Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Water Company Executives: Undisclosed Payments

Thursday 5 February 2026 · 2 questions

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Answered 0 Partly answered 1 Not answered 0

Key points

  • The Guardian reported that the chief executive officer and chief financial officer of Wessex Water received around 50,000 in undisclosed payments from a parent company.
  • Welsh Water's chief executive has one of the highest paid jobs in Wales at almost 900,000 a year, and the company is increasing basic pay to circumvent the Government's crackdown on executive bonuses.
  • The Government have already banned more than 4 million in unfair bonuses, blocked by Ofwat for 2024-25.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Lloyd Hatton Lab South Dorset
Environment
Context

The Guardian reported that the chief executive and CFO of Wessex Water received around £50,000 in undisclosed payments from a parent company. This occurred just weeks after a former Wessex Water boss was given a £170,000 payment from the same parent company, despite a ban on bonuses.

Question

Just last month, The Guardian reported that the chief executive officer and chief financial officer of Wessex Water received around £50,000 in undisclosed payments from a parent company. Just weeks before, it was reported that a former Wessex Water boss was handed a whopping £170,000—again from a parent company. With all that in mind, does the Minister agree that if bonuses can simply be rebadged as extra payment from parent companies, we must urgently toughen up the bonuses ban so that we can finally hold failing water company bosses to account?

Answer from The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Emma Hardy)

This situation baffles me. It seems simple to me that bonuses should reflect performance, and if performance is not good enough, people should not get a bonus. I am not sure why that seems so difficult to understand. It is not just about the letter of the law, but about the spirit of the law. Ofwat has exposed serious transparency failings across the water sector, and we are therefore tightening transparency rules to shut down any attempt to dodge the bonus ban.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The Minister did not provide a concrete plan or timeline for toughening up the bonuses ban.

How: It Is Not Just About The Letter Of The Law, But About The Spirit Of The Law.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q2 David Chadwick Lib Dem Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe
Energy Environment
Context

Welsh Water's chief executive has one of the highest paid jobs in Wales at almost £900,000 a year. The company is hiking basic pay to circumvent the government’s crackdown on executive bonuses despite facing issues like sewage dumping and leaks.

Question

Welsh Water’s chief executive has one of the highest paid jobs in Wales at almost £900,000 a year, and the company is hiking basic pay to get around the Government’s crackdown on executive bonuses, despite being a not-for-profit. That is even though Welsh Water presides over some of the worst sewage dumping and leaks in the UK and sky-high price rises. Will the Minister look into companies trying to bypass the new regulations in that way and ensure that those loopholes are closed?

Answer from The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Emma Hardy)

With respect, I think the hon. Gentleman has just made the case for why mutualising water companies is not the answer on performance. This Government have already banned more than £4 million in unfair bonuses, which have been blocked by Ofwat for 2024-25.

Not addressed: The Minister did not address the issue of investigating pay hikes to circumvent bonus bans.

How: With Respect, I Think The Hon. Gentleman Has Just Made The Case For Why Mutualising Water Companies Is Not The Answer On Performance.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)