Key facts
- Water company chief executives and chief financial officers received a total of £25.3m in the past year, a 1.5% increase.
- Louise Beardmore of United Utilities received £2.5m, an increase of £1.1m from the previous year.
- Mark Thurston of Anglian Water received £1.9m, which included a £500,000 "retention payment".
- Companies are reportedly using various payment structures, such as "retention payments" and "annual allowances", to bypass a government bonus ban.
- The bonus ban, introduced in 2025, applies retrospectively to companies responsible for serious pollution or financial failings.
Water company executives' total pay has risen over the past year, despite a government ban on bonuses and significant public criticism regarding sewage pollution and rising bills. Analysis of 14 water companies serving most of England and Wales revealed that overall reported pay packets for chief executives and chief financial officers increased by 1.5% to £25.3 million.
Louise Beardmore, chief executive of United Utilities, received the largest package at £2.5 million, an increase of £1.1 million from the previous year. Mark Thurston, chief executive of Anglian Water, was paid £1.9 million, which included a £500,000 "retention payment" despite the bonus ban. Companies are reportedly using various payment structures, such as "retention payments" and "annual allowances" not directly linked to performance, to circumvent the ban.
This revelation has intensified pressure on figures like Andy Burnham, Mayor of Greater Manchester, who advocates for greater public control over the water industry. Adrian Ramsay, a Green party MP, echoed calls for water to be brought back into public ownership to redirect funds from executive pay and shareholder profits back into the system.
Water company pay has been under scrutiny due to persistent sewage dumping. While companies have been allowed to raise bills for necessary investments, executive remuneration continues to rise. Eight companies anticipate being subject to the bonus ban for 2025-26, which applies retrospectively to those responsible for serious pollution or financial failures. However, the High Pay Centre has questioned the effectiveness of the current measures, suggesting that restricting bonuses is insufficient if overall pay levels remain high through other means.
Defending the payments, companies argue that certain awards are funded by shareholders for work outside the regulated company or are necessary "retention arrangements" to maintain leadership continuity. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has stated that any attempt to circumvent the bonus rules is unacceptable and that they will ensure bonuses are only paid for delivering environmental and customer outcomes.