Thames Water has been on the brink of collapse for more than a year, struggling under the weight of £17bn in net debt, built up over decades since privatisation. Photograph: Jill Mead/The Guardian
Debt-ridden utility company warns of ‘material uncertainty’ despite seeing profits rise to more than £400m
Thames Water has said crisis talks to secure its future with lenders are taking “longer than expected” and will drag into 2026 as it faces the prospect of a collapse into government control.
Britain’s biggest water company on Wednesday said it had swung to a profit of £414m for the six months to September helped by bills rising by nearly a third, after losing £149m in the same period in 2024.
Despite the jump in reported profits, the company said there was “material uncertainty which may cast significant doubt” on its status as a going concern. A collapse into government control under a special administration regime (SAR) – a form of temporary nationalisation – “could occur in the very near term” if it is unable to agree the terms of a formal takeover by its controlling lenders.
Those creditors have asked the regulator, Ofwat, and the government for Thames to be let off future fines for pollution, arguing the prospect of hundreds of millions of pounds of extra costs is making a turnaround impossible.
The standoff has already continued for months longer than originally anticipated and the talks were expected to have concluded by the end of the year.
On Wednesday, the company said: “Discussions are taking longer than expected but this is a complex situation and the current phase of the restructuring plan will likely take a number of months to conclude.”
Green Party MP for Brighton Pavilion Siân Berry. Image by Kelly Hill, Wikimedia CC BY-SA 4.0.
Responding to the announcement from the Justice Secretary, David Lammy, that jury trials in England and Wales for crimes that carry a likely sentence of less than three years are set to be scrapped, Green Party MP, Siân Berry, said:
“The focus on victims’ rights is appreciated, but this Labour Government is taking the wrong steps to try to serve us better, and laying the groundwork for further crackdowns on dissent, whistleblowing and protest if it removes juries from so many charges that have state or corporate victims.
“Juries are also a safeguard against creeping bias and discrimination. Judges are not currently representative of our wider communities and, under these plans, individual decisions will be at risk of damaging politicisation, while individual judges who are women or from minoritised communities risk attacks from the far right.
“More than fifteen years of continuing austerity has caused a backlog in the courts, not juries. Instead of dismantling a centuries-old fundamental legal right, the Government must reverse the neglect and cuts that created this mess in the first place.”
The justice secretary, David Lammy, has backed down on previous plans to permit jury trials only for cases carrying sentences of five years. Photograph: House of Commons/PA
Only cases such as murder and rape or offences carrying sentence longer than three years would face jury under plans
David Lammy has been accused of making a “massive mistake” by Labour MPs and peers after announcing radical plans to cut thousands of jury trials across England and Wales.
Defendants will no longer have the option to choose to have their cases heard before a jury, the justice secretary told the Commons. Magistrates’ powers will be extended from dealing with maximum sentences of one year to at least 18 months, he said, and a new judge-led court will be established.
The deputy prime minister has backed down on plans to remove jury trials for all cases involving a maximum jail term of five years after an outcry from MPs, lawyers and campaigners.
…
The move means defendants accused of burglary, theft, fraud, sexual assault, stalking, sharing indecent images, drug dealing and criminal damage up to £10,000 could be denied the right to put their case to a jury.
…
Labour MPs said the changes would make it harder for defendants and may not reduce the backlog.
Stella Creasy, the MP for Walthamstow, said jury trials only accounted for 3% of cases, asking how much difference curbing them would make. “It’s hard to see how this measure … will address that backlog,” she said.
Clive Efford, the MP for Eltham and Chislehurst and a leading member of the Tribune group, said it could penalise working-class defendants and could lead to an “us-and-them in the criminal justice system”.
Richard Burgon, the left-leaning MP for Leeds East, said the policy sent “a chill through my heart”, and compared it to policies enacted by the Russian president, Vladimir Putin.
Orcas discuss Donald Trump and the killer apes’ concept of democracy. Front Orca warns that Trump is crashing his country’s economy and that everything he does he does for the fantastically wealthy.UK Labour Party Foreign Secretary David Lammy repeatedly heckled at a speech to the Fabian Society over his and the Labour Party’s support for and complicity in Israel’s genocide of Gaza.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth attends a cabinet meeting with President Donald Trump at the White House in Washington, DC on December 2, 2025. (Photo by Carolyn Van Houten/The Washington Post via Getty Images)
According to the official filing, Trump’s Defense Secretary “has admitted that he gave such orders despite the fact that he did not know the identity of those being targeted for these bombings and extra-judicial killings.”
The family of Colombian fisherman Alejandro Carranza Medina, believed killed by the US military in a boat bombing in the Caribbean Sea on Sept. 15, has filed a formal complaint with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights accusing US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth of murder over the unlawful attack.
“From numerous news reports, we know that [Hegseth] was responsible for ordering the bombing of boats like those of Alejandro Carranza and the murder of all those on such boats,” reads the petition, filed Tuesday on behalf of Carranza’s family by Dan Kovalik, a human rights attorney based in Pittsburgh.
“Secretary Hegseth,” the petition continues, “has admitted that he gave such orders despite the fact that he did not know the identity of those being targeted for these bombings and extra-judicial killings.”
The complaint also notes that President Donald Trump, the commander in chief of the US military, “ratified the conduct of Secretary Hegseth described herein.”
First reported on by The Guardian, the filing of the petition with the IACHR—an autonomous body under the charter of Organization of American States (OAS) designed to uphold human rights in the Western Hemisphere—could result in the initiation of an investigation and the release of findings about the bombing that took the life of Carranza and two other individuals believed to be aboard the vessel.
The petition, the outlet noted, “marks the first formal complaint over the airstrikes by the Trump administration against suspected drug boats, attacks that the White House says are justified under a novel interpretation of law.” Experts in international human rights law have stated from the outset that the administration’s justifications lack legal basis and that the attacks constitute unlawful criminal acts.
According to The Guardian:
Carranza, 42, appears to have been killed in the second strike of the Trump administration’s bombing campaign, on 15 September. The administration has publicly disclosed 21 strikes on alleged drug boats. Carranza’s family says he was a fisher who would often set out in search of marlin and tuna.
On the day of the strike, Trump announced on his Truth Social platform that “This morning, on my Orders, US Military Forces conducted a SECOND Kinetic Strike against positively identified, extraordinarily violent drug trafficking cartels and narcoterrorists in the SOUTHCOM area of responsibility”. Trump attached video marked “unclassified” of a small boat floating in the water before it was struck.
Both Hegseth, the highest-ranked civilian at the Pentagon, and Trump have been under growing scrutiny for the series of boat bombings that have resulted in the extrajudicial killing of over 80 people since September. Experts have said the killings should be seen as “murder, plain and simple.”
New revelations about a strike on Sept. 2, in which two survivors of an initial bombing were later killed as they clung to the exploded boat on which they were traveling, has evelated that concern in Washington, DC this week with lawmakers seeking answers about the attack which, even if one accepted the legality of the initial strike under the construct the Trump administration has tried to claim, would constitute a clear human rights violation amounting to a war crime.
In an interview with Agence France-Presse in October, Katerine Hernandez, Carranza’s wife in Colombia, said her husband was “a good man” devoted to fishing and providing for his family. “Why did they just take his life like that?” she asked.
Hernandez denies that Carranza was involved in drug trafficking, as Trump and Hegseth have alleged without providing evidence, but also suggested that even if drug trafficking was taking place, it would not justify his murder. “The fishermen have the right to live,” she said. “Why didn’t they just detain them?”
In a Tuesday statement, the IACHR urged the US government to “ensure respect for human rights” during any and all extraterritorial military operations in the region, noting the deaths of a high number of persons both in the Caribbean and in the Pacific, where other strikes have taken place.
“While acknowledging the seriousness of organized crime and its impact on the enjoyment of human rights, the Commission recalls that States are obliged to respect and ensure the right to life of all persons under their jurisdiction,” the statement reads.
“According to the Inter-American jurisprudence, this duty extends to situations when State agents exercise authority or effective control, including extraterritorial actions at sea,” it continues. “When lethal force is used by security or military personnel outside national territory, States have the obligation to demonstrate that such actions were strictly lawful, necessary, and proportionate, and to investigate, ex officio, any resulting loss of life. These obligations persist irrespective of where the operations occur, or the status attributed to the individuals affected. Likewise, persons under State control must always enjoy full respect for due process and humane treatment.”
The commission called on the US to “refrain from employing lethal military force in the context of public security operations, ensuring that any counter-crime or security operation fully complies with international human rights standards; conduct prompt, impartial, and independent investigations into all deaths and detentions resulting from these actions; and adopt effective measures to prevent recurrence.”
Orcas discuss how Trump was re-elected and him being an obviously insane, xenophobic Fascist.Donald Fuhrump says that Amerikkka doesn’t bother with crimes or charges anymore, not being 100% Amerikkkan and opposing his real estate intentions is enough.
