direction. I'm going to come to councillors in a second, but I just want to, on the subject of culture, communications and complaints, just deal with something that a resident wrote to the committee about. I'll call her Janet. Janet may be familiar to some of you on this committee. And what she wrote was this. Mine is one story amongst many. In August last year, I reported a leak on the pavement outside my house. Thames Water said it was my responsibility, but several weeks and innumerable conversations later, they agreed it was their leak and repaired it accordingly. However, they also sent me a bill for £820 for the water used during the period and took the money despite saying they wouldn't. Trying to get that resolved was one of the worst experiences I have had with any company. The discussions took place via WhatsApp each time I had to start from scratch. I don't think that they read the correspondence properly and kept writing things like, get your leak fixed and don't worry about your account, you don't owe anything. No, because they'd taken £820. Eventually, weeks later, they credited my account. They don't do refunds, apparently. I know that I'm not unique, but there can't be many octogenarians who could manage this kind of discussion via WhatsApp. Somewhat to my shame, I got into a bit of a state about it. £800 hasn't dinted my account much, but there are many elderly people who aren't in that fortunate position. And it was their sheer incompetence, being polite, that was so stressful. This is the point around communications and culture. Every interaction matters. And the problem is that too often we, as councillors, hear these stories. Is it really the position that the culture has changed? I'll let Michael deal with the specifics of that case, which I don't have the details of, I have to say. Has the culture of the organisation changed? I've been here four years, I would say it's changed quite a lot. Has it got further to go? Absolutely, it's got further to go. No doubt about it. I think the, I mean, Tim mentioned a number of complaints. We have a measure also called customer satisfaction, it's called CSAT in the industry. And that has shown year and year improvements too. But these situations, these individual situations, as you say, cast quite a wide shadow over the company. And we take them very seriously. But Mike, do you want to comment on that? All I'd say is that we don't have the specific details of that case. But if someone, if you can or one of the officers can email me the details after, we will get that specifically looked into. That sounds outrageous, doesn't it? Let's face it. Ignoring what hat we're wearing at the moment as human beings, that sounds madness. So we'll get that looked into. Thank you. I'm going to take a round of questions from councillors. I'll take Councillor Ibrahim first. Yeah, so just on this point, I have a resident and I'm going to give you the prices of their last five bills. So it was £146, £100, £87, £88 and £109. So the range is from £87 to about £146. So it kind of ranges between that. In no changes of circumstances, they'd receive a bill in late October 24, early November, for about £790. I'm going to be honest enough and say, that person is my mother. And so I decided to call Thames Water. I said something clearly isn't right because, you know, roughly about £80 to about £140. They say, oh, there's probably, well, it looks like it's right. And so we argued the toss for a bit and they say, oh, actually, can you go outside and do a reading? And I said, well, I'm not actually with my mother and it won't be for a few days. And they said, well, she just needs to pay the bill. I didn't pay the bill. So they ended up saying, why can't you go? What are you doing? Aren't you not her son? And decided to berate me for, I think, to be a bad son and said, well, why? I said she's disabled. She can't read. She can't go outside. They said, well, what are you doing? I did not go and read it. I insisted that Thames Water come down. And Thames Water, I believe, are going to come down. I still have not received an updated bill. If I, and I'm going to say something on a very personal level, if I find myself in front of a bailiff because of Thames Water's failings, nor my mother, I'll be very disappointed. But what I want to speak to you is, and I didn't want to make this personal, but I didn't realise Janet was going to write in. I have personal experience because there's no way that we have gone from 88 to about 140 quid for five to six consecutive bills over a number of years, and it has now jumped up to 790 pounds. What could have caused this? I'll deal with the mechanics of it in terms of what could have caused it, and then we'll talk about the experience. So, normally in these situations, there's one of two things happening. So, on the basis of the metres at the boundary of the property, which I assume, let's assume it is, either there's a leak that has emerged on the, your mother's side of the property. So, that's between the, if you think about, I'll start again. If you think about the water mains, it comes in three parts. You've got the bit that's in the road. So, you've got the water main, and then you've got the connection from the water main to the property. The bit that's in the road up until the boundary of the property, that's terms of water's responsibility. Then you've got the bit that's from the property boundary to the entry to the actual building. That's the customer's responsibility. And then you've got the internal plumbing, which is obviously the customer's responsibility. So, on the basis that the metre is at the boundary of the property, one of two things will have happened. Either there's been a leak that's appeared on the underground bit of pipe between the boundary of the property and the entry to the property. That's usually the case in these situations. Or there's an internal plumbing issue. And they're more frequent than you might think, actually. So, it's, you know, if you look at the toilet, and I'm sure you've all seen it in the past, the toilet you see water cascading down the back. In the old days, I mean, I'm old enough to remember when all toilets had outside overflows. They don't, they just not like that anymore. They overflow into the bay, into the actual pan. And people don't really notice it. So, that can be a reason. It could be a leak within the property, a plumbing leak within the actual building itself. If normally, opposite pipes are under floorboards or under concrete floors. And that, they happen quite frequently. But those are the reasons that normally, in these situations. But in terms of, do you want to cover off in terms of the individual case? Yeah, I mean, I'm going to say the same thing again. If you email me directly, I'll get your case looked into and I'll get back to you personally on that one. If it is a leak, in turn, we do have a thing called the leakage allowance payment. So, there is, if it can be proved to leak, I don't know the full mechanics of how it works, but there is a mechanism where we can refund money if it is a leak. And if you get the details over to Mike. We will. And, but on a wider point, you are on a relatively privileged position of being on this committee, you can email me. That's, well, I'm not having my emails a particular privilege, but the point remains that it is still, I think there might be many people who aren't, haven't got that. So, we are sorry for that. And what I will do is I will feed all these cases back to the customer team and ask them to improve. And they're just finding, once you've done that, I'll get the leak detection team that we have to go and check. So, what the leak detection team will do, obviously they're out there looking for leaks on our mains or on the bit of pipe between the main and their property. But we also can, we've got a team that can look on the private side. So, we can look on the underground bit between the property boundary and the bit where it enters the house. If it's internal to the house, I'm afraid that is a plumber that needs to come and have a look at that. But we can certainly rule out that any leak on that underground bit. Depending on the size of the leak, we have a free leak repair if it's above a certain size. But the first step is to identify where it is. Can I just do a follow-up? Yeah, sorry. I'm using, I'm not here to, and I'll write to you. I'm not here to advance my personal case. I think there's two things that come, and I think it's around the comms. Firstly, what surprised me was, and I remember asking the terms of water, because it's about, let me ask my second question, which has infuriated me more. The customer service that I received was entirely poor. She, when I said to her, like, you know, surely you also understand, and this is the point I'll put to you in front of me, is that I just didn't, I couldn't understand why, and I think there's lots of residents who, and I'm going to Janet's case, and I'm going to go to my case, where this was an outlier. And so there's an issue with customer service, and I really do want you to look into that, because I, again, was not, I do not identify myself as a counsellor. I'm a resident. I'm born and bred in London, and so I think everyone deserves the same level of customer service. I just feel like she just seemed, she was out of order to ask me, what are you doing, why can't you go and do it, to go and look at and do a reading. And the reading is outside, not just the front door. There's a gate to the property, and it was outside, so very much not within the boundary of the property. So that's the first thing, and I would love to hear your thoughts around, just because it's not my experience. We see it in the media, and we see it in anecdotes time and again about poor customer service. But the other issue is around mechanisms, and she, because is there a way that we can identify something that is just such an outlier? So, for example, if someone was to get a, I'm just trying to give a random figure, a £5,000 thing, and often they're paying about 400 quid. Is there nothing within the Thames Water system that kind of alerts someone to it and say, actually, there's something wrong here, because it seems to be, obviously, some people might have high periods of usage and not. But I'm just saying to you, to go from, again, and I've got the figures in front of me, is kind of that 80 to about 140 quid. To go up to 800 is, there's something, like, for me, I found, I was dumbfounded to say, did no one, and she would say, oh, no, the bills are generated automatically. And so that's what I want to focus on, it was to say, actually, what are those chucks and balances in Thames Water, rather than what seemed like, you know, this automatic, because there's something wrong. And I'm sure, you know, you guys can't comment, but I'm, I'm, there's been no change of circumstances. We cannot have gone from 80 to 800 quid. But I just want to talk about those processes, because I just don't want, like what's happened to Janet, who ended up, you know, luckily, I've not put my mum on, given that this is, you know, something on a much smaller scale. We were billed for about 300 quid four years ago, and that ended up being a leak. But I'm worried about people like Janet, who automatically the money's taken, and it's about 800 quid. God forbid my mum had 800 quid debited for something when she's often paying about 80. So what are those checks and balances? And could we take that away and maybe look at that? Because that sounds really concerning. Yeah, I mean, if I'm honest with you, I'm equally concerned that there are checks and balances, and they've clearly not worked here. So I'll, I'll, I don't, I don't run the customer team, but I will make some inquiries in terms, and we'll take that as an action to go and do that. But I agree with you, that shouldn't have happened. We, you know, as Mike says earlier, we're sorry it did. It is completely unacceptable. Full stop. But we'll look into it, absolutely, because that shouldn't happen. There is a leak allowance, though. So we'll go and check Janet's thing. I mean, if you, if you send the details, we'll also check your mother's, if you send the details to Chewy, so we can establish where the leak is. But if it is a term, it is an internal matter. But there isn't a way to claw back some of that cash in terms of, if the people have the leak allowance thing. But yeah, we'll, we'll take that away. Yeah. Send me the details as well. Thank you. Councillor Heather. Thank you, Chair. Yeah, I'm Councillor Gary Heather, and I'm a councillor in Findry Park Ward. Been a councillor since 2014. Um, so I was a councillor and on this committee when the births of the, uh, you know, the trunk mains in the Angel, um, happened. And the Sobel, uh, one is quite near to where I live. So I'm a very aware, because of that, and the amount of time we spent scrutinising that issue, that cast iron, 36 inch cast iron mains, Victorian mains, are a problem. Councillor Jeep has already referred to them. We're aware like there are problems in the sense that they are old, they're cast iron, um, we've got temperature change, we've got possible ground movement, they can fracture. We're aware of that. We're also aware, because of the level of scrutiny we did with Thames Water, there were lots of them, and they're very difficult to replace in terms of cost, and also the amount of, uh, disruption it causes. So we're very aware of that. So what I'm also aware of though is, is that when we had those major births, the scrutiny also covered what were going to be the protective measures to protect Islet and Residents, and I'm specifically talking about Islet and Residents, talking about Islet and Residents, what can Thames Water do to protect those residents? And I remember the Angel one, there were quite some shortcomings with some of the issues, and I think that probably they've been, well I know there has been improvements. So what I'm thinking of is specifically three headings. Monitoring. You've already mentioned a lot of these things. Monitoring. So in terms of that, like, what's the level of staff in there? You know, what's the resource allocated to that? Um, what's the frequency? I mean, the diagnostics in, and you've also alluded to that as well, and I'm aware that new technology has been, uh, has been being used to improve that. Um, also wondering, you know, what development has been on that. And finally, and again this has been referred to, is if there is a catastrophic failure, which, it's not too, it's not too extreme to say that it can put life at risk. I remember the Angel one, the amount of water that came out of that main, and it went down straight through Camden Passage. And it did actually, could actually put people's life at risk who were living in those basement properties there. Um, but that aside, the amount of damage it causes, the amount of disruption it causes, is enormous. I guess really what my question is, I'm trying to formulate, well, I've got a question, is that there is a risk, you know, it's quite difficult to quantify it, but aside to that, it might be a low risk in that sense, but when it happens, it's enormous. So, the last point was about response times. I remember on, on the Angel one, was particularly response time was very slow. It was very slow indeed, which meant that because it had burst, that water was slowing all the time. I know that during that scrutiny, when we questioned Tennis Water, your actual operatives were not based locally, they were based quite a way out. I remember one of the things I actually put to that scrutiny, I'm not sure what's exactly what's happened, so I appreciate some feedback on this, is that I said, you need people, local, that can come and sort it. And I do appreciate what you said earlier, that some of that is about, because I remember, turning it off is not, not straightforward either. So, I know there's lots of problems. What I'm trying to say is, I'm actually saying this, because the reason, you know, I'm passionate about this, is because I did see the financial issues there are with Tennis Water, and I was concerned with this particular issue, that there is enough resources being put into this, to protect the residents of Islam. So, hopefully, that's enough for you to give me some answers. Thank you. I'm going to say to everybody, we've got about half an hour left. Crisp questions, crisp answers. Yes, thanks for that. I mean, you are right, it is a major issue. And there's, I think if we split it into how we respond and lock it in, so Paul will cover that one out. And then, Paul also, if you can cover off the investment and the plans, because I think that's an important part. But in terms of, if you talk about the response times first, which I think is the first thing, because as you say, there is definitely the potential for risk to life. I don't think anybody would argue with that. Thames is actually almost unique, you know, across the industry. I've been in the industry a long time, and I've never known this many large mains in such close proximity to people. I mean, the size of the mains we have in London are not particularly unusual. 36 inches sounds large across the industry. It's not massive, by the way. It's quite common to have mains 60, 70 inches in diameter. But they tend not to be direct next to people living in basements. And that's the unique bit of what we are dealing with. It's not an awful lot we can do about that, because we need the size of the mains to get water there, and people living in basements. So, we just have to manage that risk. But in terms of your question, in terms of response times, and also resources, I think I'd link to that. So, what we have done since the last time I came here in 2022, we've changed the way the organisation works in terms of the number of people available. So, the number of people that are able to respond. So, overnight, if something happens overnight, the previous approach was we'd call somebody up, they were on standby, we'd go and get them out of bed and go to size. Now, obviously, that's the time the water's running. What we now have in London, across the whole of London, is what we call night technicians. Again, the clue's in the name. They're out at night. So, we have people that are dedicated that just work nights now. And a big part of that is to do what you just said, to make sure they respond. Personally, having not really experienced this problem with large maintenance in such close proximity to people before I came here, I was quite surprised at the level of risk that we'd sort of come to accept. And it's not acceptable. When you look across the industry, it's not acceptable. So, what we've done as a result of that, and I guess I came here and I listened very carefully to what people said. We've actually put in a team of night technicians across North London and across South London too. So, they're not, we don't have to get them out of bed, because they're out. So, that's the response time thing. But, Paul, you maybe want to cover off how physically we lock it in and also... Yeah, sure. So, obviously, these are large mains and they will always have a pump at one end of them. And they will also have pressure points along the mains. They are all monitored and controlled 24-7 from our central control room. They don't just rely on someone looking at the screen. They've also got alarms as well, so that they attract the controller's attention should there be an issue. But when you look at the size of the mains themselves, you know, when they go, it is absolutely catastrophic. Pumps will be stopped. And where we have got remote control on valves and it's safe to operate, we will look at closing valves too. But the sheer volume of water that's in the trunk mains and the size of those trunk mains... Firstly, to close the valves typically take 2,000 turns. And you can't just turn up, run around in a circle and close it as fast as you can. Because if you do that, you call surge that then sends a body of water back in the opposite direction and most likely will cause another burst and another incident. So the technicians and the teams that are working and reacting to those situations are mindful of what they're trying to control and contain but also mindful that they don't create a second or third incident on the back of them trying to control it. With regards to investment, we want to do four times as much as we've done in previous amps. Trunk mains are modelled, they are monitored. We have a priority investment plan that we want to deliver. And hopefully once we've got through the process, we've offered what we've been in position where we can start doing that work. But trunk mains are one of those areas where we are absolutely on top of, equally concerned about because of the nature of where they are and the sheer body of water that's released when they burst. But they are absolutely monitored 24-7 and have that controlled room oversight as well as the teams that are available locally. Councilor Staff. Thank you very much for this. Councilor Heberstaff, Laycock Ward and Chair of Licensing. I'm going to ask this question alongside my colleagues from Barnsbury Ward. So my ward, Laycock Ward borders Offord Road where one of the major projects has just been undertaken. It's a very welcome project. I'm glad to say it's my section was able to be completed slightly ahead of schedule. So I'm very thankful for that because I can actually access my own flat. So I'm very thankful for this. It was a £1.8 million project. What I wanted to really get into was around is it on budget? Has it cost any additional costs with that? Are those costs also going to be borne by your customers, our residents? Or is that borne out in other ways? And my second part of that question, if I may, Chair, was mainly around the lessons learned from the Offord Road project. I thought it was additional in your plan. We've known for quite some time that there have been quite a few water bursts around there and also on Roman Way and Caledonian Road where my colleague from Caledonian Ward is as well. Why was it an additional part and not something that has been sort of or pre-planned in that sense? I remember sitting here in the committee in 2022 having discussions about where you've known there to be problems in the infrastructure but not being able to do anything about it. So why was it now that that project has undertaken? Are the costs of that £1.8 million going to be passed on at all to your customers or not? And what are your lessons from having completed this project? And can we get assurances that those pipes are fit for purpose and that we're not going to be back here, let's say, in another five or six years having the same discussions about major projects? And I do say it is very welcome that this was undertaken, but thank you. Yeah, I'll start then, Paul, to take over. So the Offord Road investment came as a result of me coming to this committee. So I listened very carefully to what people said and I had a conversation with Paul's predecessor as we walked out the building, actually. So that was a consequence, so we do listen, actually. In terms of is it on target on budget? Yes and yes. Is it borne by customers? Well, all investment ultimately is borne by customers. So strictly speaking, yes, but is it borne by extra charge to customers? No. It's paid for within the allowance. And as I said earlier, we've spent in this five year period £1.7 billion more than we were allowed to collect from customers. And we'll be spending £4 billion more in the next five year period. But Paul, you might want to cover any sort of journal. Yeah, I mean, just when you look at investment in the network that we've seen for this five year period, at the beginning of that five year period, we was offered an opportunity for an extra £300 million worth of investment. And that was part of customer bills. But that was only on the premise that shareholders matched that funding. So, £300 million from customers and then £300 million from shareholders. However, within the mechanism, when shareholders put extra funding in, the cost mechanism allows them to pass 25% of that back to customers. Which is why £300 million come from customers, but shareholders actually put in £400 to make sure that that wasn't reduced by that cost share mechanism. And because of that extra funding, that's what allowed us to be able to respond to situations like this. But, as we've said, you know, our ambitions to do more and more mains replacement is one we absolutely want to do. I completely understand the sentiment with regards to increasing bills. But the thing that we have to face into as an industry and as a society is that our water infrastructure is getting older faster than we're replacing it. And maybe we've all enjoyed previous generations investment, when now we've absolutely got to ramp up that investment, as painful as it is. If not, we'd be pushing it down the road to the next generation and a generation before. So, unfortunately, there is that conflict of we do need to replace many more mains. It does have to be paid for, but we really do need the support. Thanks, Paul. Dr Hyde. Thank you, Chair, and thanks for coming this evening and for sharing all the work that you have been doing. I'm kind of, this is really for other people to decide later, but I'm kind of like, oh, wow. We sometimes as a scrutiny committee make recommendations to the council, but I feel like there's some things that have come out tonight that we might recommend to you. Like, don't give people a credit note when you owe them 800 quid, put the money back in their account. So, maybe heads-wise and the mind can think about that, and whether perhaps you should come back in a year, because you are very reasonable people. And I'm sat here as a kind of academic and sociologist trying to triangulate the data you are giving me with the data I've heard from residents over the last few years. And some of this stuff, I'm having a tricky time. And so, I wonder if it might serve as for you to come back in a kind of set period, perhaps. Anyway, what I was going to say, apologies, Chair, I represent Caledonian Ward that did have part of Offord Road in it, that has Pentonville Road in it, that has the old school in York Way. You can see where I'm going with this in it. So, I've had maybe more experience than most of residents and businesses that have had a really tough time because of bursts or a lack of water. And this might seem like a small point, and having met you this evening, it feels very different to the presentation. Something I noticed in the 2022 presentation, there was an apology, and there was quite a lot of detail. And I was concerned coming here tonight. I would like a public apology, really, for the impact of those businesses in Pentonville Road. Now, it sounds like you dealt with it well and were responsive, but having been to some of those businesses, I've seen the devastation. I'm thinking, perhaps, of Bell & Viv, the cocktail bar that had to completely redo all the kind of loss of money, or the stress and the hassle. And I would like, I guess, an apology for our residents and to our businesses, and also just more reassurance from you that you really understand how it is for residents. It has really moved me to hear that you came in 2022, because that part of Offord Road that had those floods, there's a particular resident who I've dealt with before she went into a different ward, whose house I think has been flooded three times. And so it's really moved me that you heard that, and you have responded with action. And I think that's part of what we are interested in this evening, is, can you demonstrate to us that you understand, really, like, it's catastrophic for people when this happens. And for me, in the presentation, though, it was interesting, it was a little light on some of the human impact, which is, of course, what we as local councillors hear about the most, whilst understanding my colleagues have made brilliant technical points about 36-inch pipes. Yeah, I also remember the lady being flooded three times. It was actually a story that stuck with me. I actually spoke to her at length at the end of the meeting, too, and really listened to what she had to say. And I must do, not could do, not should do, must do. So absolutely, I completely get that. I do understand the devastation. I understand the risks we run. And we are very apologetic when we get things wrong, and I'm very happy to say we were sorry for what happened at Pentafil Row. It's not a problem at all, to say that. But I get it. It's, what we are trying to do, Paul and I, is get the investment right, to make sure that customers don't have to contact us, to make sure that customers don't have to experience the awful, awful devastation of water pouring through their homes. It's truly awful. I've been to myself to a customer's own experience. It's awful. So we're very sorry when it happens. We are trying to fix it as part of the current investment period. But yeah, completely, I'm very happy to say, we were sorry about Pentafil Row, and I'm very happy to say that we're trying to fix it. Thank you. And I had a question about how you learn and evaluate from what's happened. You've talked about the wash-ups you do, and perhaps if you come back to the committee again, a kind of slide about how you evaluate and learn from, because these things are so, they're life-changing for some people, and some businesses never recover. And we just want to be really assured that you're getting all the learning from that, so that when inevitably, I'm sorry to say, something else happens, that we can be rest assured that we're all on the same page and trying to not go around that mountain again. Thanks. Just one quick thing on the learnings is that I think, having, I say 2016 was before my time, but I think a lot of the businesses, rightfully, were very angry at how basically they were left by us to fend for themselves. And this is, I'm certainly not saying we did a great job, and hurrah, hurrah, hurrah, at Pentafil Road. As Martin said, we're very sorry in devastation. But I think the support that we've done for businesses is leaps and bounds. And the cocktail bar that you mentioned, I think we want, to our contractors, kind of helped them in the building to help them reopen, and not doing away from there the pain and the struggle they've had. But I hope that gets you, at least somewhat, that we now know we can't just walk away and say, well, we fixed the pipe, actually, there's the impact. Yeah, I completely agree. Going to bring the leader in, then Councillor Pandore. I'll then see if there's anybody in the room from the public who want to say anything, and then we'll see if we've got time for one or two very, very quickfire questions. Just a couple of points. So, Councillor Uno Hallorant, leader, representing Caledon Ward. I think my colleague said it. I still think, listening tonight, yes, if you've apologised, could do better. I'm really sorry, sitting here listening, to say to somebody you're privileged, you know, being a councillor, talking about his mother and a WhatsApp, people now, bills, people are going to pay for your mistakes. Councillor Clark made a really good point. People see water gushing out, gushing out, all the technology, why you can't collect it. You know, it's still shameless. So, if Council Greening hadn't held you to account, we had several meetings and committed room one, those businesses in Camden, it was so trauma, some of them never got over it. You've haggled on insurance and everything else. Yes, you've improved. Can we give assurance tonight for those people? You said complaints are down, but people can't get you on the phone. Will you commit to now, given the chair, so anybody's watching this now can contact you direct, because this is what we need. We're hearing from people that they can't get through to Thameswater, and it's still greed. I know some of you are only new to it, but you're still getting shareholders, and it's all about profit. Some people have had the gravy train and all this, and now, in the years to come, our residents are going to pay more money. Those prices, we heard it. You know, you can't treat people like this. You need to get on with your job. I'm sorry, we all were on that scrutiny. We know, I know more about pipes and things and that. It's horrendous. You know, and your presentation. Yes, I just felt, if I was watching this and I'm sitting at home, I want more action. You know, you cannot be going out and asking our residents to pay for your mistakes. The Victorians did a really good job, when you think about the pipes, you know, and they got on with it. You know, there's technology out there. You need to do better. We're here tonight to hold you to a can. Richard Greening said to you, we will call you back every time, and we will not keep our mouth shut. If you need to come back, we will go to the press. We will scream from the top. You heard from our MP, and I said, please, Councillor Hyder said it as best, people need to believe you. I sat here tonight and thought, hmm, but do I believe you? The Offered Road, you had to be called here. You had to see that woman. You had to see those families. We get the emails. We see the people. We see the humanity. We see the victims. Camden Passage, I speak to people. Some people have never got over it. So please, just take this away. Do better. Yeah, okay. I mean, sorry. Somebody else would say... I thought you were just going to ask questions. Sorry. Look, I agree with a lot of what you've said. I mean, I can't, as I always say... Will you give your phone numbers and your direct details to anybody that contacts us that they can contact? I know you're going to take the councillors for his mum and somebody else's, but we are a fairer borough, and it's about those people that couldn't get here tonight. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, yes, you can have my... I'm not going to announce it, but I'll give it to the chair. He's more than happy to give it to all members to pass on. Just for expectation, I don't have access to individual customer details. What do you mean by your... Email, you can't give my number. Well, can we give you a number? Yes or no? I mean, you're WhatsApp-ing people with these funny messages, so... You can give people my number, but no one here on this... The reason I'm saying that is we will have to pass it on because we don't have access to customer details. So we need to put... Because for a variety of GDPR reasons, if my laptop was stolen tonight, for example. But yes, give my details. Come on. Councillor Pandor. Hi, I'm Councillor Pandor. My ward is St Mary's and St James's, and I just want to talk briefly about the human devastation that I've been seeing for the past few months. And I'm really glad to hear that your culture is changing, but I really want to talk about your comms. And I echo what Councillor Ibrahim has said, and there's a lot of my residents that I've not been able to get through. And when they have got through, they are spoken down to, and your comms team are very, very rude to them. A lot of my residents, English is not their first language, so they have not been treated with sensitivity and the care that they deserve. And they have been given bills. They have very much the same, similar situation. And it gets to a situation where they read these letters, they're not sure what's going on, they feel that they've been summoned, they're getting a court order, they've paid, now they need to try and get their money back. And I meet these residents, and they don't live in St Mary's and St James's, they live in Finsbury Park. I go to the mosque, sisters come to me with these letters, and I'm trying to advocate for them to try and help them to get their money back and find out what has gone wrong. But what I want to talk about is that it's unacceptable that on the phone, your people are rude to our residents. It's not acceptable. And you're talking about your complaints have gone down. I want to talk about the residents who are not complaining, who don't have the confidence and the courage to pick up the phone and say that this is happening to me, because you're so damn right rude to them. So how are they supposed to advocate for themselves? And every single councillor that's sitting here, I'm sure they've been on the receiving end of this, and it's just not acceptable. People that English is not their first language, they are suffering. We are living in one of the richest countries in the world. Our bills have gone high. They're getting charged for their water bills, and then they're getting an expected bill of £300, £400, and they just can't pay it. So I want some insurances that you're going to sort out your comms and put your people on some training, because they really need to be polite to our residents. All we can really do is, as we said previously, that's unacceptable. Clearly, when you ring up Thames Water, you shouldn't have staff being rude, and they do need to be more sympathetic. We are aware that we cover everywhere from Gloucestershire to Kent, and there are many different languages and people with all different types of background to that. All I can do is, for now, is apologise. We will feed it back to the customer team, and perhaps when we say, someone said, if we can come back in a year, give us the invite, we will come back in a year and commit to that. Perhaps get someone from the customer team directly to kind of explain how the training works, how the system works. Because they're a little more closer to that, we're kind of more operational focused, but in a year, we'll get someone to come along to come and explain that. Because when our residents contact the council, our staff are trained on customer service, and we have resident experience, where our residents have a chance to talk about their experience of how they're treated by our council. And we monitor that, and we've made huge improvements, and you guys are like a multi-million company. And if you think about it, water is a natural resource, and we shouldn't be charged for it, but we have to be charged for it because of all the infrastructure. But if you think about water being a natural resource, and we're in parts of the world where you're just not getting clean water. People are dying because they're not getting water yet. We've got the water here, but people aren't being treated with respect. Yeah, we've heard you loud and clear. I'll feed that back to my opposite number that looks after the customer centre, and I'm very happy that we come back. I mean, in terms of inviting us back, we always turn up to these things. We don't have to drag us here. So I'm very happy. I'm sure my upper focus will come along too. Right, we've got ten minutes left in the meeting. I'm going to ask for hands up from any either members of the council or residents in the room who want to speak, who haven't spoken so far. OK, what I'm going to do, I'm going to bring Councillor Greening, a long time since Councillor Greening was Councillor Greening, Richard Greening, for some observations, and then we'll see where we are with the time. Thanks. Thanks, Chair. Richard Greening, formerly member for Highbury West, now Arsenal Ward. One of the recommendations we made in 2017 following the Angel Flood, and that Angel Flood was one of the eight floods that happened that autumn in different boroughs, all of which were from 19th century water mains. And we called upon Thames Water to ensure that the remaining water mains, Victorian ones, were replaced in 15 years from that port. Well, it was actually seven and a half years since it was reported, so I wonder how that's going. The target was set because there was a Victorian main replacement programme run from 2002 to 2013 that replaced around 30%. So we thought that 15 years was a challenging but nevertheless achievable target to stop the kinds of things we were seeing with Victorian mains. I suspect the Pentonville Road one is yet another one laid by Hugh Middleton's company that needed to be replaced some time ago. So where are we with replacing those mains, please? So just picking up on the Victoria mains, we did have a very successful Victoria mains replacement programme. And the challenges we faced with that is that the cost at that time of delivery versus when you start to see the benefits. And that's some of the discussions that we've been having with Ofwot, which is why we've now reached that point where we want to do four times as much in the next five-year period than we've done in the last five-year period. I'm more than happy that once we've got through that process to come and meet you and talk with you and take you through the actual work that we're going to be doing across Islington. But I do absolutely understand that we've got an ageing infrastructure. It's ageing faster than we're replacing it. And we've absolutely got to turn that corner and make sure we start replacing it faster than we are at the moment. But I'm more than happy to come back and take you through that detail once we've got through that period. OK, what I'm going to do, I've had three councillors who haven't spoken so far indicate that they want to speak. So I'm going to take each of you in turn and then final comments after they have spoken. So we're going to do it. Councillor Bosman-Kwaji, then Councillor Hayes, then Councillor Jackson. Please, no more than a minute each. We do need to get everything in. Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Team Thames Water, for coming in this evening. Councillor Bosman-Kwaji, Bunhill Ward, Islington South and Finsbury. I think everyone's kind of said their points. And I kind of want to hone in specifically about our businesses, the SMEs, and also related to transport. And I think there is a thing, maybe as a recommendation, I read the report. And you said, for example, the council need to put, I think it was 350 extra bags or something from the previous report, you know, in terms of in certain spaces to, you know, soak up the water. I think that's out of date now because I've heard the committee talk about, you know, the excess of water that we're getting. And we're not recycling water and we've had a lot of, you know, heavy rain, et cetera. So I'm just wondering what is your maybe three main targets in terms of working with our amazing council officers from the environment to safeguard not just the businesses, but also those that live on council estates. I think they're not often a part of these conversations. So it's about how they move around the borough and also where the drains are that are not often, they're not working. So you get a clog up and, you know, people are being splashed by passing vehicles. I can take for a ward walk about, you're welcome. But I just think there's a lot of, you know, spots and I always go to Council Arena, so an important record also, Chair if I may, about the amazing work that Council Arena is doing with her team because whenever I contact her about the drains and local businesses, she's always just there on the call, which I'd like to have the same relationship with you for residents and local businesses in Bunhill. Thank you. Thank you very much, Councillor Hayes from Clerkenwell Ward. It was interesting in the presentation that you were talking about meaningful support for residents with bills, and we appreciate that, you know, and colleagues have highlighted the cost of living crisis for people. I'd hope that the fact that Islington's got 16% rather than 10% the average of people getting that support might reflect the work of our IMAX team and our independent advice agencies in making sure people are getting the means-tested benefits that they should. But we've also got a lot of residents with extremely high private rental costs, whose residual incomes are very low and who are facing, as you've highlighted, you know, not only increases in the cost of water but other utilities. Will there be provision for people who are maybe not getting means-tested benefits but are nonetheless at the sharp end of what's happening? And could you come back to the point that Councillor Ibrahim made, or it might have been in the example from Janet, that where there's a very high payment taken, that that is not refunded, it's just a credit on the account. There is a massive cost to people in being without money to which they are entitled, and they are then paying interest on everything they're paying fines, they're paying overdraft costs. So the true cost to them is very much higher. And could you just give us an update? Thank you. Thanks, Chair. I'm keen to understand a little bit around the culture part. And I think it's important, because a lot of this is around, from what all councillors are saying, there's a lot around culture in terms of delivery or how residents are sort of dealt with. I think you wanted to say a little bit on it, but I would like to know what you've done since the last time you've been here to change the culture in terms of the workings of how you respond to things. And finally, and this is just speaking as every other resident across the country, if Thameswater was to go into administration, how would that affect us here in East Linton? Very pertinent in the light of some rumours tonight. Can I suggest that Tim, you go answer the flooding question first, please? Just in terms of the way that the responsibilities work, Thameswater are clearly responsible for the flowing of the drains and the flowing of the stormwater drains. But the actual clearing of the road gullies is normally a council responsibility. But if there are specific flooding hotspots that we're having problems where residents are struggling, in general, Islington isn't a borough that has a significant number of hydraulic flooding issues. But I'm absolutely willing to give my email address and we can work together if there are specific hotspots that we're not aware of to see if we can resolve those things for customers. Okay. Bill support. In terms of the criteria, I confess not to being an expert on the criteria, but I think I'm right in saying it's 5%, if the water goes 5% of the residual of people's income. I think I'm right in saying that. But if you provide detail to Michael. If it goes through the chair, give me just the details and we can get back on precisely what the criteria are. I confess not to being an expert in that space. In terms of the culture place, we've put all of our front-facing customer people in my team, which is the water team that runs the network and also the treatment works through customer experience training to make sure that they are more respectful, to use the phrase that was used earlier, and more understanding when they deal with customers. It's when I look at the customer response in terms of their satisfaction with people they interact with from my own team, which is the water team, I see very good scores as a result of that programme. Is that enough? I think I've already said it's not. I think I've already said there's more to do. Last question, that if Thames went into administration... Oh, sorry, I can't say if you wanted to answer. I was going to say it will have absolutely no impact on the residents of this Linton at all. Business will carry on as normal, and it's exactly the same message that we give to all of our teams and all of our supply chains. What we do every day is essential to life, it's essential to our economy, it's essential to society. That won't change, that won't stop. The only thing I would add to that, so that's the operational part of what we do. In terms of the investment, if it went into administration and remained in administration for some time, then that's a different situation. If we were nationalised tomorrow, and as I always say, the ownership of the company is a matter for politicians, not the company. If it was nationalised tomorrow, it would be up against the same list of priorities the government has. I joined the industry just post-privatisation, and what I would say is it was not in a great state, actually. It was in a fairly poor state, having been nationalised for so long. I'm not saying that's the right thing, it's a matter for politicians, not what the ownership structure of the company is. But in terms of the, would water continue to flow the day after? Yes, it would. Would we get all the investment? That's the question, I think, that would be a matter for politicians. Well, thank you for those answers. I'm just going to turn to Councillor Clarke, as my co-chair, as to whether you have any final observations before I make a few concluding comments. Thank you. Well, really, thank you very, very much. You've really done well. You've taken all the questions. I would just like to say, 30 years after privatisation, to be told that the reservoirs are too small to collect rainwater for a growing population of London is very disappointing. I hear you're building another reservoir in Oxfordshire. To be extracting water from Wales and aquifers and all that, it's just really disappointing. But, you know, I know that it's a bigger issue, but really, really appreciate that. And I echo the councillors that are asking for you to come back in a year and let's hear how things are going. Thank you very much. And on that, I very much hope that in a year's time, you will be prepared to come back. We appreciate that facing these questions isn't easy. And we're extremely grateful as a committee for the time that you have taken tonight and the care that you have taken tonight in preparing for the meeting and answering the questions. I know that there were some public questions and also some questions from committee members that we weren't able to cover off tonight. What I'm going to ask my fellow committee members is, can you get those questions over to me? And I'm going to say by this time next week. And then, at least that way, you have a cut-off point and we'll get the questions over to you. And because they will be, I suppose, formal questions, we will incorporate them, if we can, into any formal write-up of the meeting. I think you've heard loud and clear the concerns of the committee. What I hope we will hear in 12 months' time is really evidence that you've taken on board what has been said tonight. Of course, we don't hear about the positive interactions that residents have with Thames Water. We only hear about the bad experiences, but I think where we want to be next year is hearing about positive experiences, positive interactions, good communications, and hopefully a programme of works in Islington that will provide the reassurance that Islington residents deserve that their water supply will continue for the foreseeable future and into the next generation. So, on behalf of the committee, thank you all once again for coming tonight. And can I thank all of the officers and the committee members for everything that they have contributed tonight? I'm just going to check with Emma. Is there anything else I need formally to do other than close the meeting? In which case, I close the meeting. Can I just say thank you on our behalf? I personally get a lot of value out of these sessions, and I know people give up their own time as well to come to attend them. So, thank you very much. I'm always very happy to come here. Thank you.