Speeches by Dollimore.

“It was very clearly taking form in the 4 November meeting. Ian has just said that he would never wish to do anything that circumvented a law, and you gave an undertaking to your board colleagues that you would go and check that with Ofwat. But the reality is that you did not do that for seven months.”

“On this point about the importance of retaining the senior management team versus the importance of retaining the junior frontline staff doing the work of fixing the pipes, the remuneration committee minutes contain a reference to concern about the welfare of senior staff. Have there been any discussions at the remuner…”

“They do not feel that way. Actually, the impact of the evidence session last time was dismay and disbelief. It did not motivate the people they represent.”

“You have spoken about that, and that will be in your submissions to the Independent Water Commission.”

“The people who live outside London will probably feel they are quite important and essential to fix too.”

“If you have not taken that decision as a board, why are you lobbying the Government for that as Thames Water?”

“Can you define regulatory easements? We are talking about fines being cancelled.”

“So is it the creditors who are lobbying the Government?”

“You do not think it is sustainable? We are talking about a £17 billion deal and between £1 billion and £1.4 billion in fines.”

“It makes no difference to the creditors?”

“Thames is lobbying Government for a smaller haircut for its creditors and being let off these fines. That is quite clear.”

“You have said in your accounts that were published this morning that you expect it will take 10 years to fix sewage dumping in the Thames. Are you asking to be let off the hook for 10 years as part of this regulatory reset?”

“You have just spent an hour outlining that process, and we are not going to go back into it now, but it was very unclear how you decided to proceed.”

“We do not actually know that they would not invest because you have been very limited in the bids that you have proceeded with. It has not been an open process with others who wanted to take part in the process. I just do not think this stacks up.”

“They would still be making a return; it would just be less.”

“Why do you not just get the extra from the creditors? Why do they not just take a bigger haircut?”

“Whether we are talking about fines or penalties is slightly beside the point here. Thames is asking for a carve-out, to be let off the hook for penalties or fines that are due, and people will find it very hard to understand why you should be given that exception. It appears you are also calling for that for the entire…”

“If you are asking for carve-outs to the rules that say you need to fix certain pipes by certain deadlines, how is that going to fix those pipes any quicker?”

“Can you let me finish? Is Thames not effectively holding a gun to the Government and the taxpayer’s head? it is basically saying, “You’ve got to let us off these fines or you’ll have a special administration regime.””

“Are you only allowed to raise bills on the basis of meeting those targets?”