Speeches by Maynard.

“Legislation such as what?”

“Can you give me some examples?”

“Just following the logic of it, we now have European regulations and UK regulations. If you are a business owner, you had only one set before. You now have two. Does that mean that you have more regulations or fewer?”

“I am going to be a bit unfair on that. Does that mean that we have more regulations because we are outside and that businesses have to be compliant? Is that fair or unfair?”

“Do you agree with the Government’s assertion that they would expect to recoup their funding at the conclusion of the administration?”

“My next question is on the special administration regime. Steve Reed wrote to Alistair Carmichael on 25 June and said, “However, we expect that any Government funding required during a SAR would be recouped after the conclusion of the administration.” Do you agree with that?”

“When are you going to come to a decision?”

“What it looks like to me, and perhaps to other members of the Committee, is that you are flouting your own regulations on purpose, because making them ultimate controller would mean they have legal obligations that they no longer have. We have shareholders who have publicly walked away and said, “Our equity is valueles…”

“Can you explain why you think that the class A creditors do not exert significant influence over strategic decisions for Thames Water?”

“The concept is broader than legal ownership, as you know. It includes anyone who can exert significant influence over strategic decisions. As per the High Court ruling and that judgment, it is very clear that class A bondholders are meeting that level. Do you agree?”

“OMERS is the largest shareholder in Thames Water. Last May, 14 months ago, it removed its director from the board and wrote off its shareholding. How can you tell us seriously that it is the ultimate controller of this company?”

“Hi, David. It is good to see you. Who is the ultimate controller of Thames Water?”

“In that reasonable proposition, the net cost to the Government of putting Thames Water into special administration would be zero. Just sticking with what we have stated here, are you in agreement with what Steve Reed said?”

“They are the super senior lender, so they are at the top of the tree.”

“With the Chair’s permission: would you mind writing to the Committee to set out what your reasoning is with regard to the ultimate controller?”

“The next question is about investment grade. A year ago, last July, Thames Water breached its operating licence, whereby it has to have two investment-grade credit ratings. It has not had that since last July. We are 12 months on. As per May this year, Moody’s is now unable to state a credit rating, because it does not…”

“I refer members to my register of interests. Sarah Cardell, hi. Thank you for being here. How do you see and manage the tension between maintaining free and open markets and going for growth?”

“I am asking for your view.”

“Running with that, what you are also agreeing with is that the net cost to the Government is likely to be zero, because what Steve Reed stated is that they are likely to recoup their money at the conclusion of the administration.”

“What I am worried about, particularly with the very quick exit of your prior chair, is that, if you read the FT or any other newspaper, it seemed to be a message from Government to say, “If you are in big tech or have dominant market share, we are going to go more lightly on you. As a dominant player, you have more lee…”