Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Push the boat out on Scottish Water's future

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 08 October 2009
AS THE frantic negotiations over the next Scottish budget hot up over the winter, the future of Scottish Water also looks set to come to the boil as MSPs search for savings.
The status of Scottish Water – Britain's last public-sector water supplier – has been the subject of a long-running debate. Conservative and Liberal Democrat MSPs have been pushing for it to be taken out of the public sector.

So far the SNP admi
nistration, and its Labour-led predecessor, have resisted the calls during previous budgets – though mainly on ideological, not cost grounds. The idea is that water as a basic commodity should remain in public ownership and that this leads to cheaper bills for customers.

Even the Conservative government which privatised most water firms in 1989 was unwilling to tackle the Scottish consensus over public ownership – partly, it was suspected, because of the fallout over the poll tax coming north of the Border first.

But this year's budget has brought a new urgency to the debate because Scotland and the wider UK are now entering what expert economists are describing as "an age of austerity".

Professor David Bell of Stirling University, an adviser to Holyrood's finance committee, recently said that £2 billion of savings would be required from the Scottish budget by 2014.

This has put Liberal Democrat and Conservative plans to mutualise Scottish Water back into the spotlight.

Both parties estimate that while such a move would not wholly privatise the organisation, the saving would be worth £150 million a year to the Scottish budget. This would be enough to build the Glasgow Airport Rail Link, which, for a saving of £100 million, is due to be ditched in the 2010-11 budget if the SNP finance secretary John Swinney gets his way.

The argument over mutualisation is that it is not a quick fix for savings – if ministers agreed to do it now, the savings could not come before 2011-12.

However, Liberal Democrat finance spokesman Jeremy Purvis believes he has a short-term measure as well: he wants Holyrood ministers to consent to Scottish Water borrowing or issuing a bond to raise finance for investment.

The approach would also require discussions between the Scottish Government and the Treasury, but together they can deliver a more flexible approach to financing the body than the current traditional borrowing from the Scottish budget.

Mr Purvis said: "For the coming year this equates to £150m locked away for supported borrowing (not grant) in the draft budget. Such an approach would not require statutory change to mutualise the body as this would take at least over a year.

"We would go much further now, however. We would ensure that Scottish Water operates better in three ways: in investment, energy and services."

In the last fully agreed year, £181.8m for 2009-10 was borrowed by Scottish Water from the Scottish Government with a 5.83 per cent interest rate for 17.2 years.

Mr Purvis also notes that it can raise funds by issuing a bond from a commercial bank, to be used towards its investment programme, specifically its renewable energy projects. According to Mr Purvis, the interest rate would typically be in excess of gilt yields by 0.385 per cent to 0.5 per cent.

Mr Purvis also wants to find new ways of reducing the organisation's expenditure. Among his proposals for the forthcoming year, he notes that Scottish Water is the country's biggest consumer of power, with an annual bill of between £40m and £50m.

And he wants Scottish Water Horizons (a commercial subsidiary of Scottish Water) to be given greater powers to provide energy for their water and waste water treatment sites by building renewable energy sources, such as turbines on them. Scottish Water Horizons is currently working with Scottish & Southern Energy to develop a project for 60 three-megawatt turbines.

Meanwhile, the Scottish Conservatives are continuing to push for de-nationalisation of state-owned Scottish Water to allow it to borrow to invest on the open markets.

The party prefers the Welsh Water mutualised model, which has been operated on a not-for-profit basis since its takeover by Glas Cymru in 2001, and has no shareholders or share capital.

It also receives no subsidy from the taxpayer, and instead returns a dividend to its customers – £20 in 2007-8.

Murdo Fraser, the Scottish Conservatives' deputy leader, is convinced that his party's plan would not just save money but also be the basis of better service for customers.

"As a nationalised monopoly, Scottish Water misallocates resources, is immune from competition and overcharges its customers," he said. "If Scottish Water is to deliver the safe, high-quality service that the public deserves, and if it is to attract the investment needed, then it must be taken out of state control."

However, despite these proposals to save taxpayers hundreds of millions of pounds and budget pressures on future expenditure, the SNP Scottish Government is still currently resisting any attempt to change the status of Scottish Water.

A Scottish Government spokesman pointed out that, as things stand, Scotland has the lowest average water bills of anywhere in the UK.

"The Scottish Government believes that the public ownership model offers customers the best value for money," he added. "We see no reason to change the current arrangements."

However, there are now an increasing number of voices within the industry who believe that change is on its way. In particular it is believed that money in the block grant from Westminster to support Scottish Water may at some point dry up because there are no Barnett Formula consequentials for England when it comes to water.

The case for reform has been recognised by many commentators, including the chairman of the Water Industry Commission, Sir Ian Byatt; Jo Armstrong, a former policy adviser to the First Minister under Labour; former Labour environment minister Sam Galbraith and leading economists David Bell and Donald MacKay.

And in a recent interview the former chairman of Scottish Water, Alan Alexander, said: "I would advise finding a way to make it possible for Scottish Water to maintain its drive towards efficiency without drawing money from the public purse."

He went on: "I think this is an industry which can be financed in a different way. There are other parts of the public sector which need to be financed from taxation income. Scottish Water doesn't."

But Gary Womersley of Waterwatch Scotland, a body that represents consumers, said that politicians would do better concentrating on what was best for consumers rather than how Scottish Water is run.

"Priorities of consumers and improving the service must come first," he said.





Page 1 of 1

 
1

McNic,

A soon to be Free and Pleasant Land 08/10/2009 06:32:23
Hands-Off!
2

McNasty,

Edinburgh 08/10/2009 07:07:08
#1 Quite right.
3

portonian,

scotland 08/10/2009 08:18:33
in a time of climatic change water might just be the next oil bonanza if we sell the product to foreign countries make them pay. this includes england. don't end up with giving away control to the french or english for a short term gain as we did in the case of oil when the money and the jobs moved out of the country
4

TWC,

exLabour 08/10/2009 08:20:14
Slab & SNP need to stay together on this. Water in Scotland is like Mana from heaven.

If we de nationalise it the French or the gGermans will own it in 5 years.

It doesn't mater where we send it it comes right back to us. The Country should always own 51% plus by Scottish law preferably 100%.
5

TheDisplacedGlaswegian,

Edinburgh 08/10/2009 09:17:04
#3 One day, fresh water will be our most important resource . Anyone who forces the sale of Scottish Water to some rich investors (who will then hold us to ransom before cashing in and selling on to some foreign company) will never be forgiven. We should strongly resist this move as we should have resisted our once publicly owned energy companies being sold off.
6

Chris,

Edinburgh 08/10/2009 09:34:09
You only have to look at cases in England where private water companies were given 'ownership' of the water in rivers and streams to realise that this is unacceptable. Thames Water was one of the worst culprits, draining small rivers into dried-up beds in their quest for more water, yet remaining unaccountable because they, under Thatcher's legislation, owned the water. What next? Will the own the rain?
7

watcher,

edinburgh 08/10/2009 11:36:03
Is it not managed by Thames water?
8

Warden Resurrected,

The Nationalist Republic of Scotoma 08/10/2009 11:38:04
Note no nationalist here talking about the £2.4 Billion Scottish Water will be spending on development costs. This is because it can be noted some of this money could be used on areas, think new forth Bridge.
9

Wee Fifer,

Edinburgh 08/10/2009 12:55:52
Paws off Scottish Water!! Find savings elsewhere, end of story.
10

billalba,

fife 08/10/2009 13:24:54
note to unionists on here...remember Gas - prices rise, Electricity - prices rise, BT - prices rise that is what happens when you give your resources to private institutions - we will not be following England with their private water companies always trying to get as much profit as they can to the detriment of the users.
11

portonian,

scotland 08/10/2009 15:45:05
control must be kept for the scottish people and any excess water sold as a commodity to the highest bidder
this includes our unionist friends if they want it. I don't want to return to earth in another hundred years and find we as a nation have wasted another resource.

technology and skills obtained from our other resources
wave and wind power should also be retained as scottish jobs and as assets for future generations. we have not been smart as a nation in retaining our inventions but we have perhaps a last chance to make it happen to our advantage this time don't fail the our
children.
12

TWC,

exLabour 08/10/2009 16:25:24
Hands off Scottish Water
13

Eve,

Scotland 08/10/2009 16:26:51
#1 McNic, 2 McNasty & 9 Wee Fifer: So true, natural resourses should belong to the country that they resided in NOT sold off radomly for short term proffit.

Hands off Scottish Water, Privatsaiton would be a majour and costly mistake.

Long term gain over short term proffit.
14

mr broon,

Edinburgh 08/10/2009 19:22:27
Scottish Water is one of the country's last large nationalised companies which the Scots Tories and their lobby goup Reform Scotland are desperate to
privatise for profit.

However, the minority Scots Tory Party is forgetting something: It's candidates must first be elected in sufficient numbers to the Scottish Parliament before it can gain control of the Scottish Government?


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Today's Vote

Given the recent gradings, would you swim off Lothian’s beaches?
No, I’d be scared of catching something nasty
No, the water is far too cold for my liking
Yes, I think the beaches are perfectly safe

Web Links:



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.