Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Summary of responses
Report to: Anglian Water
April 2013
Prepared by Dialogue by Design
Dialogue by Design
252B Gray’s Inn Road
London WC1X 8XG
Telephone:
Email:
Website:
020 7042 8000
info@dialoguebydesign.com
www.dialoguebydesign.net
Company registration no. in England and Wales: 3856988
VAT registration no. 123 4151 58
The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and may not reflect those of
Anglian Water.
Contents
Executive summary
1
Chapter 1 – Introduction
7
1.1 Background to the consultation
7
1.2 The consultation process
7
1.3 Reading this report
8
1.4 How this report is organised
8
Chapter 2 – About the consultation
10
2.1 Methodology
10
2.2 Encouraging participation
12
2.3 Participation
13
2.4 About the respondents
14
Chapter 3 – Satisfied customers
19
3.1 Future customer service
19
3.2 Sewer flooding in homes
28
3.3 Further sewer/wastewater concerns
29
Chapter 4 – Fair charges
31
4.1 Special lower tariffs
31
4.2 Metering
37
4.3 Cost of water
40
Chapter 5 – Safe clean water
43
5.1 Catchment management
43
5.2 Drinking water
55
Chapter 6 – Resilient services
59
6.1 Resilience to drought
59
6.2 Drought and flooding concerns
60
Chapter 7 – Supply meets demand
63
7.1 Leakage worries
63
7.2 Other comments on leaks
64
7.3 Water usage
66
7.4 Other demands on supply
69
Chapter 8 – Flourishing environment
72
8.1 Environmental management
72
8.2 Other environmental concerns
73
Chapter 9 – A smaller footprint
75
9.1 Carbon emissions and natural resources
75
9.2 Carbon footprint reduction
76
9.3 Climate change
77
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
9.4 Energy savings
78
Chapter 10 – Conclusions
79
10.1 Work with communities
79
Chapter 11 – Other themes
85
11.1 Investing for tomorrow
85
11.2 Fair profits
86
11.3 Other comments and questions
88
11.4 Consultation and information
89
Chapter 12 – Conclusions
92
12.1 Overview of responses by issue
92
12.2 Next steps
95
A.1 Appendix – Details of engagement activities
96
A.2 Appendix – Consultation questionnaire
100
A.3 Appendix – Analytical framework
102
A.4 Appendix – Organisations and businesses responding
115
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
Executive summary
Introduction
In 2013, Anglian Water initiated its widest ever consultation with customers and stakeholders
on its proposals to shape the future of its water services for years to come. This report gives
an account of the findings from this consultation.
Every five years, water companies review the price they charge their customers for the water
they supply. This price review process involves taking into account and balancing a wide
range of different and sometimes competing priorities. To inform the development of its
business plan for the next price review – known as PR14 – and its longer-term strategy,
Anglian Water has developed a programme of engagement and communication called
‘Discover, Discuss, Decide’. As part of the PR14 process, the water regulator, Ofwat, asked
each water company to set up an independent ‘customer challenge group’. Anglian Water
has convened its own independent panel of experts, the Customer Engagement Forum
(CEF).
Through ‘Discover, Discuss, Decide’, Anglian Water aims to establish an ongoing
conversation with its customers and stakeholders, providing information and understanding
their views. The broad aim of the programme is to help Anglian Water determine the best
possible balance of priorities for investment while delivering high quality customer service
and keeping customers’ bills affordable.
The consultation centred around a document which described ten different outcomes that
Anglian Water wants to achieve. The document was developed with input from the CEF. It
provided respondents with the opportunity to ‘Discover’ information about Anglian Water,
‘Discuss’ and consider what they think, and then help ‘Decide’ the future of services by
responding to the consultation questions. Respondents could submit their views by using the
online response form, the paper response form, via email or letter, or in some cases via
customer services representatives.
The views collected in this consultation will inform Anglian Water’s draft business plan, to be
published in summer 2013. This will explain how Anglian Water thinks the different choices
are best balanced. Customers and stakeholders will again be asked for their views on this
draft plan later in 2013. The findings from this will inform the final business plan, to be
published in December 2013, and Anglian Water’s longer term strategy.
The consultation asked twelve questions, each of which focused on one of the outcomes
described in the consultation document. Five of the questions were open, so that
respondents could contribute their own thoughts in as little or great detail as they wished.
The remaining seven questions were multiple-choice. Because the respondents chose to
take part in the consultation, they cannot be taken as a representative sample of Anglian
Water’s customers or stakeholders or of the wider population. This means that the findings
from the consultation describe only the views of the respondents and cannot be generalised
over a wider group.
Overall balance of responses
The consultation process has generated a wide variety of comments and suggestions thus
far, from Anglian Water customers (household and business), employees and stakeholders.
We cannot say with certainty how many respondents fall into each of these groups, as some
employees and stakeholders might have chosen to respond as customers. However, where
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
1 of 116
people identifying themselves as employees have raised issues not raised by other
respondents, we have noted that these issues are specific to employees.
Overview of responses by issue
The issues that have attracted the most attention so far are support for paying bills and lower
tariffs, catchment management, water quality, customer service, more communication about
Anglian Water’s work and the importance of education on water conservation.
Satisfied customers
The majority of people who comment directly on Anglian Water’s
customer service are satisfied, praising it for providing excellent
support and urging it to maintain its current high standards.
Where room for improvement in customer services is identified this
is primarily in relation to communications, including timeliness of
response and reliability from Anglian Water’s customer services.
Positive suggestions made by respondents range from providing more frequent updates on
engineer calls at home and works in the community, to providing more information and
advice on bills. Some respondents list specific targets against which to measure customer
services, such as fixing a problem on the first visit, better management of calling customers
back, following cases through, and learning from the best practice in the field. Many
respondents call for more self-service options for payments and meter readings as well as
greater use of technology and social media networks. A number of respondents call for the
company to prioritise operational efficiency and cost-effectiveness. Other respondents
express serious concern for sewer flooding in homes and want the company to prioritise
eliminating this risk. Some Anglian Water employees offer suggestions for internal
improvements to communications, service levels and staff training.
Fair charges
Respondents who comment on the idea of lower tariffs to help
some people who struggle to pay their bills have mixed views.
Some support this idea while others oppose it, and many give
reasons for their views. Some feel a social duty to help out those
who might have difficulty paying their bills and can identify specific
groups that might fall into this category, such as older people, people with disabilities and
families on a low income. Others see financial benefit in this idea, suggesting that lower
payments would reduce non-payments and help to keep everyone’s bills at a reasonable
level. Many of the people who oppose lower tariffs do so on the basis of fairness: they say
that everyone should pay their own way and be treated equally in terms of tariffs.
Metering is another of respondents’ central concerns. Many think that everyone should be
made to switch to a meter as soon as possible. Some think the choice to switch to a meter
should remain a choice for the customer to make either in their own time or with
encouragement from Anglian Water. Others would still like to see everyone made to switch to
meters but phased in over time to allow people to adjust to changes in their bills.
Some respondents comment on the cost of water generally and many of these say it should
either be reduced or that increases in prices should be minimal: while many of these people
say that water is currently affordable, they worry that price increases will change this. Others
compare the cost of water favourably with the cost of other utilities. A few think that water is
undervalued and too cheap. Some respondents are motivated to save water in order to save
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
2 of 116
on their bills, while others say that the company can also find ways to save money across its
operations.
Safe clean water
Respondents were asked about their views on catchment
management, which is defined by Anglian Water as
“influencing land-use practices to reduce pollution before it
affects water sources”. Catchment management can involve paying farmers and landowners
to change what they do.
People supporting catchment management plans – whole-heartedly or conditionally –
outnumber those opposing them. The most common reasons for support include concerns
about the safety of drinking water and the health of the environment. Preventative
management of water resources is also seen as more efficient and effective than post-event
clean-up. Many respondents are concerned about the cost of these proposals, however, and
that this will be passed onto customers through bills. Some people think that farmers and
landowners should not be paid to change their behaviour, often on the basis of the “polluter
pays” principle. Others argue that tackling water pollution should involve other organisations
as well as Anglian Water, including the government and the Environment Agency. Many
respondents say they would like more information on this issue before offering a view.
Many respondents say that the quality of their drinking water is fine. Some are concerned
about water hardness, others would like improvements in its taste, and a few comment on
water discolouration. When responding to the multiple-choice question about the quality of
water, a number of respondents identified other ways in which Anglian Water could improve
this. These concerned the taste and smell of chlorine, the presence in water of other
chemicals such as fluoride and nitrates, and variance in the appearance of water, in terms of
cloudiness and colour. Many respondents would like to see water recycling in place and
some suggested dual water supplies for potable and non-potable uses.
Resilient services
Anglian Water asked respondents how quickly the company
should improve the resilience of its service. The majority of
respondents think that Anglian Water should invest at the same
rate as they do now, reducing the risk to supplies slowly to
keep bill increases to a minimum. Fewer respondents support
an increase in the rate of investment to improve Anglian Water’s resilience quickly, with an
increase to customers’ bills in the short-term. Some respondents would like more information
about the company’s current levels of investment, which would enable them to respond
better to whether to maintain or increase the rate of investment.
Flooding and drought issues relating to resilience are raised in respondents’ comments on a
number of questions. Many encourage Anglian Water to reduce these risks and support
improved resilience in the water network to ensure continued supply in the face of weatherrelated water pressures. Many respondents want to avoid limits to supply or use during
periods of drought, and are particularly frustrated by hosepipe bans. Some respondents want
Anglian Water to ensure an effective but balanced course of action to tackle both issues,
while others are concerned about the costs of taking action.
Supply meets demand
Many respondents are concerned about leaks, often saying
that they waste treated water and cost money to fix. Many
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
3 of 116
think that Anglian Water should focus on preventing and repairing leaks to conserve water,
minimise damage and keep costs down. The time that it takes Anglian Water to repair leaks
is another recurrent theme, with respondents noting that the longer it takes to fix leakages,
the more water gets wasted.
Some respondents express wider and more long-term concerns about water supply,
including the possibility of scarcity as the population grows and more development takes
place. Education and awareness-raising – about water efficiency and conservation, in
particular – are seen as very important in relation to these issues but many respondents are
unaware of Anglian Water’s work in these areas. Some think that Anglian Water should
supply water-saving devices such as meters and water butts, either free or at a discount.
Other suggestions for addressing growing pressure on supply include expanding existing
reservoirs and constructing new ones, rain harvesting and the use of grey water where
appropriate, and ensuring water efficiency measures are incorporated in new builds. Some
respondents express concern about the impact on water pressure as population growth
increases demand.
Finally, some respondents think that Anglian Water can improve its own water efficiency,
both across the infrastructure and in its operations. Building partnerships with other water
companies, local councils and property developers could result in innovative and
collaborative solutions, according to some respondents.
Flourishing environment
Investing in environmental management beyond legal
obligations is important to most respondents. About half
of those commenting on environmental management
qualify their support by saying that investment should
generate clear economic benefits for local people. Others support investment because the
environment itself matters to them.
In particular, some respondents are concerned about the impacts of Anglian Water’s work on
local ecosystems, including the deterioration of habitats and pollution of rivers. These
respondents argue that Anglian Water should concentrate on reducing negative
environmental effects resulting from its own system and practices. Some respondents
commend Anglian Water for its environmental programmes and awareness campaigns.
However, for some respondents, environmental management activities do not fall within
Anglian Water’s purview. Others contend that water users – including the agricultural sector
and other large-scale users – are more to blame for the negative environmental impacts and
that more environmental awareness activities are needed.
A smaller footprint
A majority of respondents say that reducing carbon
emissions and use of natural resources should
continue to be a goal of Anglian Water as long as bills
do not increase. Only some support this even if bills
might increase. Some raise concerns about the impact of climate change on weather
conditions and hence on overall water resources and a few suggest demand-side measures,
such as smart meters, to address this concern. Others suggest that factors such as water
companies’ mismanagement of water supplies are a greater threat to water resources.
Some respondents suggest that collaborating with other regional water suppliers, energy
companies and local planning authorities would help Anglian Water’s efforts to ensure a
water supply that meets future demands.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
4 of 116
Caring for communities
In general, respondents support Anglian Water’s work
with communities, and many mention specific issues
in the context of community work – including water
usage and environmental protection – that they would
like to see the company prioritise. Community
engagement and education activities – particularly
educational programmes aimed at children and young people – are seen as an important
aspect of Anglian Water’s efforts to raise awareness about water resources and water usage.
Recreational areas are also supported for their leisure, economic and educational value.
A large number of respondents say they did not know about Anglian Water’s community
activities, and some think that Anglian Water should publicise its work in the community more
effectively. A few respondents do not see community activities as the responsibility of a water
company and think that Anglian Water should focus on supplying clean drinking water and
wastewater services.
Other themes
Two of the outcomes in the consultation document were not addressed in specific questions.
These are ‘Investing for tomorrow’ and ‘Fair profits’. Some respondents comment on these
outcomes in their answers to other questions.
Many respondents comment generally on Anglian
Water’s infrastructure and assets. Some respondents
are particularly concerned about pipe maintenance
across the infrastructure. In addition, some take the
view that asset maintenance – including regular checks
on and cleaning of the system – and improvement
across the ageing infrastructure should be the company’s main concern. A few respondents
are concerned about the quality of sub-contracted work. Of these respondents, some
acknowledge that investing in upgrading and maintaining the infrastructure will require some
cost to be passed to the customer. On the other hand, others support enhancing assets only
in balance with low customer costs.
Some respondents comment on the structure of the water
industry and on Anglian Water’s profits. A number of
respondents say that the industry allows for monopolies
and prevents consumers making a choice among suppliers.
A few respondents feel that the public do not understand
Ofwat’s price regulation of the industry and think that Anglian Water should help to clarify
this. The most recurrent comment on profit is a challenge to either the level of profit or its
use. Sometimes the roles of shareholders, owners or management are challenged: many
respondents think that lowering dividends to shareholders is an acceptable and preferable
way forward.
Finally, a number of respondents comment on the consultation process itself and how issues
are treated in the consultation document. Some praise the consultation while others express
some concerns.
Conclusions
The ‘Discover, Discuss, Decide’ consultation suggests that Anglian Water’s customers are
interested in taking part in a wide-ranging discussion and in having their views heard as part
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
5 of 116
of the price review process and longer-term strategy. The consultation responses contain
numerous remarks, reservations, suggestions, support for and opposition to Anglian Water’s
ten outcomes. They touch on individual circumstances, regional issues such as population
growth and national and global concerns such as drought, flooding and water scarcity.
Insights from the entire consultation will feed into the dry run business plan to be developed
over the summer of 2013. At this point, Anglian Water will again ask for customer and
stakeholder views on the proposed business plan.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
6 of 116
Chapter 1 – Introduction
In 2013, Anglian Water initiated its widest ever consultation with customers and stakeholders
on its proposals to shape the future of its water services for years to come, ‘Discover,
Discuss, Decide’. This report gives an in-depth account of the 4,871 consultation responses
received.
1.1 Background to the consultation
Every five years, water companies review the price they charge their customers for the water
they supply. This price review process involves taking into account and balancing a wide
range of different and sometimes competing priorities. To inform the development of its
business plan for the next price review – known as PR14 – and its longer-term strategy,
Anglian Water has developed a programme of engagement and communication called
‘Discover, Discuss, Decide’.
Through ‘Discover, Discuss, Decide’, Anglian Water aims to establish an ongoing
conversation with its customers and stakeholders, providing them with information and
gathering and understanding their views on a range of themes. The broad aim of the
programme is to help Anglian Water determine the best possible balance of priorities for
investment while delivering high quality customer service and keeping customers’ bills
affordable. The views gathered over the course of this programme will inform the
development of Anglian Water’s long-term strategy and its business plan for 2015 – 2020.
Throughout ‘Discover, Discuss, Decide’, Anglian Water is working closely with its Customer
Engagement Forum (CEF). This independent expert body represents the interests of
customers, communities, the environment and economy. Part of the role of the CEF is to
report to Ofwat on the overall quality of the engagement work carried out by Anglian Water
as part of PR14 and to confirm that customer and stakeholder views have been considered
in the development of its next business plan. This plan – to be published in December 2013 –
will be submitted to Ofwat for approval and will set the level of customers’ bills and
investment priorities for 2015 – 2020.
1.2 The consultation process
Anglian Water worked with Dialogue by Design (DbyD), an independent consultation
company, to design and conduct the ‘Discover, Discuss, Decide’ consultation and analyse all
responses received during the consultation. Conducting open public consultation ensures
that all those who wish to contribute to the ongoing conversation are able to do so.
The project centred on a consultation document which described ten different outcomes that
Anglian Water wants to achieve. This document was developed with input from the CEF and
was made available in paper and electronic formats. The document provided respondents
with the opportunity to ‘Discover’ information about Anglian Water, ‘Discuss’ and consider
what they think, and then help ‘Decide’ the future of services by responding to the
consultation questions. Respondents could submit their views by using the online response
form, the paper response form or via email or letter.
Respondents could respond to as many or few as they chose of the twelve questions
included in the consultation document. The questions covered eight of the ten outcomes
presented in the consultation document: Satisfied customers, Fair charges, Safe clean
water, Resilient services, Supply meets demand, Flourishing environment, A smaller
footprint, and Caring for communities. The two remaining outcomes, ‘Investing for
tomorrow’ and ‘Fair profits’, had no corresponding questions but respondents commented on
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
7 of 116
these issues in their responses to other questions. We have reported on these comments
separately (Chapter 11).
Of the twelve consultation questions, five were open-ended with a free-text space to
respond, using up to 2,500 characters. Seven questions were multiple-choice; each of these
questions offered respondents between two and five response options. These options were
presented in two different ways. They might take the form of statements describing different
views on a single issue: respondents could then choose the statement which best reflected
their own view on that issue. Alternatively, the options describe different issues which might
concern respondents or on which Anglian Water might focus: for example, “hardness” or
“discolouration” in relation to water quality. Respondents would then choose the option they
thought was of most importance. Respondents could also choose not to select one of the
options presented and may do this for a wide range of reasons: we have not attempted to
second-guess why people chose the ‘no option selected’ response rather than one of the
positive statements. The final question was a general invitation for respondents to offer any
further comments and questions.
The outputs from this consultation will inform the development of Anglian Water’s draft
business plan. This will be published in summer 2013 and will explain how the company
thinks the different choices can best be balanced.
The proposals in Anglian Water’s draft business plan will be put out to further consultation
and the views gathered will help Anglian Water to refine their plans further, in light of
customer and stakeholder feedback.
1.3 Reading this report
The purpose of a consultation process is to gather views and ideas rather than to determine
the level of support or opposition for particular issues. The people who have contributed their
views were not chosen to represent any wider population – such as all Anglian Water
customers or the population as a whole. Instead, they were ‘self-selecting’. That is, they
chose to take part in this consultation. This means that the findings have no general or wider
validity. Instead, they provide rich insight into the range and diversity of the comments made
by the 4,871 people who responded.
The self-selecting profile of the respondents to the consultation makes it important for the
reader to bear in mind that any numbers or percentages used in the report have no statistical
significance. These are used only to indicate the balance of respondents’ views on the
multiple-choice questions. To provide some guidance on the balance of views expressed in
response to the open-ended questions, we have used words such as ‘most’ or ‘many’ when a
large number of respondents make similar points.
Many points are made by a smaller number of respondents – anything between a handful
and a couple of dozen. In these cases, we use the words ‘few’, ‘some’ or ‘several’
respondents. Overall, the report seeks to summarise the rich variety of respondents’
suggestions and therefore the use of quantitative wording is essentially an indication and
should not be perceived to carry any statistical significance.
1.4 How this report is organised
This summary report on the consultation presents the results from the analysis of the 4,871
responses to the consultation.
The remainder of this report is organised as follows:
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
8 of 116

Chapter 2: detailed overview of the consultation process, method of analysis and
participation

Chapters 3 to 11: details of the consultation findings, following the structure of the
consultation document. Each chapter provides a summary of the main comments and
concerned raised by respondents. It then goes on to provide a flavour of the consultation
responses received and delves into particular themes that are raised across the
consultation questions.

Chapter 12: conclusions of the analysis.
Throughout this document, parts of respondents’ comments have been inserted to illustrate
the narrative. For reasons of data protection, comments are attributed by respondent type:
household customer, business customer, organisation, or employee of Anglian Water. For
the purpose of clarity, any spelling or grammatical errors in quoted responses have been
corrected. For those respondents who have opted for their response to remain confidential,
no part of their comments will be quoted in this report.
Finally, where it is clear that respondents identifying themselves as employees have raised
issues not raised by other respondents, we have noted this.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
9 of 116
Chapter 2 – About the consultation
2.1 Methodology
The ‘Discover, Discuss, Decide’ consultation opened on 21 January 2013 closed on 24
March 2013. This was an extension to the planned close date of 10 March 2013 and enabled
more respondents to participate.
Responses to the consultation were received in a number of formats:

online response forms submitted via the DbyD bespoke consultation website

paper response forms sent directly to DbyD or gathered via Anglian Water’s customer
services team. The team made home visits to customers, took telephone responses, ran
events in city and town centres, and in schools

email responses sent directly to the consultation email address or to Anglian Water.
All responses were received by DbyD, assigned a unique reference number and entered into
the DbyD analysis system.
Online response forms
Online responses received via the consultation website go directly into the DbyD analysis
system. While the consultation was open, users were able to update or amend their
submission at any time. If respondents updated their submission the changes were imported
into the analysis database with a clear reference indicating a modified submission. This
ensures that any new information provided is taken into account during the analysis.
Paper response forms
Response forms received by post were logged and scanned, then manually entered into the
analysis database by data entry staff. The data entry process followed the questionnaire
structure so that these responses could be analysed in the same way as online responses.
The quality of data entry was monitored by the DbyD transcription team to ensure that
responses were captured accurately. To make allowances for potential delays in the postal
system, offline responses postmarked no later than 25 March 2013 were included in the
analysis and in this report.
Customer services team assisted response forms
The Anglian Water metering team collected responses from customers at home recording
their responses digitally on their laptops.
Customers on the Anglian Water WaterCare register were also contacted and customers
registered as blind or partially sighted were sent Braille and large print communications
explaining how they could respond. Some contacted Anglian Water for further assistance; in
these cases, the customer services team collected their responses over the phone, recording
their responses digitally or onto paper forms.
These customer services assisted responses were securely transferred to DbyD for
processing in a manner similar to that described above for paper response forms.
Emails
Respondents were able to send responses directly to DbyD by email or directly to Anglian
Water customer services for forwarding to DbyD. In the latter case, Anglian Water informed
respondents that their response would be considered as part of the consultation and securely
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
10 of 116
transferred the responses to DbyD, where they were entered into the analysis system as
described above.
Analysing qualitative responses
To analyse the responses, and capture the variety of views expressed, we created an
analytical, or ‘coding’, framework. The analytical framework is a tool by which we analyse
responses according to the issues and arguments they raise. We read responses and apply
themes, sub-themes and codes to them. This helps us with analysis and report-writing and
allows us to retrieve responses on particular issues at a later date. Throughout analysis and
reporting, the coded responses have been available to the Anglian Water project team.
For this project we adopted a three-tier approach to analysis, starting with high-level themes,
splitting these into sub-themes and then into specific codes:

Themes: high-level categories to organise related sub-themes and codes

Sub-themes: mid-level groupings to organise codes

Codes: a description of a specific issue or argument
As an example, a comment by a customer stating that they feel their Anglian Water bills are
good value would be coded into (theme) Charges and Profit - (sub-theme) Cost - (code)
value for money/affordability. The full analytical framework is provided in Appendix A.3.
The DbyD data analysis system allows analysts to develop a basic coding framework at the
start of a project (top-down) while still providing scope for further development of the
framework to capture emerging issues using suggestions from the analysts engaging with
the data (bottom-up). The initial framework was supplemented and approved by the Anglian
Water project team. We use natural language codes1 (rather than numeric sets) since this
allows analysts to suggest refinements and additional issues, and aids quality control and
external verification. The system is also designed to allow responses to be coded in layers; if
each code summed up a complete response, there would be no need to summarise them.
In addition to themes such as ‘Water Quality’ or ‘Supply Resilience’ that emerged, generic
themes such as ‘Location’, ‘References’ and ‘Consultation and Information’ allowed analysts
to capture specific locations mentioned in responses, references made to organisations such
as Ofwat, and any views on the consultation as a whole, including the process, the
information presented and the consultation website. During the analysis it became clear that
respondents often raised the same issues against more than one question. To avoid
repetition and to ensure that each issue is fully reported, the report has been structured in
line with the questions asked. For example, where respondents have raised issues relevant
to question 1 in their response to question 3, we have reported on these issues in the
chapter on question 1.
Quality assurance
DbyD’s formal quality assurance is built into our overall consultation process and we quality
check data entry of handwritten and typed responses, and the integrity and consistency of
overall analysis, on an ongoing basis. The quality checking function is flexible and allows us
to focus attention on the work of particular analysts and on specific questions or codes,
enabling us detect and minimise inconsistencies. In addition to the in-built system-guided
1
Natural language here refers to ‘plain English’ – communication that is spoken, written or signed – as
opposed to constructed languages, such as that used in computer programming.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
11 of 116
quality assurance, we use more informal methods to maintain high standards. These include
core team members supporting new analysts and regular analysis meetings to explore any
emerging issues and discuss possible changes to the framework. The core team analysed
and reported on responses, ensuring consistency.
Analysing multiple-choice responses
Responses from the seven multiple-choice questions produced quantitative data that were
analysed by DbyD’s colleagues from the Office for Public Management (OPM). We report on
each of these questions with a brief summary of the responses and a graph displaying the
total number and percentage of respondents selecting each of the response options as well
as those who did not choose those options.
Among responses to multiple-choice questions, we include those in which none of the
presented options was selected. They are reported as ‘no option selected’. In line with good
consultation practice, we have made no assumption about the reasons why respondents
might have chosen this option – for example, whether they feel unable to respond to the
question, whether they reject the options presented or whether they simply ticked boxes at
random. There may be other reasons for choosing ‘no option selected’.
In 461 instances, respondents submitting paper response forms either selected more than
one option, wrote in and selected their own option, or wrote additional comments on the
options for one or more of the multiple-choice questions (questions 2, 4, 7, 8, 9 or 10;
question 6 provided an ‘other’ option with an open-ended free-text space for respondents to
add comments in response to the question). Often, these respondents selected one of the
options provided and wrote in an alternative/additional option as well. In the great majority of
cases, these additional options or comments did not raise issues that were not already
included in other responses, and we have analysed and reported on them within the relevant
themes and chapters. In those cases where an additional option or comment was particularly
common or did raise something noteworthy we have noted this in the text (e.g., sections 7.2
and 11.4).
Table 1: Additional comments/options provided by multiple-choice question
Multiple-choice question
Additional comments/option provided
2 – Sewer flooding in homes
62
4 – Metering
46
7 – Resilience to drought
77
8 – Leakage
185
9 – Environmental management
43
10 – Carbon emissions and natural resources
48
Total 461
2.2 Encouraging participation
Anglian Water aimed to raise awareness of the consultation to encourage a wide range and
variety of responses. They promoted the consultation website via post, email and mobile
messaging; held events in city and town centres and worked in schools across the region.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
12 of 116
They covered the entire Anglian Water region, including Hartlepool, to encourage all
customers and stakeholders to have their say. Activities included:

Customer engagement roadshows

Print and broadcast media

Radio advertising

Web and social media.
Targeted groups included:

Stakeholders

Household customers

Business customers

Future customers.
For further details on these activities, please see Appendix A.1.
As further encouragement to respond to the consultation, Anglian Water offered respondents
– excluding their employees – the opportunity to enter a free prize draw for three prizes of
£100 and four prizes of £50 ‘Love 2 Shop’ high street vouchers. A total of 2,064 respondents
chose to enter the prize draw. The winners of the prize draw were selected by random and
winners have been notified.
2.3 Participation
The total number of responses received within the consultation period is 4,871. The table
below identifies the number received through the different response channels available. The
majority of responses were received either by paper form or via the consultation website.
Table 2: Number of responses received by response channel
Response type
Count
Paper form
2,719
Online
1,863
Customer services team assisted
276
Email
12
Paper form with attachment
1
Total 4,871
Not all respondents answered all consultation questions. The table below shows the number
of responses to each of the consultation questions.
Table 3: Number of responses received by question
Question
Responses
1 – Future customer service
3,417
2 – Sewer flooding in homes
4,871
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
13 of 116
3 – Special lower tariffs
4,103
4 – Metering
4,871
5 – Catchment management
3,300
6 – Drinking water
4,871
7 – Resilience to drought
4,871
8 – Leakage
4,871
9 – Environmental management
4,871
10 – Carbon emissions and natural resources
4,871
11 – Work with communities
2,715
12 – Other comments or questions
2,410
2.4 About the respondents
Respondents were asked to answer a small number of questions about themselves,
specifying some background information. For those responding via the consultation website,
some minimum information including name, email address, postcode and respondent type
was required. Respondents could choose whether to provide information in addition to this.
People responding via other formats, including paper, could provide as much or as little
information about themselves as they wished. A small number of respondents (66) did not
provide their names and responded to the consultation anonymously.
Organisations
Forty-five respondents identified themselves as business customers and 56 identified
themselves as other types of organisation. Of these 101 respondents, 40 identified their
organisation or business. These are listed in Appendix A.4.
Postcodes
Postcode information allows us to identify whether respondents are customers of Anglian
Water for their water supply, their wastewater services, or for both of these. A total of 3,671
respondents provided a valid postcode that falls within the Anglian Water service footprint: Of
these customers within the Anglian Water service area:

3,297 are water supply and wastewater customers

246 are wastewater customers only

128 are water supply customers only (including 72 Hartlepool Water customers).
Some respondents did not provide a postcode (706); others provided postcodes that are out
of Anglian Water’s service areas or provided invalid postcodes (494).
Postcode information also allows us to identify response across geographical area. Among
the 4,165 respondents who chose to provide a postcode, the greatest number (1,447) report
Peterborough area postcodes. The other most common postcode areas among respondents
include, in order of decreasing prevalence:

Norwich (484) and Northampton (484)
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
14 of 116

Ipswich (408)

Lincoln (302)

Milton Keynes (251)

Cambridge (178)

Doncaster (130)

Other postcode areas: 481
We have analysed all 4,871 responses submitted to the consultation. There were no
significant differences in findings when taking postcode data into account in the analysis.
Background information
As noted above, some respondents provided additional information about themselves. This
includes respondent type (e.g., domestic or business customers, organisational response
etc): their age; the number of adults in the household and the number of children in the
household; whether they have responsibility for paying the bill and whether their water supply
is metered or unmetered. Those who did not answer a particular question about themselves
are reported as ‘no option selected’.
We have analysed all 4,871 responses submitted to the consultation. In the text we note the
only instance where a significant difference in findings was identified when taking
background information into account in the analysis (e.g., regarding views on metering in
relation to reporting having a meter in the analysis of question 4 in section 4.2).

Figure 1: Respondent type –

the majority of respondents identify themselves as household customers

self-identifying organisations and businesses responding are listed in Appendix A.4.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
15 of 116

Figure 2: Age – about half of respondents identify themselves as 60-74, 45-59 or 30-44.

Figure 3: Adults – the largest proportion of respondents report having two adults in the
household.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
16 of 116

Figure 4: Children – most respondents chose not to respond; of those who did, the
largest proportion report having no children in the household.

Figure 5: Bill responsibility – most respondents say they are responsible for the bill.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
17 of 116

Figure 6: Metering – most respondents report having a water meter at their property.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
18 of 116
Chapter 3 – Satisfied customers
In this chapter, we look at responses to questions 1 and 2.
Question 1 is an open question asking respondents what they would expect of Anglian
Water’s future customer service. Question 2 is a multiple-choice question concerning the
level of risk acceptable in relation to people’s homes being flooded by sewage. Where
respondents have raised issues concerning customer services or wider concerns around
sewage or wastewater flooding in response to other questions, we have included these in
this chapter.
The consultation document describes a good outcome in relation customer services in the
following terms:
“We respond to customer needs with tailored, innovative services. Our processes are
customer focused, and our people highly motivated and capable. Service failures are
very rare and caused by factors beyond our control. If failures do occur we act
promptly and effectively – keeping customers up to date and doing all we can to
prevent and reduce the impacts on individuals and businesses.”
3.1 Future customer service
The first question invites respondents to consider the future of Anglian Water’s customer
service, from 2015 to 2020.
Q1. Thinking about our future customer service in 2015 – 2020, what would you
expect us to be doing that we’re not doing now?
Overview of responses
A total of 3,417 people responded to this question. Of those respondents who comment on
the level of customer service currently provided by Anglian Water, the majority express
satisfaction. They praise the company for providing excellent support and urge it to maintain
its current high standards. Among those commenting on their priorities and expectations for
future customer service, many say they have positive perceptions of the company. However,
a few respondents caveat their support for customer services with suggestions including
lower tariffs, quicker leak repairs, and more frequent meter readings.
“I am very happy with the way I have been treated as a customer and I would like this
to continue.”
Household customer
A large number of respondents would like to see improvements in Anglian Water customer
service. They believe that customer services should aspire to be ”reliable”, “responsive”,
”honest”, “accessible” and “friendly”. A few respondents feel that customer services currently
operate in a culture of compensation: that is, those who complain the most will get the best
service overall. Some list specific targets or suggestions for improvement such as solving the
job on the first visit, improving call back management and learning from the best practice in
the field. Others stress that service levels should be sufficiently high so that customers do not
need to contact customer services to have their problems solved.
Some respondents compare Anglian Water to other companies. In some instances these
comparisons are positive, with respondents remarking that Anglian Water is doing a good job
compared to other water companies. However others believe that it is falling behind other
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
19 of 116
utility providers in terms of its services and level of innovation, such as use of towards smart
technology. A number of respondents, including several Anglian Water employees, discuss
the company’s reputation and the room for improving its customer satisfaction rates to
become a leader in its field.
“I think AW do a good job in comparison with other water companies in responding to
customers operationally but the central communications needs improving […]”
Household customer
“Minimising the need for customers to chase us, causing repeat contact and
complaints. For example to chasing meter reads, meter fits and exchanges, refunds,
the setting up of unregistered properties. These processes are often seen by the
customer as being too slow. This would need to be achieved by having a companywide high priority on customer service, so that we are proactive in exceeding
customer expectations and this in turn will build a stronger reputation.”
Employee of Anglian Water
Customer communications
A large number of respondents see effective communication, both external and internal, as
vital to good customer service. A number of Anglian Water employees stress the importance
of managing customers’ expectations better by giving realistic deadlines and helping
customers understand the company’s business model. This statement is echoed by some
respondents who describe negative experiences involving overly optimistic promises of visits
and issue resolution and unclear information on the meter fitting process, which proved to
take longer than expected.
“Understanding the customer’s priorities in alignment with ours. As an example: if a
customer has a water leak outside their house that they want fixing straight away. In
most cases, however, we put a LOS [level of service] on it which the customer cannot
relate to or understand.”
Employee of Anglian Water
“The customer service rep is helpful in the main but sometimes gave over-optimistic
callout promises of 2-4 hours or within 24 hours which on occasion were broken.”
Household customer
Some Anglian Water employees are more critical of the company’s customer services and
stipulate that customer communication failures are often a result of inefficient crossdepartmental communication and transfer of information. We report on this in more detail as
part of the sub-section on operations later in this chapter.
In terms of external communication, many respondents highlight the need for news and
offers better publicised via a number of channels such as a regular newsletter, text
messages or local newspapers. A few also call for this information to be accessible in
multiple languages and to people with visual disabilities; some praise the company for its
current policy to provide Braille and large print documents.
Many respondents are also keen for Anglian Water to share more details about its wider
work including environmental projects, new developments and mitigation being pursued,
future plans, the measure of leakage repaired and water saved, water quality test results and
water levels in aquifers. Alongside such information, it is also suggested that Anglian Water
disseminate guidance on reducing water usage, advance notice of and reasons for increases
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
20 of 116
in bills, and more information on metering such as the percentage of households in one’s
area that are metered. A number of respondents suggest that this information could be
provided in a regular e-newsletter that is circulated to customers, or that the information
could be included with bills. Others express their preference for live updates via a designated
Twitter account. Aside from giving a better understanding of Anglian Water’s work, some
suggest these updates would help local businesses plan better around potential
infrastructure restrictions.
“Tell us the main risks, what is being done to mitigate them and who should be
contacted in the event of a problem.”
Household customer
A few respondents also believe that customer service could be more supportive of new
customers by providing them with detailed introductory information in order to assist them
during the transition process.
A number of respondents praise Anglian Water’s efforts to consult their customers, and some
call for more attempts to listen to the views of the public, such as through regular
consultation by post or email. This point is echoed in requests for more face-to-face
communication with customers and the preference for direct contact with Anglian Water
employees rather than sub-contractors. Other suggestions for engagement include the
company attending more local events, hosting “open evenings” to brief the public on future
plans and provide them with the opportunity to raise questions, and offering a satisfaction
survey at the end of all customer service calls. Anglian Water employees in particular
emphasise the need to raise staff and operational visibility in the community in order to
elevate the company’s profile among its customers. It is suggested that this may also make
more customers aware of the company as their wastewater services provider.
“Visibility is important. As a customer I like to feel that I am getting value for money
and if I see Anglian Water vans/people working as I am going about my day (in much
the same way as the police service when people refer to seeing 'bobbies on the
beat').”
Household customer
By contrast other respondents state that customers do not want to be “bombarded” with
information or interaction and that information should be restricted to essential contact
related to maintaining service. They prefer the company to concentrate on delivering the
service rather than public relations and promotional activities and argue that bringing water
bills down should be a priority over an improved customer service.
To communicate better and provide a more personalised service, some respondents suggest
Anglian Water strive for a more nuanced understanding of their customers, including tracking
usage and giving customers an early warning if their water usage spikes. A few recommend
that customer service staff accompany engineers during their home visits to get an in-depth
and first-hand knowledge of the problems customers face. In line with the idea of making
customers feel valued, some suggest the introduction of a loyalty reward scheme and others,
mainly Anglian Water employees, recommend putting together a set of measures to be used
for all household visits.
“I think it would be an interesting exercise for you to understand better the
demographic of your customer base. Parents with children about to leave home,
people living alone or houses of multiple occupations are all likely to have differing
water requirements.”
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
21 of 116
Household customer
Conversely, a few respondents argue that providing a personalised service is likely to be
inefficient and urge Anglian Water to adopt an approach of achieving the greatest good for
the largest number of customers rather than trying to please each individually.
A number of respondents want better options around scheduling of appointments for Anglian
Water engineer visits. There is a desire for appointment windows to be narrower, for
instance, and for customers to be notified in advance that engineers are on their way. Many
respondents would like appointment times be made available on weekends and evenings.
Opinions among respondents vary about whether Anglian Water should aim to reduce the
amount of post it sends. A number of respondents believe that switching to online bills and
minimising the number of leaflets and documents sent to households is environmentally and
financially savvy. Others, however, are concerned that this policy might exclude reluctant
web users or those without internet access such as older people. To find the right balance, a
few respondents recommend conducting a customer contact and payment preference audit
so that payment books, for example, are not sent to customers who pay by direct debit.
A large number of respondents express a preference for wider and better use of technology
across customer services. They want to see self-service options via an improved and more
interactive website. For instance, some respondents would like to be able to do more online
such as edit their account details more easily; submit meter readings that will generate an
accurate, revised bill to be sent to them; chat to advisors; book appointments similar to a
supermarket home delivery scheduling; and track the progress on a job or enquiry. Metering
and leakage are two areas where many respondents believe technology can have the
greatest impact on customer services. Some respondents envision the company being able
to create apps to report leaks or submit meter readings. Many believe the company should
be investing in digital, easy-to-read indoor meters.
“I think that exploiting the technology that is around at the moment, to allow for more
of the contact to be completed online, to display issues in Google maps?”
Employee of Anglian Water
Some respondents suggest that use of social media channels would further help to improve
Anglian Water’s communication. Social media tools – Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and other
networks – are seen as particularly useful when engaging with young people or giving roundthe-clock incident-related updates and tips during flooding.
“More for the environment, less paper, not giving out big books of info, which most
people won't read and throw away.”
Household customer
Issue resolution
Several respondents express strong satisfaction with their overall experience of Anglian
Water and praise the staff for the support they give.
“I am very satisfied with the customer service I have received from Anglian Water. In
2012 I had a leaking stop tap on my property. This was replaced with a new stop tap /
meter box. The whole process was handled very efficiently. I have since had a meter
fitted and after 6 months I will be given my usage information to help me make the
decision to change to metered billing.”
Household customer
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
22 of 116
However, of the respondents who refer to a specific case or experience with customer
services, those who had a negative experience with Anglian Water outnumber those with a
positive one. The criticisms range from delays in fixing leaks and unsatisfactory levels of
compensation to failures to inform customers of maintenance works. For instance, one
respondent comments that he is repeatedly overcharged on his sewage bill, while another is
unhappy that, even though he has priority customer status because of a skin condition, his
water supply was unexpectedly cut off. A number of respondents also complain of unhelpful
staff, both in the field and in call centres, who cannot provide answers to enquiries or do not
take action on customers’ requests.
“I have telephoned Anglian Water more than once regarding this problem and despite
promises to fix it nothing has ever happened […]”
Household customer
A number of respondents request quicker and more attentive replies to their enquiries or
complaints, especially in emergency situations or regarding cross-customer issues. Other
respondents, on the other hand, are content with Anglian Water’s emergency response
protocol but challenge the company’s approach to routine tasks which they find inefficient
and slow. Anecdotal evidence given by some respondents suggests that problems are at
times neglected or only solved after numerous phone calls. For instance, on one occasion
meters were incorrectly labelled, readings were attributed to the wrong homes and the issue
was only resolved after dealing with a succession of different representatives. Other
respondents complain that their requests for meter placement, increased water pressure and
hot water tap checks have not been addressed and no further information by way of
explanation for the delay or lack of service has been provided.
Anglian Water’s response to customers dealing with leaks is another area that has been
challenged. Some respondents would like to see Anglian Water repair leaks on customer
property for free or for a small fee. Others ask for compensation if reported leaks are not
fixed within a certain deadline. Some express their frustration that leaks have been left
unattended because they happen to be on the boundary of two (or more) water boards and
the involved water companies and local authorities do not want to take responsibility for the
leaks. Other respondents worry about unattended leaks on private property and advocate for
the company to try to do more against these leaks.
To improve the resolution rate of complaints, a few respondents believe staff numbers should
be increased. Another prominent and recurrent suggestion is that customers should be able
to speak to the same person on successive calls. This point is echoed by comments from
Anglian Water employees, who note the importance of time spent on understanding a
customer’s problem. They stress how issue ownership can improve customer service
complaint resolution rates. A few respondents suggest that a more proactive stance on
service might be preferable; for instance, they suggest that restricting supply in advance of
inclement weather would be better than reacting later to an emergency situation.
For other respondents, it is important to have knowledgeable staff who are able to direct the
query/complaint to the right department in the first instance and follow up complaints by
contacting customers directly. Some comments go further and ask for the introduction of a
more decentralised, “one-stop shop” type of customer services organised by postcode area
so that all customer needs in a local area, from payment to complaints, can be handled
without the need for various departments to be contacted.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
23 of 116
“Bearing in mind that our employees are well-spread across the AW region, I wonder
if we could have 'community champions' who could be a point of contact or at least a
friendly face to talk to in their local area.”
Employee of Anglian Water
Most Anglian Water employees who have responded to question 1 and discuss
communication updates place importance on keeping customers informed about the
progress of their enquiry and promptly informing them of any developments, especially if an
arranged appointment is to be cancelled due to emergency work. This view is also evident in
a number of other respondents who believe a proactive follow-up call after resolving a
complaint is essential to ensure customer satisfaction.
Works updates
Many respondents ask for advance notice of planned maintenance work and regular updates
on progress, especially if the water supply will be cut off as a result. Suggestions on how
best to reach a wider number of affected customers include the use of local newspapers,
public notices and leafleting. Some respondents suggest that the company work closer with
local authorities to keep them updated on any planned works. For instance, a few councils
want to work more closely as they feel the lack of alignment in plans negatively impacts the
work of both organisations.
“More electronic communication such as email or texts to affected customers notifying
them when water supply is disrupted and regular updates to keep you informed. As
part of the Whittlesey community who lost supply last year, I feel this would have
been useful at the time.”
Employee of Anglian Water
If disruption in the supply is envisaged, some respondents suggest Anglian Water should
provide extra care, though unspecified, to its vulnerable customers such as older people and
people with disabilities before and during the disruption. Some also praise the introduction of
the WaterCare register. Some are also concerned about the effects of a hosepipe ban on the
aforementioned groups and insist on bottled water being provided to them regularly. A few
respondents call for the water supply to be restored in a reasonable time, not the current 12hour window and ask for bottled water to be provided free of charge to all affected
households.
Another suggestion for better communication around maintenance works is improved road
closure signs which contain details such as a brief description of the project and its expected
duration. A few respondents mention the importance of Anglian Water providing their
customers with regular updates even if the work has been outsourced to contractors, and
suggest better control of and communication with the contractors themselves to ensure the
work is delivered to standard. Some respondents note that if the outsourced work is of poor
quality, this will affect Anglian Water’s reputation rather than that of the contractors.
“Upgrades and the way you interact with your customer base. For example, the
programme to replace the lead supply pipes on pre-1962 houses. Little or no
explanation has been given to residents by any of the contractors with respect to the
actual process […] Thus, lots of questions, especially from elderly residents, have
been made.”
Household customer
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
24 of 116
Other suggestions for improving the company’s reputation include more proofreading of
leaflets before they are printed and sent to customers and doing more to maintain and
improve assets such as sewage treatment works that can emit unpleasant odours and
contribute to a negative image of the company.
Call centres
Of those respondents who make suggestions for customer services improvements, many
want better phone support. Some respondents cite regular staff briefings and better crossdepartmental communication to improve first contact resolution. Others ask for faster phone
response times and a clear point of contact, especially in a case of emergency. Another
widely supported idea is for a free-phone customer service number. In addition, some
respondents suggest they would benefit from a free helpline where customers can seek and
receive advice on minor problems not requiring an engineer visit.
A number of comments mention call centre staff failing to call back after having promised to
do so. Respondents feel that this makes the problem-solving process long and cumbersome;
one suggestion for resolving this is to set a deadline within which to respond to customers’
questions.
“I think over all the customer service has always been brilliant except when you are
due a phone call back.”
Household customer
Several responses across the consultation mention the location of call centres, with most
asking for them to be or to remain based in the UK. A number of respondents express their
discontent with an automated phone system which often leaves callers with long waits and
state their preference for human operators. Some suggest that after a set wait time has
passed, the customer should be offered a call-back by an Anglian Water representative
within a reasonable response window. Some respondents report unhelpful interactions with
staff who, they suggest, do not always aim to efficiently resolve problems. This point is
further supported by a few Anglian Water employees who call for strict discipline to be taken
internally against impolite call centre staff.
“Answer problems and queries honestly and remove your layer of 'telephone
assistants’ whose job it is to blatantly put off all but the most persistent people […]”
Household customer
Billing and payments
User-friendly bills are one of the most common requests across the comments on customer
services. A number of respondents believe they would benefit from more detailed and
itemised monthly statements that include information on how various charges are calculated
as well as explaining the difference between metered and unmetered costs. Other
respondents suggest a “Where does my money go?” pie chart to be included with bills to
promote transparency as well as make people appreciate what is involved in delivering water
and wastewater services.
To help them identify if they are heavy users and incentivise them to reduce their usage and
therefore their bills, some respondents want to know how their consumption compares to
other similar households or how it is spread across the year. Others prefer just to be notified
if their water usage suddenly increases, as this can suggest leakage.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
25 of 116
“Supply information with bills on the household's water use: how it compares to a
similar period last year, how it compares to other households in the area, how they
can save water.”
Household customer
Several respondents call for better publicity on the different tariffs or current promotions on
offer and express discontent that sometimes existing customers are discriminated against
and not given access to the best offers available compared to those newly joining the area.
Providing advice on the most suitable rates for their home and circumstances is considered
particularly important to respondents who experience financial difficulties. Some suggest that
in addition to making this information widely available via housing associations and letting
agents, Anglian Water should also identify and contact customers in debt with information on
rates to ensure they are on the most suitable one. Others are anxious for reassurance that
Anglian Water is charging them the right amount and want to be promptly contacted if they
are found to be consistently over- or under-paying.
A number of respondents also express dissatisfaction with the way estimated bills are
calculated by Anglian Water, which they feel is inconsistent and often leads to incorrect bills
and significant fluctuations in the amount charged to compensate for over- or underpayment. Some attribute this to the use of an outdated price points plan along with the
practice of basing estimates on the use of an average person rather than taking into account
individual cases.
Regular meter reading as a way of avoiding estimated bills is called for by a number of
respondents who complain that the current meter reading frequency as performed by Anglian
Water is low. Some ask for evidence, such as a slip through the door, when their meter has
been checked whereas others want to be reminded by email when a meter reading is due.
A few suggestions are also made regarding payment methods. Some call for greater
flexibility, especially for those customers struggling to pay their bills, and ask for instalment
payments over longer periods. Others ask for discounts for those paying by direct debit or for
an extension of the current payment cycle. Even though the majority of respondents that
mention payment periods prefer a monthly bill that will help them budget better, a few are of
different opinion and would rather have an annual bill. A number of respondents challenge
the difficult process currently in place for refunding accounts in credit; instead, they suggest
the direct debit be automatically reduced for accounts in credit.
Finally, a few respondents make the following payment-related suggestions: send a single
combined water/wastewater bill even for those customers who only receive one service from
Anglian Water; make payment locations accessible for people with disabilities; and look into
the idea of a “one-stop shop” to handle payments for all utility providers.
Operations
Responding in the context of customer services, efficiency and cost-effectiveness are the
most often cited operational priorities for Anglian Water.
“Trying to make company run more efficiently thus reducing costs for us.”
Household customer
A few respondents state their support for environmentally sustainable operations as well. As
an illustration of the last point, one respondent was disappointed to find out that instead of
recycling or re-using it, one of the Anglian Water offices had disposed of their old office
furniture.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
26 of 116
Suggestions for improvement in terms of overall efficiency and cost-effectiveness include:
doing more work in-house; better internal management of resources; aligning policies
throughout the company; carrying out a company-wide cost and efficiency analysis; reducing
administrative, transport and energy costs; emphasising the collection of outstanding bills;
and taking a more proactive stance by focussing more on prevention. A number of Anglian
Water employees also criticise the ”Click” scheduling and dispatch system. Other
respondents suggest that increasing the number of technicians on the ground and changing
the shift patterns of operators within the maintenance and pump station teams will provide
more effective, round-the-clock coverage.
For many respondents, better cross-departmental teamwork and transfer of information will
allow for faster handling of complaints and is an area that requires significant improvement.
Some highlight, for example, that a well managed records or job history could allow
engineers to provide better service. A number of respondents draw on their personal
experience in describing cases when reports were not properly logged and thus failed to be
investigated. In other stories shared by customers, accounts were placed on hold in order to
investigate meter readings; however, the financial department was not promptly informed
and kept sending these customers letters demanding immediate payment. To help forge
better departmental ties, some respondents recommend customer services representatives
spend time in different departments to get a better understanding of the company’s structure
and operations. More widely, better training of staff – with an emphasis on the technical and
scientific knowledge relevant to the company – is another request featured across responses
by Anglian Water employees and other respondents. A few employees ask that the scientific
training programme for Operations Management Centre staff be continued, for instance.
A few respondents express a concern that increasing the size of the company will
compromise its level of “accountability” or transparency to the public.
”[…] as a company becomes larger then accountability becomes smaller.”
Household customer
Additional services and sales
Some respondents make comments and suggestions on the sales-related side of customer
services. The majority of these comments address insurance sales; the attitude to this can
be described as ambivalent. Some respondents do not want to be contacted with sales
offers, while others call for a better liaison between Anglian Water and insurance providers to
ensure that the risk certificates issued are valid and insurance will not be revoked even if
flood warnings are announced. A few respondents complain that their property cannot be
insured due to regular flooding.
A number of respondents also share views on additional services they think the company
should supply – ranging from fitting anti-backup valves to homes to mitigate the impact of
flooding to making grants available to customers interested in installing water efficient
technology. A few respondents want to see the company’s water or wastewater service
extended to other geographical areas.
Some respondents go so far as to advise the company to pursue a more commercial
approach. While some respondents would like to see water-saving devices provided to
customers free of charge, others see the potential for Anglian Water to sell – perhaps with
extended long-term payment plans – devices such as water efficient toilet cisterns, compost
loos or grey and rain water recycling systems. A few respondents suggest there are potential
business opportunities around the hardness of the regions’ water and suggest water
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
27 of 116
softening or water filtration kits could be marketed to customers. Others suggest that the
company extract and sell limescale to generate extra profit for the company.
Other issues
Respondents commenting in response to question 1 also take the opportunity to comment on
issues beyond customer services. Most respondents focus on metering or present detailed
views on flooding, leakage and infrastructure. These issues are explored in detail in later
chapters, but among the specific cases highlighted in comments to question 1 are:

Improving pumping stations in Bedford and Langworth

Upgrading the system in Heighighton and Lincolnshire

Improving flood measures near the River Wenson

Painting the water tower in Spalding
3.2 Sewer flooding in homes
Anglian Water knows that flooding from sewers concerns its customers. The second
consultation question asks for respondents’ views on the risk of sewage flooding in homes.
Q2. Of all the aspects of our services, customers tell us they are particularly
worried about flooding from sewers inside their homes. What best describes
how you feel about the risk of people’s homes being flooded by sewage:

It’s unacceptable and the risk should be eliminated for all customers, whatever the cost –
2,002

We should continue to invest at around the same rate as we are now to reduce the risk
for some customers – 2,228

Reducing the risk should not be a priority – 347

No option selected – 294
As shown in Figure 7, opinion is divided about the level of investment that should be made
by Anglian Water in order to reduce the risk of homes being flooded by sewage. Forty six
percent of respondents say that Anglian Water should continue to invest at around the same
rate as they are now to reduce the risk for some customers. However, a similar proportion
(41%) think that any risk is unacceptable and the risk should be eliminated for all customers,
whatever the cost. Only 7% of respondents say that reducing the risk should not be a priority
for the company.
Figure 7: What best describes how you feel about the risk of people’s homes being
flooded by sewage?
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
28 of 116
% of respondents
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Anglian Water should
continue to invest at around
the same rate as they are
now to reduce the risk for
some customers
No option selected
50
N=2,228
46%
It’s unacceptable and the
risk should be eliminated for
all customers, whatever the
cost
Reducing the risk should
not be a priority
45
N=2,002
41%
N=347
7%
N=294
6%
Base: 4,871
3.3 Further sewer/wastewater concerns
Respondents comment on the issue of sewer flooding in homes and wider wastewater
concerns across the open-ended questions as well. A total of 380 comments were made in
relation to these issues and are reported on below.
Of the respondents who address the issue of sewage flooding, the majority feel very strongly
about it and ask for measures to be taken to eliminate or mitigate the problem. Their
comments range from calling for measures to reduce overflows to insisting on eliminating the
problem entirely and describing it as Anglian Water’s most serious fault. Only a few
respondents add the caveat that they support action only if their bills will not increase as a
result.
As a way to avoid sewage flooding, a number of respondents call for better control of surface
water runoff and suggest Anglian Water to lobby for the use of permeable products on
driveways and gardens. Other respondents request that the company urgently attend
reported cases of rainwater having drained into and overwhelmed sewers.
Some respondents worry that drain blockages and sewage flooding, apart from releasing bad
odours, also lead to surges in the rat population and pose health risks to local residents. A
few respondents call for septic tank emptying services to be provided by Anglian Water free
of charge.
“Foul odours being generated across a large area of a town does no good for the
community, the local businesses, or Anglian Water’s reputation.”
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
29 of 116
Household customer
A common sentiment across responses is that prevention is a better course of action for the
company rather than trying to cure problems as they arise. If, however, sewage leakage
does occur, then there is a call for prompt action from customer services to respond
appropriately and where possible, advance warning to be issued to the affected households.
“Respond quicker to emergency calls regarding flooding and sewage coming up my
sink and toilet.”
Household customer
Many comments on sewage and wastewater also highlight the need for upgrades and repairs
of the related infrastructure. In line with this, some call for “emergency dumps for sewage” to
be built to be better prepared to protect homes in case of flooding as well as more
connections to be made between homes and the sewer mains. Others, however, worry that a
higher number of households on the sewer mains will put extra pressure on the system and
insist on better future planning. To keep all sewers up to a good quality, especially in light of
Anglian Water’s 2011 acquisition of more private sewers, a few respondents suggest Anglian
Water does more to map the expanding sewer system it is responsible for.
“Taking a more pro-active stance on renewal of the surface water and sewage
systems – much of which dates from the Victorian era and is degrading rapidly.”
Household customer
Some respondents are concerned about the cost of upgrades to help the system cope better
with sewage. A few respondents feel upgrades to the sewer mains and related pipework
should be done at a reduced cost for consumers, while others call for a higher level of
investment from Anglian Water.
Other respondents request more sophisticated sewer and sewage treatment technology so
that sewage treatment has less of an impact on the environment and keeps noise and odour
levels are kept under control. Noise and odours concern local councils, especially; they
prefer to avoid enforcement measures against these negative impacts. A few respondents
are concerned about water companies discharging sewage into rivers and seas and some
suggest underwater pipes to be built to allow for pumping the sewage below the sea bed.
Additionally, a few respondents have suggested alternatives to water-borne sewage
including compost loos and urinals in homes.
Finally, some respondents highlight specific sewage- and wastewater-related cases calling
for Anglian Water’s attention:

A blocked storm drain in Thorpe Meadows

Connecting properties to the sewage system in South Walsham

Separating sewage and drainage in the Lincolnshire/Fens area

Resolving unpleasant odours from the Cambridge sewage treatment works in Milton

Connecting travellers living in Chesterton Fen to the sewer mains

Repairing a fractured sewer in Ingram Street, Huntingdon, due to a geological fault

Responding to flooding concerns for homes in Bawdsey with septic tanks in a river area

Resolving recurring sewage problems in: Bourne, Harlington, Heighington, Stoke by
Nayland, Thorney, Whitlingham and Yaxley.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
30 of 116
Chapter 4 – Fair charges
In this chapter, we look at responses to questions 3 and 4.
Question 3 is an open question asking for views on measures to support customers who
struggle to pay their bills. Question 4 is a multiple-choice question, presenting a number of
possible views about metering and asking respondents to select the view that corresponds
most closely to their own. We also consider responses to other questions that raise issues
concerning special lower tariffs, metering and the cost of water.
The consultation document describes a good outcome in relation to bills and charges in the
following terms:
“Customers recognise that our bills are a fair way of covering the costs of what we
need to do. Bills are seen to be affordable, and the service provided represents good
value for money. Tariffs are simple and easy to understand. We recover fair costs
from developers for the infrastructure needed when new houses are built.”
4.1 Special lower tariffs
The question concerning charges asked for respondents’ views on special lower tariffs in
relation to an increase in their bills:
Q3. What do you think about extending special lower tariffs to help some
people who struggle to pay their bills, even if it means a small increase in other
customers' bills?
Overview of responses
In total, 4,103 people have responded to question 3.
Respondents refer to lower tariffs in relation both to question 3 and in their responses to
other questions. The views expressed include both support and opposition to this idea. Many
respondents say they support lower tariffs, with most stating their agreement without
elaboration. When they explain the principles that underpin their support, respondents most
often identify a duty to help those in need, or state the view that water is a basic human right
or a social essential. Several respondents suggest this is the sort of support they expect of a
“caring” or “fair” society. Some supporters caveat their support, often with criteria around the
level of bill increases or conditions of entitlement.
Others focus on the benefits of lower tariffs – particularly financial – for the water company
and its customers, arguing that it will help to reduce non-payments and to keep all bills at
reasonable levels. Some mention the adverse economic climate as a relevant context.
Others mention particular vulnerable groups they believe deserve support – most often older
people, people with disabilities or families on low incomes. A number note that the
circumstances that might merit assistance through lower tariffs “could happen to anyone”, in
the words of a household customer. Other respondents cite that water is essential to
people’s lives and important to maintaining hygiene and public health.
“With the continuing recession, government cuts (which affect the poor, elderly and
disabled most) then it is important that we pay a little more to reduce the costs to
these needy people.”
Household customer
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
31 of 116
Almost as many respondents as support lower tariffs say they oppose it. Some cases against
a low tariff scheme are made at a high level in terms of fairness or responsibility, with several
respondents calling for everyone to pay their own way, or to be treated the same way.
Sometimes they call for prices to be lowered for all customers. Commonly these respondents
suggest that a scheme is unnecessary, either since bills are already low enough (some say
cheap in comparison with other utilities) or because customers facing extreme difficulties
cannot be cut off anyway, and so need no further support. A number of responses suggest
that Anglian Water take steps to reduce the service non-payers receive, in order to
encourage them to pay. One suggestion is to reduce these users’ water flow, a measure
sometimes referred to as a ”trickle-tap”.
Others worry about the knock-on effects of a low tariff scheme: their concerns include
confusion around multiple tariffs and the additional costs of administering such a scheme.
Some also mention added financial or other strain placed upon those customers who are not
eligible or may not receive support despite needing it. Some respondents comment that
nearly everyone currently struggles to pay their bills. Many of those who state opposition to
special lower tariffs go on to propose alternative arrangements or to provide certain detailed
caveats on their opposition, as explored in the section on entitlement, below
“I think people need to be responsible for the water they use. Increasing one bill to
decrease another might not teach our customers about water efficiency.”
Household customer
Bill increases
Question 3 asks respondents for their view of lower tariffs if paid for through a small increase
in other customers’ bills. A small number of respondents stress their support for crosssubsidy, describing the cause as acceptable or justified. More express their support for
cross-subsidy with some caveat, often stating they would be willing to pay more, “provided”
the assistance were, for instance, limited to a particular vulnerable group, such as older
people. Others say their support would depend on the increase being small, on Anglian
Water providing a matched contribution from its profits, or on the increase targeting only
higher-income bill payers. Several respondents express support as long as certain
exclusions are made – in particular, any customers who are seen to be choosing not to pay
their bills.
“I have no problem with helping those who are in genuine hardship e.g. the elderly,
young carers and suchlike. My acceptance of the increase would depend how far this
tariff was extended.”
Household customer
Some respondents focus more in their answers to question 3 on the potential for increased
bills for some customers than on the lower tariffs scheme itself. A number say they are
opposed, while others express more of a concern without stating outright objection. Most
who detail their objections question the fairness of the measure and different reasons for
considering it unjust. Several mention again the difficult economic context as a relevant
consideration in asking some customers to pay more. Opinion among respondents who
oppose increased bills is divided, with some stating that water bills are already too high to
justify further increases, while others argue that they are not currently high enough to be
unaffordable. These respondents frequently make this case in explicit comparison to bills for
other utilities.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
32 of 116
Some respondents compare bill increases to taxation, often saying they pay enough tax
towards the provision of state benefits and contending that people should be receiving
sufficient assistance from the government without having to resort to Anglian Water’s lower
tariffs. Others do not deny the possibility that more support might be needed, but still say that
the government should make up the difference through benefits.
“My water bill is too high as it is and I don't see why I should subsidise other people.
My taxes pay for benefits and don't see why I should pay more for my water for
people who are struggling.”
Household customer
The need for the cost of lower tariffs for some customers to be met by other customers is
challenged by a few respondents in relation to customer debt reduction. They assert that
while reducing some customers’ bills theoretically results in lower revenue levels for Anglian
Water, in reality lower tariffs would result in some level of payment being received from
customers who otherwise would not have paid anything. Lower tariffs would therefore
increase Anglian Water revenue overall, rather than creating a shortfall the company would
then need to pass on to customers.
Who pays?
For several respondents, the question of who would pay higher bills in order to subsidise
lower tariffs is important. They say that those who can most afford to pay them or live in more
affluent areas should pay more. A few respondents suggest house size should be used to
determine thresholds for variable tariffs. A number of other respondents focus on the need to
exempt the “middle class” or those “in the middle” from the additional burden, arguing that
they already lose out by ineligibility for other benefits and assistance, or more forcibly that
they are already “penalised” or “punished” despite managing to pay their bills. For some
respondents, the idea of a group who struggle most is troubling: they say that everybody
struggles and none should be singled-out for special treatment.
“I'm on a low income but not eligible for any help, so if my bills rose to help others it
would be a struggle for me.”
Household customer
Many respondents push for the cost of a lower tariff scheme not to be borne by customers at
all, but by Anglian Water itself. These respondents often mention Anglian Water’s profits and
shareholders. Many respondents call for the cost of lower tariffs to be met from Anglian
Water’s company profits or by reducing shareholder returns. A few respondents wonder
whether management bonuses could cover the costs of the scheme. A number of
respondents call explicitly for the cost of the scheme to be split between customers and the
company or shareholders.
“I don't believe some customers should be paying for others who are struggling to
have lower tariffs. I feel 16 million pounds worth of profit would make a significant
impact on those who struggle if shareholders would only accept their responsibilities.”
Household customer
Other suggestions for meeting the costs include establishment of an Anglian Water charity
fund to assist struggling customers. Other respondents call for the funds to be found in
company efficiency savings, or by accompanying the scheme with stricter and more effective
enforcement of bill payment. A few respondents turn their attention to businesses that are
customers of Anglian Water, calling for larger commercial customers to meet the costs, or
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
33 of 116
specifically for business rates to be raised to the equivalent of residential rates in order to
pay for the scheme.
Entitlement
Nearly as many respondents express some support for lower tariffs as give unqualified
support or the measure, but they frequently add certain caveats. A large number of
respondents discuss conditional and qualifying aspects of a lower tariff scheme, and cover a
wide range of topics.
Many caveats on the lower tariffs scheme deal with entitlement. Many respondents specify
that it should be restricted according to particular needs or situations. Medical conditions,
disability, and old age are all identified as appropriate eligibility criteria for the provision of low
or social tariffs. When mentioning customers with medical conditions, respondents
sometimes specify relevant treatments such as dialysis which require extra water
consumption. Several other circumstances are mentioned slightly less frequently, including
single parenthood, low income, and unemployment or redundancy. Families experiencing
such difficulties are often specifically mentioned, although a few respondents suggest that
single people should receive a discount as with council tax. Another respondent proposes
lower tariffs should be scalable according to the size of the household.
“If they need to use a lot of water due to, for example, a medical condition and are on
a water meter that is causing large bills, the sensible option would be to put them
back to a set charge for their water that can be budgeted for.”
Household customer
Some respondents suggest their own distinctions between eligible low income groups in
particular and those who should not receive lower tariffs, sometimes described with terms
such as “scroungers” or “slackers”. Several respondents raise state benefits as a relevant
consideration, often saying those receiving benefits should be disqualified from the scheme
as they already receive financial support. These respondents sometimes stress that through
taxation they already contribute to support for those receiving benefits. Some focus on abuse
of state benefits as a concern when determining entitlement, or simply state that anyone
receiving benefits should be excluded.
Many respondents placing caveats on entitlement to lower tariffs discuss the reasons
customers might struggle to pay their bills, or describe behaviours that should form
conditions of entitlement. Some perceive the ability to pay water bills as a question of
financial priorities, suggesting that “lifestyle choices” or spending on “luxuries” ought not to
be compensated with lower tariffs. These concerns are sometimes linked to suggestion of
benefit abuse described above, while a few respondents worry that savings through lower
tariffs may be used to subsidise unaffordable lifestyles. Many respondents try to distinguish
those who “won’t pay” and so should not be entitled to lower tariffs from those who really
“can’t pay”.
A number of respondents suggest those struggling to pay may need to do better household
budgeting. Financial education is suggested as a way of making sure that beneficiaries meet
the cost of lower bills. However, some respondents discussing financial difficulty completely
oppose lower tariffs and suggest better budgeting and financial management as a substitute.
“My water bill is too high as it is and I don't see why I should subsidise other people.
My taxes pay for benefits and don't see why I should pay more for my water for
people who are struggling. They should look to other ways of affording their bills like
cutting down on luxuries and managing a household budget, like I have to do.”
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
34 of 116
Household customer
Some respondents make means testing a caveat of their support for lower tariffs, or specify
that it must be ongoing, rigorous, or carefully monitored for abuse. A number think that
entitlement should be reassessed periodically, so that lower tariffs are not given to those who
no longer need them. Others point out the limits of means testing, its fallibility, its cost or its
social and personal impacts. The whole question of entitlement to lower tariffs, according to
some respondents, comes down to the adversity of individual circumstances, and a small
number of supporters of lower tariffs object to ruling recipients in or out by group or label.
Some go further to say the lower tariff must only be available to those in really extreme
circumstances, including one household customer who suggests a cap on the number, or
that it should be a clearly short-term temporary measure until customers are back on their
feet.
“Only those most vulnerable should receive extended lower tariffs to help them pay
their bills. I do not agree with other customers footing the bill for individuals who
cannot prioritise their own personal debts/expenditure to meet utilities.”
Household customer
Water use and education
Many respondents discuss water metering as a way of earning or measuring eligibility for
lower tariffs. Some respondents opposed to lower tariffs suggest that water metering should
be compulsory and should in itself be sufficient to ensure that all can pay their bills.
Respondents who support lower tariffs also sometimes say the installation of a meter should
be a condition of receiving a lower tariff. For others, water-saving devices should be
compulsory as a means of measuring and encouraging reduced water use. Some say
demonstrating an effort to save water, to reuse water, or to achieve a lower rate of
consumption per member of the household should be a condition of receiving lower tariffs.
“Metering could be used to identify those who need but not to the wasteful. Metering
monitoring by comparison with like properties.”
Household customer
Some respondents suggest providing information or education on water use to help reduce
the cost of bills as an essential element of any scheme they could support, asking Anglian
Water to invest in education on water usage, value and conservation alongside social tariffs.
Some of these reflect on understanding of the value of water, and question whether bills
currently reflect the value of water adequately – suggesting that lower tariffs would only
further distort this, perhaps leading to increased usage. For a few respondents, help with
paying others’ bills should not come at the expense of ensuring water safety and preserving
resources for future generations. The information provided around any lower tariff initiative is
seen by several respondents as important. Some say the cross-subsidy arrangement must
be properly explained to customers, or there should be transparency about the movement of
money between customers’ bills.
“I think that AW bills are low enough already, so do not agree with this. All other
avenues should be looked at first, such as educational use of water, installation of
meter, water-saving inserts etc.”
Employee of Anglian Water
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
35 of 116
Other comments
Some say that the increase in other customers’ bills should be “small”, “reasonable”, “barely
noticeable” or affordable for those who have to pay it, and that this would be a condition of
their support. One suggests it should be limited to 5% of the bill, another that it should be no
more than £2 or £3. Respondents say that it would be important for the standing charge not
to increase as well, otherwise the lower tariff would be made ineffective.
“If the increase is small, that's acceptable. If the increase goes much beyond 5% of
my bill, I think the company should consider other mechanisms to recoup the lost
income.”
Household customer
Respondents ask for other conditions around a lower tariff scheme too. Some say it would be
acceptable only if the service is good for all customers, or that it would depend on where the
thresholds are set. Others say they would like more information on the operation of the
scheme in order to make a judgement. Others worry that such a scheme will not receive
much support from customers in general, or explain that they feel they might benefit and so
cannot present an objective view. For some, support seems reluctant, with respondents
saying that if such a scheme brought some income from struggling customers, it would be
better than nothing. Among other suggestions, respondents call for increased bills to be a
voluntary measure for customers who wish to support others, or propose a bonus or gift of
some sort for those who pay higher bills, without specifying what that might be.
Several respondents suggest that Anglian Water could do more to publicise already available
discounted tariffs such as SoLow, and take a more proactive role in offering these to eligible
customers. Indeed, some respondents think the need for lower tariffs can be at least partially
obviated by this. Others think that there might be less need for lower tariffs if Anglian Water
made payment terms more favourable. For instance, the company could give customers
more time between receiving a bill and the date payment is due, spread payments over a
longer period, or bill on a monthly basis to encourage budgeting. A few respondents
advocate allowing customers to take payment “holidays” that would allow them to choose to
defer payment for a short period of time.
The possibility of separate sources of drinking water and water suitable for other purposes,
as a means to help customers or the company itself to lower costs, is also suggested by
some respondents. Alternative models for restricting costs include caps rather than variable
tariffs, and “glide paths” – or a targeted transition achieved in gradual steps – to assist
customers with the potentially costly transferral from their current tariffs to metered
payments. Others suggest sliding scale charges which start out at a reduced rate per unit,
but increase incrementally as water usage increases. Similarly some argue that a discounted
rate should only apply up to a given level, such as the average household usage level, and
water used above that threshold should be charged at the standard rate.
“As a general principle I am against cross-subsidy, but accept that it is probably
inevitable (and is potentially also linked to a move to increased/compulsory metering).
I think that the eligibility criteria for such tariffs should be extremely limited, eligibility
should be regularly re-assessed and the extent of the cross-subsidy should be
transparent both to those receiving it and those paying for it. It should be a separate
line item on bills. I think an important part of these tariff arrangements should be glide
paths for those who can pay currently but may struggle if subject to metering: there
should be a fixed period for these customers to make the adjustment (3 years) at
which point their eligibility for special tariffs would be evaluated as normal.”
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
36 of 116
Household customer
4.2 Metering
Question 4 presents respondents with choices regarding views on metering Anglian Water
customers.
Q4. We know that it will not be possible for all properties to have a meter.
However, for those that can, what best describes your attitude towards
metering:

I think everyone should be made to switch to a meter as soon as possible – 1,835

I think everyone should be made to switch but this should be phased in over time to allow
for people to adjust to changes in their bills – 991

I think the decision should be voluntary and people should make the decision in their own
time – 1,195

I think the decision should be voluntary but Anglian Water should encourage people to
make this change – 682

No option selected – 168
As illustrated in Figure 8, 58% of respondents think that everyone should be made to switch
to a meter. Approximately two in five (38%) respondents say people should be made to
switch as soon as possible, and one in five (20%) respondents say it should be phased in
over time to allow for people to adjust to changes in their bills. Respondents reporting that
they have a meter at their property are more likely to say people should be made to switch as
soon as possible compared to respondents who report that they do not currently have a
meter (47% compared to 14%).
One in four (25%) respondents say people should make the decision in their own time. About
one in seven (14%) respondents say that, although the decision should be voluntary, Anglian
Water should encourage people to make this change. Respondents reporting that they do
not currently have a meter at their property are more likely to say people should make the
decision in their own time compared to respondents who report already having a meter at
their property (55% compared to 17%).
Figure 8: What best describes your attitude towards metering?
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
37 of 116
% of respondents
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
I think everyone should be made to
switch to a meter as soon as
possible
N=1,835
38%
I think the decision should be
voluntary and people should make
the decision in their own time
N=1,195
25%
I think everyone should be made to
switch but this should be phased in
over time to allow for people to
adjust to changes in their bills
N=991
20%
I think the decision should be
voluntary but Anglian Water should
encourage people to make this
change
No option selected
35
N=682
14%
N=168
3%
Base: 4,871
Respondents also comment on metering in their responses to other open questions. These
729 comments are reported on here.
Support for metering
Across all consultation questions, responses indicate strong levels of support for the
metering of water. Of the many people who make comments about metering, a great majority
express their support for this measure, with many of these suggesting it should be made
compulsory. A few respondents oppose making the installation of meters in properties
compulsory against the wishes of the householder. One response favours compulsory
metering but thinks it should be phased in over a period of time to allow people to adjust to
any resulting change in their bills. Another respondent thinks that customers should be able
to have an existing meter removed and return to a non-metered service should they so wish.
Some respondents refer to the pricing mechanisms of other utility services, and express
support for the adoption of a similar “pay-for-what-you-use” model for water.
“Every customer should be on a water meter. We don't all pay a set amount for our
gas and electricity, why should we for our water?”
Household customer
Reducing usage and cost
Linking cost to usage is seen by a number of respondents as a good way to encourage
households to value water more highly as a resource and provide them with a clear
motivation to reduce the amount they use. Others think that metering provides households
with greater control over their bills by allowing their actions to directly influence the charges
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
38 of 116
40
they face. It is suggested that metering could benefit particular types of customers such as
single-person households. Another suggestion is that commercial water users also be
metered, including large-scale users.
“If everyone was on a water meter then they could control their own expenses and it
would encourage them to save water.”
Household customer
A number of respondents note that there are some types of property where it is difficult, or
not possible, to install a meter. These include council housing and private rental properties.
These respondents would like Anglian Water to make efforts to reduce the number of
properties where this is the case.
Cost concerns
A small number of respondents express concern about the cost of a metered water supply.
The majority of these assert that metered households in some cases pay more than those
using non-metered water. Some provide anecdotal evidence of such scenarios, even when it
is asserted that the customer had made efforts to reduce their consumption levels. Some
suggest that faulty meters, or leaks, might cause these high costs. There is encouragement
for Anglian Water to deal with such issues promptly, and where possible take a proactive
stance to alert customers to potential leaks through the monitoring of usage patterns, for
example. While respondents suggest that single people, couples, and small families might
save money with metering, there are concerns that it might result in higher bills for larger
families, including those on a low-income. A couple of respondents suggest specific
measures should be in place for such families. One suggests that there be a maximum
charge at which metered supplies would be capped. A specific suggestion is to lower the
cost of watered water.
Several respondents would like more regular reading of their meters. They feel that it would
help them to better manage their costs.
“We are very economical with our water use, and yet are paying more than twice as
much as when paying based on rateable value.”
Household customer
Finally, one response refers to the cost of meter installation, stating that this cost should not
be met by the bill payer. A couple of respondents support that financial or other incentives
could be used to encourage people to have a meter installed.
Smart metering
Some respondents refer to smart metering. This type of advanced meter is seen as a way of
helping customers understand their usage and costs better through an easier to read
interface with the capacity to provide more detailed data to the customer. Some suggest too
that these meters could reduce costs for Anglian Water by allowing meter readings to be
transmitted electronically, rather than Anglian Water needing to visit homes to take readings.
Another suggests that in the future smart meters might enable customers to benefit from
more dynamic pricing structures, such as variable unit pricing.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
39 of 116
4.3 Cost of water
As well as specific comments relating to Anglian Water’s low tariff proposals or their plans for
metering, respondents make general comments about the cost of water bills across all
consultation questions. A total of 2,166 comments are made about cost generally.
Reduce water bills or keep increases to a minimum
When respondents are asked what they would expect Anglian Water to be doing in the
future, the most frequent answer is that it should reduce bills overall for customers.
Respondents believe that it is the water company’s responsibility to ensure water and
wastewater services are affordable, fairly priced and value for money. Customers favourably
compare their Anglian Water bills with those of other utilities. However, a few respondents
feel that Anglian Water’s cost compares less favourably against that of other water
companies:
“You are one of the most expensive water companies. You need to be careful your
charges do not create bad press”
Household customer
While acknowledging the difficulty of “doing more for less”, respondents feel that this
requirement is more important than ever in the current financial climate, as businesses and
members of the public are less able to cope will rises in bills:
“Your main duty especially in these tough economic times is to keep bills down.
However you achieve this I don’t mind.”
Household customer
Respondents compare rises in their water bills with the rising rate of inflation. Some complain
that bills are rising by “inflation-busting percentages”, and others state that they would be
happy if bills increased either in line with or below the rate of inflation. The cost of living
index, the retail price index and the consumer price index are also used as comparisons.
The current economic climate is used to argue for and against lower tariffs. Some think that it
makes lower tariffs all the more necessary, in order to support those who need it. These
respondents tend to request bill reduction only for particular groups such as single parent
families, those in deprived areas, or older people. Others think that bills increased because
of cross-subsidies would then become unaffordable for those who do not qualify for lower
tariffs. Comments on lower tariffs are reported on in more detail in section 4.1.
Some respondents object to money from customers’ bills being spent to fund other “extra” or
non-essential work such as environmental objectives or community aims that they feel will
lead to higher bills than necessary. Some state that increasing value for money through bill
reduction is a community service in itself.
“It is easy for a company to impose an increase and then ensure they spend all that
budget without giving good value for money to its ‘customers’.”
Household customer
Many respondents discuss the concept of equality and fairness across customers in the
pricing of water. A significant number state that pricing should be “fair”, without further
elaboration of what they consider to constitute fairness. For others, “fairness” is considered a
larger choice of tariffs that will accommodate a wide range of customers and their varying
water needs, whereas others see compulsory metering and pay-for-what-you-use as the only
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
40 of 116
way forward. Other respondents link their statements to comments that every customer
should pay the same price for water, or customers should pay according to “equal” tariffs. A
small number of respondents specify that they believe everyone should pay the same cost
per unit of water they use, rather than an identical flat rate. A couple of respondents raise the
issue of price differences between domestic and commercial users, including farmers. A few
respondents feel that commercial users pay too little or should at least pay the same rate as
domestic customers.
A number of respondents feel that prices should be lower or that water should even be
provided free of charge to customers because they see it as a resource that Anglian Water
does not have to pay for. These respondents often mention that Anglian Water’s supply “falls
from the sky for free”, as some household customers put it, and consequently should be
supplied to customers for free. Some Anglian Water employees confirm that this is a attitude
they also perceive among customers who could be made more aware of what is involved in
delivering water and wastewater services.
“There is no reason for price increases. We have not got any more service for our
money. The rain falls from the sky and should be free to all. Please keep this in mind.”
Household customer
“People's opinion still seems to be water should be free, I find.”
“More openness about what a customer actually pays for when they pay their bill so
they can appreciate the costs involved in supply a usually thought of ‘free’ product.”
Employees of Anglian Water
Suggestions for saving money
There are some respondents who feel that money can only be saved if certain services or
aspirations are cut. However, some ask that Anglian Water’s service remains “excellent” or is
improved, while water bills are reduced or stay the same. This is occasionally accompanied
by suggestions about how this could be achieved. For some, the solution is to reduce
Anglian Water profits or the amount of money that is “wasted inside the company”.
“Reducing bills rather than increasing shareholder dividends.”
Household customer
Several respondents say that water efficiency is the simplest solution to bill reduction,
through fixing leaks, meters and incentives. Some suggest that people who cannot afford to
pay their bills are put on meters and given other water-saving information, rather than putting
them on lower tariffs:
“Promoting water efficiency as a way to save money to lower income areas that tend
to be the highest water users.”
Household customer
Some request that they themselves are metered or otherwise incentivised to lower usage
through potential reduction in bills. A common suggestion is to provide financial incentives for
lower usage of water – such as more reasonable rates for metered customers, or discounts
on bills for those who are making the most effort to lower their usage:
“I would like discounts on my water bill for having water-saving devices installed in
and around the home like water butts, water-saving taps and shower heads, dual
flush toilets, rain water harvesting tanks, etc.”
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
41 of 116
Household customer
Other suggestions for alternative rates include having cheaper water rates during the night,
or water becoming incrementally more expensive as you use more. A few comments regard
standing charges, stating that either that they should be removed or that the standing
charges for water and wastewater are levelled.
Water is not too expensive
Despite these comments, there are other respondents who believe that water is not too
expensive, particularly when compared to other “essential commodities” such as food or fuel:
“I struggle with every day bills but water and sewage are acceptable for me as a
family of five.”
Household customer
This point is often made in conjunction with opposition to lower tariffs to emphasise the belief
that water is affordable, even for people on lower incomes.
A few Anglian Water employees say they would be willing to accept a small increase in their
bill. Others, however, empathise with members of the public, saying that they are more
understanding because they work for the company.
Others think that the water bill is only just affordable, and that any excess cost (e.g., from
lower tariffs subsidising those on lower incomes) would raise bills to an unacceptable level.
Water should be more expensive
A few respondents agree that water bills are reasonable but go on to state that water is too
cheap or undervalued. Some respondents feel that the cost of water should reflect how much
we should value it. These respondents are concerned that reducing bills further would send
the wrong message about the value of water, and instead Anglian Water should focus on
education regarding water efficiency.
“Water is often considered as a commodity with little value; some have gone so far to
say that the cost of water is ‘too cheap’.”
Household customer
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
42 of 116
Chapter 5 – Safe clean water
In this chapter, we look at responses to questions 5 and 6.
Question 5 is an open question asking for views on “catchment management” plans.
Question 6 is a multiple-choice question, presenting a number of aspects of water quality and
asking respondents to select the one most important to them. We also consider responses to
other questions that raise issues concerning catchment management and water quality.
The consultation document describes a good outcome in relation to water quality:
“Customers are confident that their water is always clean and safe to drink and use.
Water sources are used wisely and protected properly, and all legal requirements are
met.”
5.1 Catchment management
Question 5 asks for respondents’ views on catchment management plans. Anglian Water
defines catchment management as influencing land-use practices to reduce pollution before
it affects water sources.
Q5. ‘Catchment management’ plans involve testing now for potentially
uncertain benefit. It could also involve paying farmers and landowners to
change what they do. What are your views on this approach?
Overview of responses
A total of 3,300 people responded to this question with most of these expressing either
support for or opposition to catchment management as it is described in the question.
Overall, the number of respondents who support, or conditionally support, these proposals
outnumbers those who oppose them.
Common reasons for supporting catchment management include a concern for the safety of
drinking water and for the health of the environment, as well as a belief that preventative
management of water resources is more efficient and effective.
Many respondents are concerned, however, that these proposals will be costly and entail an
increase in customers’ bills. The issue of paying farmers and landowners to change their
behaviour is also highly contentious, and a large number of respondents also argue that the
responsibility to sort out water pollution should not fall entirely to Anglian Water, but the
government or Environment Agency as well. Many respondents suggest the introduction of
legislation to address these issues.
Understanding catchment management
A large number of respondents indicate that they do not understand the wording or meaning
of this question. In particular, many comment that they do not know what catchment
management is, with some also saying that they do not understand the meaning of the
“potentially uncertain benefit” referred to in the question.
Others provide an opinion on the proposals after asking whether their definition of catchment
management is correct. In some cases their understanding of catchment management as
efforts to prevent pollution from contaminating water sources is consistent with that of
Anglian Water. However, respondents also express a range of alternative interpretations of
catchment management, including that it relates to: water conservation and self-sufficiency of
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
43 of 116
farmers and landowners; water abstraction mechanisms; water storage infrastructure;
rainwater harvesting; and the use of land management in efforts to prevent flooding.
The above interpretations are also evident in a number of other responses, where although
the person responding does not question the meaning of catchment management, they
support or oppose it for reasons related to the above – for example, that it is important to
reduce the risk of flooding.
Related to the issues of understanding and interpretation of the question, many other
respondents say that they need more information about the specifics of the proposals before
they are able to offer a view.
Respondents also ask a range of specific questions on issues including: what it is that
farmers and landowners are doing wrong; whether this is not illegal already; how much the
proposals would cost; how much would be paid to farmers and landowners; whether
customers’ bills would increase, and if so by how much; how the impacts would be
measured; and how certain or uncertain the benefits are.
A few respondents complain that the framing of this question and the lack of information
provided is leading, and as such is unlikely to elicit a response in favour of catchment
management from respondents.
It is worth noting that a number of respondents simply comment that they are “unsure”.
Overall support
A large proportion of respondents support the catchment management suggestion in its
entirety. Many of these do not comment further on their reasons for this support, just saying
that they agree, or in some cases that it is necessary or extremely important. Similarly, some
simply argue that “anything which helps should be done”, or that these changes will benefit
everyone. Others implicitly support the proposals by stressing the importance of investing in
“safe clean water”. Several respondents also argue that Anglian Water should be less
cautious and start using catchment management as soon as possible, either because they
feel the benefits have been proven, or because testing is the only way to find out if it works.
“There is plenty of evidence from around the world that, taken at a catchment scale
(rather than at the scale of the specific intervention), investments in better land
management will pay a handsome dividend […]. Anglian Water (and Ofwat) need to
apply a 'balance of probabilities' approach here, rather than seeking to prove 100%
effectiveness every time 'beyond reasonable doubt'.”
Household customer
Of those who do indicate the reasoning for their support, many argue that catchment
management is important for its long-term benefits in protecting the water supply for the
future. Some respondents emphasise that this is important as it will protect the environment,
wildlife or biodiversity. Others stress the importance to people’s health of having clean and
safe drinking water. Several respondents also emphasise that taking action is justified and
important even if it will increase prices, as it is worth it in the long-term.
“I agree with it entirely. Paying now for what is certainly catchment improvements in
the future will prevent massive pollution problems at a later stage.”
“This should be encouraged as much as possible, not just for the purposes of drinking
water but also to protect the environment and the wildlife that depends on clean
water.”
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
44 of 116
“I think it this is good as it’s vital that the water people are drinking is clean and safe.”
Household customers
Some employees of Anglian Water also argue that investment in catchment management to
maintain water quality is crucial in keeping the trust of customers.
Another strand of support comes from those respondents who emphasise the benefits of
catchment management’s “upstream” or preventative approach. As well as being considered
important as it prevents pollution in the water in the first place, some respondents – including
several employees of Anglian Water – argue that catchment management will be costeffective in the long term as less money will need to be spent on treating polluted water.
Several respondents also suggest that catchment management is important to prepare for
future challenges, including water scarcity, climate change, and population increases.
“I think catchment management is extremely important. It is important to understand
that problems downstream can be minimised by actions upstream and gaining the
support of farmers and landowners is crucial for this.”
“[…] The alternative to catchment management is to accept that Anglian Water need
to carry out all investments possible to improve water quality. This would be without
any evidence or proof of benefit, and ultimately would increase customers’ bills.”
Employees of Anglian Water
A few respondents discuss various secondary benefits which they associate with catchment
management, such as more efficient use of resources by farmers which will reduce their
carbon footprint. A few other respondents note that a change in agricultural products such as
fertilisers and pesticides may possibly result in a reduction in chemicals in food, as well as
improved community relationships around local and organic produce.
“I'm all for it. It could reduce cost of water treatment to remove pollutants. Positive
impact on local inhabitants and the environment. Also helps promote a stronger
relationship with the community – with farmers and promoting good practice with
pollutants.”
Employee of Anglian Water
Conditional support
A large number of respondents also support catchment management in principle, but their
support is conditional on particular requirements.
Many of these caveats centre on issues of cost. In particular, several respondents support
the proposals as long as they either reduce or do not increase customers’ bills. Others argue
that the plans are fine only if they are cost-effective, value for money, not too costly, or will
save money in the long-term. Some respondents also say catchment management should
only be used if it is cheaper than treating the water. Other respondents suggest that costs
should be shared between Anglian Water and farmers and landowners, with some
commenting that these latter groups are responsible for the damage or that they will also
benefit from the changes.
“It seems a reasonable approach but costs should be shared between Anglian Water
and farmers/landowners.”
Organisation - Essex Chambers of Commerce
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
45 of 116
“I think this is a good idea although I also think that farmers and landholders should
also have to pay for the pollution they cause through their land management, e.g. use
of fertilisers and herbicides, etc.”
Household customer
Other issues raised as caveats to support for catchment management focus on the efficacy
of the catchment management approach. Several respondents say they support the
proposals as long as they are found to improve drinking water quality or safety, or as long as
they benefit the environment, improve resource efficiency, or increase the long-term
sustainability of the water supply. Others argue that Anglian Water needs to determine how
to measure improvements appropriately and that they need to monitor the situation properly
to make sure changes actually occur. One Anglian Water employee argues that any data
collected should be shared across the industry to avoid duplication of work.
“If it increases sustainability of water supply for the future it is a good thing.”
“Yes, you should do this as long as proper monitoring is put in place and the farmers,
etc actually make the changes.”
Household customers
A number of respondents stress the importance of careful planning, with one employee of
Anglian Water arguing that it should be part of a long-term plan supported by industry
regulators.
“Generally in support of this strategy as long as the regulators support a long-term
plan which doesn't change so drastically along the way that there are significant
'opportunity' costs wasted. The planning horizon for CM [catchment management]
must extend well beyond the AMP [Asset Management Plan] cycle to 25- maybe
even 50-year horizons.”
Employee of Anglian Water
The issue of uncertain benefits as mentioned in the question is also addressed by a number
of respondents who support catchment management overall. Many of these people argue
that small-scale trials should be conducted initially to find out if the approach is effective.
Some also stress that no action should be taken until benefits are proven.
“Limited investment for a monitored trial should establish whether it's worth it – worth
investing in appropriate research.”
“From what I have read I think it is worth it in the long run, so long as there is a review
in the future to ensure that it is stopped if there is really no chance it is going to work.
Trialling something in the short term though to test its viability is perfectly fine and
acceptable if there is a chance it will benefit everyone later.”
Household customers
Several respondents argue that while they support the catchment management proposals
put forward by Anglian Water, other entities ought to play a role in dealing with the issues
that catchment management seeks to address, particularly the Environment Agency. A few
respondents suggest that in addition to the proposed catchment management measures, the
company ought to lobby the government for changes in legislation so that farmers and
landowners change without having to be paid.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
46 of 116
“[…] other key stakeholders such as the Environment Agency also have a role to
play.”
Employee of Anglian Water
“I think that if it is necessary to protect the quality of our drinking water then Anglian
Water should be doing it, but I would also like to see Anglian Water set aside some
money to lobby the government for legislation to be put in place so that it is not
necessary to pay farmers and landowners off to get them to change their ways to
protect our water supplies.”
Household customer
Some respondents hinge their support for the proposals on the way in which they will affect
farmers and landowners. A few people stipulate that farmers should not be adversely
affected, and should be fully reimbursed for any costs they have to pay or any loss of
earnings. Several respondents argue that any changes by farmers or landowners should be
voluntary. On the other hand, several comment that they support catchment management as
long as farmers or landowners who pollute are also punished or penalised in some way, or
as long as they themselves fund the changes rather than Anglian Water doing this. A number
also support catchment management but oppose the idea of paying farmers and landowners
to change what they do, for reasons that will be discussed later in a later section of this
chapter, ‘Paying farmers and landowners?’.
“Yes, so long as the farmers don’t lose out – they can’t make profit as it is!”
“So long as land use/management changes are voluntary and farmers/landowners'
businesses are not adversely affected (or are compensated if it is), it is a good
approach.”
Household customers
A few respondents also caveat their support for catchment management with the argument
that any future financial benefits gained by these changes should be passed on to
customers, not Anglian Water or its shareholders.
Overall opposition
A comparatively small number of respondents oppose the suggestion of catchment
management in its entirety. The vast majority of these do not explain their reasoning; they
simply state that they disagree, that it is unnecessary, not a priority, or to let the status quo
remain.
Of those respondents who do provide an explanation for their opposition, many suggest that
the proposals would not work, and a few respondents argue that this is because farmers and
landowners will not change, or because the payments would not be high enough to
compensate for the lower crop yields expected. Other respondents suggest that the risks of
the proposed action are greater than the rewards, and that it would not be cost-effective.
Several opposing respondents argue that catchment management should not be the
responsibility of water companies, but rather the Environment Agency or the government.
Others suggest that farmers should be responsible for their own land and prevent pollution
voluntarily, while a few respondents argue that water companies should focus on their main
services and leave farmers to do the same.
Finally, a number of people also oppose catchment management on the basis that it will
cause bills to rise, will decrease farmers’ yields, or that the benefits are too uncertain to make
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
47 of 116
it worthwhile. Some respondents argue that Anglian Water should invest in more effective
water treatment or filtration instead.
“Waste of money. The remit of the water company should focus on the core activity,
not attempt social engineering. There are many factors affecting the way a farmer
operates and his focus needs to be in producing reliable and plentiful yields. The
water company should not interfere unless it is having a serious impact on our
operations.”
Household customer
Paying farmers and landowners
The suggestion of paying farmers and landowners to change their behaviour, as mentioned
in question 5 on catchment management, is contentious among respondents and addressed
specifically by many. Below we address opposition, support and conditional support to the
idea of compensating farmers and landowners to change as part of catchment management
plans.
Opposition to compensation
A large number of respondents disagree with the idea that farmers and landowners should
be paid to change. As mentioned previously, some of these do so while still expressing
support for catchment management in general; however, many focus purely on the issue of
compensation without addressing catchment management more widely. The reasons given
by these two groups for opposing compensation cross over significantly and will therefore be
covered together here.
Some of those respondents who oppose compensation do not comment further on why they
think this. However, many respondents do offer further explanation.
A common belief expressed by respondents is that farmers and landowners should not
require payment to change their behaviour as it is their duty or responsibility to do so without
incentive, and some suggest farmers and landowners should instead be forced to change.
Some also argue that paying farmers would be unfair as other people have to make changes
but are not paid to do so. A few respondents comment that the farmers stand to benefit in the
long run from any changes they make.
“I don't think anybody should be paid to do something they should morally be doing
anyway!”
“Why should we be paying farmers to change their practices? No one pays us to
change ours. They should be compelled to change and fined if they don't comply.”
Household customers
Quite a few of the respondents who oppose paying farmers and landowners to change their
behaviour do so on the basis that it is the polluter who should pay to deal with any problems
they have caused. A few respondents argue that we should not pay farmers and landowners
to change as we are already paying through treatment costs.
“Farmers and landowners need to be treated in the same way as others and not
pampered. Polluter pays is an excellent principle. If current practices are damaging
they should be changed by compulsion which is what happens in other industries.”
Household customer
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
48 of 116
“Changing the actions of landowners should occur but this should be done through
legislation implemented by government. We can help facilitate change but should not
pay – we are already paying through treatment and consents.”
Employee of Anglian Water
Another frequent response from respondents who oppose the concept of compensation is
that farmers and landowners are already wealthy. A few respondents distinguish between
farmers and landowners on this point, saying that it is acceptable to pay farmers but not
landowners, as the latter are already rich. Quite a few people also suggest that farmers
already receive many subsidies from the government or the European Union and therefore
do not deserve any more assistance.
Another common concern given by those who oppose paying farmers and landowners is that
this would cause consumer bills to rise. A small number of respondents consider these
suggestions by Anglian Water as an excuse to raise their bills further, while others argue that
the money should be spent on other issues, such as helping those who struggle to pay their
bills.
“I have a real issue with paying farmers to make environmentally responsible changes
to their practices. It’s our customers’ pockets vs. the farmers’ financial bottom line and
I don’t think its right that people who struggle to pay their water bills should have to
subsidise private farming business.”
Employee of Anglian Water
Some respondents argue that it should not be the responsibility of Anglian Water to address
these issues. They suggest that instead legislation should be changed, or that pollution
should be policed by other bodies such as the Environment Agency or the government. A
few respondents comment that it is not right that customers should pay for these changes
through their water bills when they are already funding government agencies through tax.
“Farmers should not be paid; they should be made by law to refrain from using
poisons on their land”
Household customer
“Government agencies should be applying pressure on farming to reduce the impact
on the environment. If this is a high risk to drinking water supplies the EA
[Environment Agency] should be both monitoring and policing this. Customers should
not be funding this from water bills when they are already funding government
agencies through tax payments.”
Employee of Anglian Water
A few respondents oppose paying farmers and landowners based on the argument that this
would be very difficult to police, expensive to administer, or that compensating farmers would
not lead to sustainable changes. Several respondents argue that paying farmers to change
may encourage them not to change without payment, or even to pollute more so they will be
paid. Others also disagree with payments being made while the benefits are still uncertain.
“I totally disagree with paying farmers and landowners a subsidy. Firstly any person
being offered a cash incentive will accept whether they accept the terms or not. How
hard will it be to police these subsidies? Will the cost of administration outweigh the
benefits? Far better to work together to reduce everybody’s cost while striving to
improve yields and become less dependent on imported (lower quality) foods.”
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
49 of 116
Household customer
“I do not think that handing extra money to farmers/landowners will help in the long
term; as soon as we cannot afford to pay they will revert back to their old ways and
this will also mean lots of monitoring to ensure they are following the rules.“
Employee of Anglian Water
“Making significant investment with unknown/uncertain benefits seems unintuitive.”
Business customer
Finally, some respondents suggest that while payment is not appropriate, Anglian Water
should help farmers to change in other ways. These suggestions will be discussed in greater
detail below in ‘Additional and alternative suggestions’.
Support for compensation
A number of respondents give their explicit support to this proposed payment. A variety of
reasons are given for this, including that payment is worth it for improvements in water
quality or protection of the environment; that payment seems like an effective mechanism by
which to create change; that payment is necessary as farmers and landowners will not pay
for it themselves; that other services provide incentives to change; and that farmers need to
know that the alternative technology does work so will need to be paid or offered
compensation to try it out. Several respondents also support compensation on the basis that
farmers are struggling and therefore need any financial support they can get.
“Every service provides an incentive to change so why not?”
Household customer
Conditional support for compensation
On the other hand, a large number of respondents are clear that their support for paying
farmers and landowners is conditional and specify a number of particular requirements.
Many of these are the same as those covered in the section on conditional overall support for
catchment management. These include the ideas that compensation should not be given
unless this will improve water quality or the environment, or that this should only be done if it
is cost-effective, if it does not require increasing bills, or if the benefits are relatively certain.
Some respondents also suggest particular circumstances under which they think farmers and
landowners could appropriately be paid. These include payment based on results, or
payment only when farmers prove they have changed their practices. A few respondents
suggest that farmers could be paid if they commit to “green” strategies or organic farming,
while another argues that only “peppercorn” payments would be acceptable, whereby a very
small nominal charge is paid to satisfy a requirement for creating a legal contract.
“It would be brilliant if farmers could be more organic in their approach and maybe
payments could be given for those farmers/landowners who sign up to a green
initiative to help with the transition.”
Household customer
Another common suggestion is that Anglian Water should not “pay” farmers to change, per
se, but instead should compensate them only for any specific costs, loss of earnings or
reduced efficiency. A number of other respondents argue that compensation should be
limited to a certain monetary level, a proportion of any costs incurred in changing, or to a
particular number of years. Other respondents argue that while incentives can be used, flat-
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
50 of 116
fee payments would be inappropriate. Several respondents suggest that Anglian Water
should subsidise specific environmentally-friendly alternative farming products, with one
arguing that these subsidies should stop when the increased demand causes the price of
these products to fall.
“I think this is sensible but since the knowledge of 'safe' farming practice has been
around some time any compensation should not be allowed to last too long... say 5
years.”
Household customer
“In the case of pesticides and herbicides, low availability active chemicals are
generally more expensive and it is reasonable for farmers and landowners to expect
us to contribute to their purchase as the long term gains for AW could be significant.”
Employee of Anglian Water
A number of respondents express the view that the proposed payments to farmers or
landowners are acceptable if this is necessary or the cheapest option, but that other courses
of action would be preferable. These include education initiatives, as well as the government
legislating to stop the polluting behaviour, polluters being fined, or Anglian Water taking
polluters to court. In a similar vein, several respondents comment that they support this
strategy as long as it does not involve paying farmers and landowners to stop doing what is
illegal anyway. A few respondents argue that paying polluters to change their behaviour is
only acceptable if this is cheaper than paying to treat the water afterwards.
“If something is dangerous for the water and a farmer is using this they should be
taken to court to stop but if it is cheaper to pay them then I agree with this option.”
Household customer
“It would not be seen as a best practice approach as illumination through legislation
would be a more long term approach. But a problem exists and if it can be
demonstrated to customers that its more financially and environmentally viable to pay
to remove a problem than to treat flows and put customers at risk it should be
continued while other approaches are continued to be investigated.”
Employee of Anglian Water
Several respondents focus on where the money for any payments would come from. As has
already been mentioned, quite a few respondents only say that this should not be funded by
raising customers’ bills. However, others argue more specifically that the money should
come out of Anglian Water profits, and a few respondents suggest that the government
should partially or wholly fund the compensation. Several respondents argue that while
Anglian Water should partly subsidise the costs of changing, a proportion of the cost should
be met by the landowner or farmer. One respondent argues that EU subsidies should be paid
to the water companies to cover the costs of catchment management.
“In principle I agree with this, but feel that farmers should take some financial
responsibility for what is also business contingency for themselves. This has a larger
effect on the economy too and so the government may also play a role in subsidising
this approach. If Anglian Water pays for all of this then it is the bill paying customers
who foot all the bill.”
Household customer
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
51 of 116
A range of other comments giving conditional support to the proposal for paying farmers and
landowners are made. These include a few respondents whose support hinges on whether
or not we know with certainty that their practices pollute water; if so, they do not deserve to
be paid. A few respondents argue that if Anglian Water does decide to pay farmers and
landowners this should be done on a commercial basis. Finally, several other respondents
argue that while paying farmers and landowners is fine in principle they would need to know
more specifically about the level of remuneration suggested before they can fully judge the
proposals.
“I am not convinced that farmers and landowners should receive payment to
compensate a change in their land use if their current activities are shown to be
having a negative effect on the water quality. If the customer is required to pay for the
increased treatment required then the farmer/landowner should be obliged to adopt
an alternative use of that land. If there is only the possibility that the landowner's
activity might cause a water quality event in the future, there should still be pressure
to change that land use but in this case a small amount of compensation might be
appropriate.”
Household customer
Other issues
A number of respondents do not provide an opinion either way on catchment management or
compensation but do express concerns or considerations about the proposals.
Several respondents only mention that the changes would be difficult or expensive to
implement, that they will take a long time, or that they may not work. A few respondents also
express concern that if farmers and landowners were paid to change it would be very difficult
to police this system to make sure they actually change their practices, and also to ensure
that the changes were sustainable. Others bring up the issue of the “uncertain benefits”
referred to in the question, and worry that it may not be wise to act on these. A small number
suggest that farmers are already changing their attitudes and behaviours.
“This approach could be easily abused by the farmers with very little come back if
they continue to pollute the catchment.”
“I feel that while paying farmers and landowners in the short term would improve their
practice, if the cost of pesticides and their affect on crop yields outweighs the shortterm financial gain from us they will continue with their negative practices in the longterm.”
Household customers
Several respondents also express concern about getting others to agree with these plans,
with a few respondents suggesting that getting buy-in from farmers may be difficult. An
employee of Anglian Water worries that trying to change customers’ behaviour might result in
negative public relations.
A few respondents also worry that these changes may lead to lower yields for farmers, which
may increase the price of food, or the need to import more food. For some, this is a
considerable worry in light of population increases. Some are also concerned that this might
make farmers uncompetitive in the national or international food markets. There is the
suggestion that catchment management changes should be agreed at a Europe-wide level to
avoid such detrimental effects, while others comment that there is a compromise to be found
between clean water and food production.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
52 of 116
On the issue of customer bills, a few respondents comment that they do not care either way
about the proposals as long as their bills do not rise. A few other respondents question
Anglian Water’s motivations and suggest that these proposals may just be a way to increase
customers’ bills. However several also comment that they are happy for their bills to rise if
this will ensure the safety of water and food.
A number of respondents also comment generally that the safety and cleanliness of water is
priority.
Additional and alternative suggestions
In addition to the responses discussed so far, a relatively large number of respondents make
specific suggestions for alternative or additional action that could or should be taken
regarding the issue of catchment management.
In particular, many respondents argue that more research or testing, such as pilot studies,
risk assessments, and cost-benefit analyses should be done, or generally that the issues
need looking into further. Several respondents specifically refer back to the “uncertain
benefit” mentioned in the question when making this point.
“[…] It is important that the company strives to reduce uncertainty in the benefits of
various measures in the catchment through investigation and modelling work.
Understanding the degree of uncertainty and timescales of benefits will help to make
more informed investment decisions.”
Employee of Anglian Water
A number of respondents encourage Anglian Water to engage and work with farmers and
landowners in trying to address these issues, while others suggest it is important for Anglian
Water to collaborate with the government, the Environment Agency, and other industries,
businesses and organisations in trying to tackle the issue appropriately. Another common
suggestion is that farmers and landowners should be forced to change, with penalties given
for non-compliance, or that they should be charged to pollute. Many respondents argue that
this should be facilitated through legislation. There is also the suggestion that Anglian Water
needs to improve their staff capacity in order to effectively engage with catchment
management initiatives in the region. A few suggest focussing efforts on particular areas
such as those known to be at risk of flood or ecologically sensitive.
“[…] I think a more joined up approach is needed in tackling diffuse pollution and the
environmental condition of rivers and catchments. It should not be the sole
responsibility of the water companies (and therefore indirectly customers’ bills are
affected) to provide the 'silver bullet' for tackling this complex and diverse issue. The
government, other industries, as well and farmers and businesses should work
together to tackle this issue, alongside the water company.”
“I think no avenue should be left unexplored in terms of improving water quality but
this type of research should be co-ordinated across the industry and with the
assistance of university quality research, so reach an answer about effectiveness for
the entire industry.”
“Anglian Water needs to create a new cadre of people who can contribute
knowledgeably to catchment management projects (whoever leads them) across the
region.”
Household customers
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
53 of 116
“The concept of Anglian Water working with famers and landowners to encourage
them to change their practices is supported. However the council considers that this
could and should be further developed and undertaken in partnership with LLFAs
[lead local flood authorities] because of the considerable overlap. Joint working
practices could be targeted when working with landowners and farmers to reduce
run-off and therefore improve water quality.”
Organisation - Northampton Borough Council and Northamptonshire County Council
Several other respondents make the point that farmers and landowners should not be held
solely responsible for their pollution but that others are partially to blame. These include the
supermarkets, who push farmers for lower prices and therefore make cheap and damaging
agriculture necessary. The companies who manufacture the chemicals used by farmers
should also be encouraged or required to reduce their toxicity, or to pay for remedial work.
Several respondents suggest Anglian Water should directly fund or work with these
manufacturers to develop more environmentally-friendly products, and a few argue that
Anglian Water could use its purchasing power to help farmers buy environmentally friendly
products at lower cost. There is also the suggestion of a high tax levied on damaging
pesticides and fertilisers.
Others argue that farmers and landowners are not the only ones who should be targeted by
any catchment management initiatives, but also other companies, industries, and
infrastructure – such as landfill dumps and car parks – that pollute the water system.
“I would be more in favour of changing the system so that remedial work to deal with
pollution from pesticides, herbicides, and fertilisers is paid for by the chemical
company providing the product. This would make them more careful about the toxicity
of their product and change the systems to provide safe products. At the moment,
they have little responsibility for any pollution their products create. This is unfair and
enables chemical companies to behave irresponsibly. I believe that Anglian Water
should have a right to recharge the polluter.”
Household customer
Another alternative suggestion made by a number of people was that Anglian Water should
educate farmers and landowners about the negative impacts they may be having on the
water sources and ways in which they can help to improve the situation. Some respondents
suggest that farmers and landowners should be encouraged or helped to change their
practices. This might be done through providing advice, offering incentives such as reduced
water rates rather than outright payment, or funding for specific changes such as manure
heap stores. A few respondents also suggest that Anglian Water should try to focus media
and public attention on the issues, to pressure farmers and landowners to change. Similarly,
several respondents suggest publicising the issues so that the public will be more willing to
accept any water bill or food price rises.
“I think re education for the farmers/landowners could work just as well. Once they
learn of the benefits they may change themselves, so long as it doesn't cost them
anything [...] If there is a cost involved then funds to help them change should be
made available to them.”
Household customer
A range of other responses suggest specific changes farmers could make to help address
the problem of water pollution. These include the reintroduction of crop rotation, the growing
of more appropriate crops or genetically-modified crops, the use of more “friendly” fertilisers,
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
54 of 116
the use of sewage waste as an alternative fertiliser, and a switch to organic farming. A few
people also suggest that farmers should be made to source their own water.
5.3 Drinking water
The following multiple-choice question asks respondents to identify which aspect of their
water quality it is most important to improve.
Q6. There is strict regulation of the quality of drinking water. But there may be
other aspects relating to your water quality which you think are important to
improve. Which, if any, is most important to you:

Discolouration - 509

Taste – 1,074

Hardness – 1,291

The quality of my drinking water is fine – 1,625

Other - 140

No option selected - 232
As outlined in Figure 9, overall about a third (33%) of respondents report that the quality of
their drinking water is fine. However, 27% say hardness is the most important aspect of their
water to improve; 22% say taste; and 10% say discolouration.
Figure 9: Which, if any, of the following about water quality is most important to you?
% of respondents
0
5
10
15
20
25
35
N=1,625
33%
The quality of my
drinking water is fine
N=1,291
27%
Hardness
N=1,074
22%
Taste
N=509
10%
Discolouration
N=140
3%
Other
No option selected
30
N=232
5%
Base: 4,871
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
55 of 116
While only relatively few respondents opt for ‘other’, a total of 509 respondents elaborate on
their response to question 6 in the ‘other’ free-text box. Comments on water quality are also
raised by respondents in other questions as well. A total of 2,099 comments concern water
quality across the consultation; they are reported on together below.
Some respondents say that all aspects of drinking water quality – discolouration, hardness
and taste – are important to improve. However, most respondents identify one or two of the
aspects that they elaborate on.
Hard water
Among the comments about improving water quality, water hardness is comfortably the main
concern among respondents. Most respondents who elaborate on the issue present a view
balancing a preference for softer water with recognition of the benefits, constraints and costs
related to hard water.
Several respondents note that the hardness of the water is a consequence of the local
geology, with some adding that it would be costly or unreasonable to expect Anglian Water to
correct this. Several respondents commenting on water hardness say that they do not
consider it a significant or particularly troubling issue. For some, it is just “a bit” of a concern
or an “aesthetic” issue, and treatment of hard water is a matter for individuals based on their
own preferences, secondary to its basic safety and cleanliness.
“I do not think that if water quality is safe to drink any more money should be spent by
the water authority on aesthetics. This should be up to the individual consumer who
can choose to spend their money or not. If it's safe to drink that should be the only
concern.”
Household customer
Others qualify their concern about hardness with recognition of its benefits – particularly
relating to health. A number of respondents mention the role of the mineral content of hard
water, including calcium and magnesium, in maintaining general health and avoiding
conditions like osteoporosis. Nonetheless, some respondents express concern about its
supposed contribution to conditions such as kidney stones and its impact on their hair and
skin while washing. Among a handful of respondents stating that they prefer to buy bottled
drinking water, one explains that this stems from suffering headaches attributed to tap water.
”I am satisfied with quality of my drinking water; however, I've noted that the hardness
of my water is something which is a daily contention. My skin is sensitive and often
the hardness of the water adds to the dryness.”
Household customer
Many respondents connect their views on water hardness to the costs incurred in avoiding it
or repairing its effects. Several mention the need to buy expensive filters, softeners and
descalers to make their water drinkable, and to tackle limescale in order to preserve or
maintain household appliances and taps. The cost of providing further water treatment
products at home is seen as an additional water cost Anglian Water does not consider as
part of what customers see as the cost of water. Others report the more seriously and costly
ill effects on central heating systems, for instance. A handful note the potential costs to
Anglian Water of managing the clogging of the infrastructure that could be caused by hard
water. A few respondents clearly state that they would be willing to pay more for a hard water
correction scheme. On the other hand, a few respondents suggest that Anglian Water should
pay for any water-softening devices or filtration that customers need to use.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
56 of 116
“Something needs to be done to stop the water reaching customers in a hard
condition if possible. This hard water damages kettles, dishwashers, washing
machines and in effect we have to pay more for our water in the form of purchasing
descalers and water softeners, etc.”
“Hard water leads to higher costs for the average householder.”
Household customers
Taste
Second to hardness, the taste of the water is the aspect of water quality next raised most
often by respondents. Many respondents mention this as a concern, though few of them
elaborate much on the detail of their view. Only a few state that it is acceptable or
unacceptable outright. A few suggest that the taste of their water is inconsistent, approving of
it “at the moment” or noting that it is a concern only “sometimes”. Others stress the
importance of the taste of water, and several say that they are driven to use softeners or
filters, or to boil their water to obtain a standard of taste that satisfies them. Still others say
that they only drink bottled water because of taste. For some respondents, the taste (and
often smell) that bothers them is very particularly chlorine, with specific mention of this
problem in Aldeburgh in particular. Others say their water tastes “metallic”, “chemical” or
“undrinkable”. A few respondents provide additional negative comments on smell. A number
of respondents comment that their drinking water tastes fine.
“[…] everyone should be able to enjoy a glass of water from their tap. There should
be no need for anyone to feel that they need to buy bottled water.”
Household customer
Chemicals
Some respondents who mention concerns about the taste of their water speculate on the
potential chemical content of the supply. Apart from chlorine, several respondents mention
nitrates, or more generally chemicals incidentally found in the water supply as a result of
agricultural processes on the land. A few respondents are worried about lead; one
respondent comments that a sample of tap water suggested lead may be traceable in the
supply. Aluminium is also mentioned by a few respondents.
Some respondents raise health concerns in relation to the potential chemical content of
water, suggesting, for example, that oestrogens might be a concern or that arthritis sufferers
may have been affected by chemicals consumed in tap water. Also quite specifically, several
respondents state clear opposition to the addition of fluoride to the water supply. Where they
elaborate, they argue that it is unnecessary but significant, or that it amounts to unacceptable
mass compulsory medication.
Respondents raising concerns about chemicals in the water supply tend to call for clear
declaration of what is added, or for reassurances about the safety and consistency of the
water supplied by Anglian Water.
“I am keen to ensure the levels of chemicals do not have any long-term detrimental
health effects on my family.”
Household customer
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
57 of 116
Appearance
Respondents make a series of comments about the appearance or clarity of their water.
Most commonly these relate to discolouration: a few report it appearing sometimes
“brownish”, others “pinkish”, some “grey” and others “white”. They also suggest that
discolouration is not consistent, noting it only “sometimes” or “after work”. A couple attribute
discolouration to air bubbles. A small number also report cloudiness, but most note also that
this eventually clears. One respondent makes a request of Anglian Water related to his
experience enquiring about his water’s appearance:
“Should add that I have been re-assured by your people that the occasional
cloudiness of the water is nothing to worry about. It would be good to have more
publicity on this – I had to ask.”
Household customer
Safety
Providing safe drinking water is a clear priority, according to many respondents. They say
that ensuring that customers have safe water to drink is Anglian Water’s primary
responsibility. Several note that cost is irrelevant when it comes to supplying safe water.
Some specifically say that they pay for water with the expectation that it is safe and, thus,
Anglian Water should provide this within its current budget. Some add that Anglian Water
should be investing in maintaining the safety of the water supply for future generations.
“Ensure water is safe for everyone, no matter the cost; it is an essential part of life.”
Household customer
Suggestions
In the context of discussing drinking water quality, some respondents express a desire for
more knowledge around water treatment and alternative, more “natural” mechanisms such
as aeration. Some go on to suggest that Anglian Water develop a water supply separate
from drinking water for non-essential use, adding that the quality of water currently is “too
good” for uses other than drinking, in the words of a household customer.
“I wash my clothes, do my dishes in drinking water – what a waste!”
Household customer
Discussing the widespread concern of hardness, several respondents suggest ways the
company could go about softening the water supply. These range from looking at options to
soften water closer to the source, upon entering individual properties or through a scheme
offered to customers at an additional cost.
Many respondents also show an interest in recycling water and saving costs on treatment.
More specific suggestions and comments around grey water for household use and other
water recycling mechanisms are reported on in section 7.3.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
58 of 116
Chapter 6 – Resilient services
In this chapter, we look at responses to question 7. This is a
multiple- choice question, presenting two options about the rate of investment to increase the
resilience of Anglian Water’s supplies. We also consider responses to other questions that
raise issues concerning resilience.
The consultation document describes a good outcome in relation to resilient services:
“Our business understands and is prepared for the impact of extreme natural and
manmade hazards. Such hazards do not cause customers to suffer interruptions to
water supply or disposal of sewage. Customers understand the risks from disruptive
events. We use the best available science to understand, successfully plan for and
adapt to a changing climate. We monitor the impacts of these changes on our assets
and processes, and consider their impacts on all investments and decision making.
We set an example to others in the region on adapting to our changing climate.”
6.1 Resilience to drought
Anglian Water knows that its customers are concerned about disruptions to their water
supply – such as mandated hosepipe bans – which can occur in response to extended
periods of drought. Question 7 is a multiple-choice question that asks for respondents’ views
on the rate of investment in improving resilience in relation to the speed of improvement and
the impact on bills.
Q7. We want to increase the resilience of our water supplies to prolonged
drought. How quickly do you think we should do this?

Invest at the same rate as we do now, reducing the risk to supplies slowly to keep bill
increases to a minimum – 3,291

Increase the rate of investment to improve our resilience quickly, with an increase to bills
in the short term – 1,130

No option selected – 450
As shown in Figure 10, the majority (68%) of respondents think that Anglian Water should
invest at the same rate as they do now, reducing the risk to supplies slowly to keep bill
increases to a minimum. Fewer than a quarter (23%) say that Anglian Water should increase
the rate of investment to improve resilience quickly, with a short-term increase to bills.
Figure 10: How quickly do you think Anglian Water should increase the resilience of
its water supplies to prolonged drought?
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
59 of 116
% of respondents
0
10
20
30
Invest at the same rate
as we do now, reducing
the risk to supplies
slowly to keep bill
increases to a minimum
50
60
70
80
N=3,291
68%
Increase the rate of
investment to quickly
improve the resilience of
our supplies to drought,
with an increase to bills
in the short term
No option selected
40
N=1,130
23%
N=450
9%
Base: 4,871
6.2 Drought and flooding concerns
On the whole, respondents recognise the need for Anglian Water to consider its resilience
and prepare for natural and man-made hazards. Across the entire consultation, 566
comments are made in reference to these issues, in addition to providing suggestions to deal
with them. Of those who make detailed comments on the issues raised in question 7, many
express concern about either, or both, flooding and drought which are often explicitly linked
by respondents. In many cases respondents encourage Anglian Water to undertake
initiatives to reduce these risks, and there is support for developing greater resilience within
the water network to ensure continued supply in the face of drought and flooding pressures.
A handful of respondents express concern for protecting against man-made risks, mainly
acts of terrorism involving the water supply but also theft.
A few respondents qualify their support. Some state that action to tackle flooding must not
negatively affect the ability to deal with, or exacerbate, drought. Other respondents are
concerned that the cost of becoming more resilient is not borne by customers alone.
The majority of those respondents who comment on drought measures do so at a general
level, simply expressing the importance of securing supplies. Of those who comment in more
detail, many address the impacts of drought on individual households and are concerned
about interruptions to domestic supplies. Many respondents express a desire to avoid the
limiting of supply or usage during periods of drought, either completely, or as far as possible,
in future. A number of respondents are particularly frustrated by the implementation of
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
60 of 116
hosepipe bans. For instance, some respondents suggest that they themselves must lack
understanding of the situation, observing alternate periods of heavy rainfall or flooding that
appear not to be managed to compensate for drier times, at the cost of lawns and gardens.
Many respondents raise suggestions for ways to minimise the need for drought measures.
Those who provide examples suggest new reservoirs, as well as smaller scale catchment
facilities dispersed across the region. In the context of resilience, another frequently
mentioned suggestion is the fixing of leaks and the renewal of old pipes while a few
respondents suggest treating and storing sea water specifically in anticipation of shortages.
Others suggest that more careful management of supply throughout the year would reduce
the need for extreme short-term measures such as hosepipe bans when a dry spell occurs.
A very small number of people oppose Anglian Water’s focus on drought measures. Most
commonly this is because of scepticism regarding risks to the water supply. Some
respondents reference the dry period of 2012 in support of this belief.
“There should be no knee-jerk reaction to drought; as soon as the last hosepipe ban
came into force it never stopped raining. I'm not saying the ban wasn't needed at the
time but when you start to hear about massively expensive schemes being devised to
save us in the future to re-distribute water around the country I feel we should just
conserve until it rains again, as it always does in Britain.”
Household customer
A relatively frequently raised viewpoint among respondents is an emphasis on the
relationship between drought and flooding with many suggesting that Anglian Water should
take greater account of this issue.
“We need to be better at dealing with drought and flooding as global warming takes
hold. We will require more storage capacity to see us through the dry times while we
will also need to deal better with high levels of rainfall at other times. I suggest at
least one new reservoir and much better drainage is required.”
Household customer
Consequently, a significant number of respondents suggest that Anglian Water should invest
in new infrastructure to increase the ability to capture water during periods of excess rainfall
and manage supplies better in the interim.
Anglian Water is also seen as playing a central role in flood protection and management of
flood defences. Of particular concern to respondents are new housing developments which
are perceived to be a major cause of flooding due to their impact on natural flood plains.
Many of those respondents who comment on this issue suggest that Anglian Water should
work with government and local planning authorities to manage housing demand and to
ensure that problem areas are avoided.
“Maybe the water companies should be lobbying the developers, government and
local government to stop developing on flood plain – it's there for a reason.”
Household customer
The analysis of other comments on new housing developments can be found in section 7.3.
In addition, some respondents – in particular local councils – outline a wider role they expect
Anglian Water to play in flood management. Some respondents call for working with local
government, drainage boards and others involved in flood management.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
61 of 116
“We would also welcome closer engagement with local government across the
Anglian region on issues of coastal defence funding, in the interests of protecting
critical water management infrastructure in areas at risk from coastal flooding.”
Organisation – Lincolnshire County Council
“We would like to work much more closely with Anglian Water to understand their
requirements and where we can identify joint priorities to look at partnership work.
While the flooding is mainly from a main river, Buckingham also suffers from surface
water flooding, particularly when the river is high and the water can not discharge to
the river. There are other pocket problem areas and it would be useful to have a list of
these areas with complete information on where the problem is, what the cause of the
problem is and what is being done to resolve the flooding.”
Organisation – Buckinghamshire County Council
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
62 of 116
Chapter 7 – Supply meets demand
In this chapter, we look at responses to question 8. Question 8 is
a multiple-choice question, presenting a number of statements about what worries customers
about leaks and asking respondents to select what worries them most. The chapter then
goes on to report on responses to other questions that raise issues concerning leakage,
water usage and other demands on the water supply.
The consultation document describes a good outcome in relation to supply meeting demand
in the following terms:
“Prudent investment in reliable, affordable and sustainable supplies that are flexible
enough to cope with uncertain demands. Manage changing demand on our water and
wastewater systems from new and existing customers, as well as meeting demand
and enabling economic growth with additional supply. The level of leakage is
acceptable to customers.”
7.1 Leakage worries
Anglian Water knows that leaks concern its customers. Question 8 is a multiple-choice
question asking respondents to identify what most worries them about leakage from a list of
options.
Q8. We know that customers are concerned about leaks. What worries you
most about leakage? Is it:

That precious water and the cost of treating it is being wasted? – 2,283

If water companies don’t fix the obvious leaks very quickly, then no-one else will do
anything to save water? – 1,741

That water companies will spend too much on leakage and my bills might go up to pay for
it? – 491

No option selected – 356
As shown in Figure 11, approximately half (47%) of respondents say that what worries them
most about leakage is that precious water and the cost of treating it is being wasted. Thirty
six percent of respondents report that what worries them most is that if water companies do
not fix obvious leaks quickly, then no one else will do anything to save water. Ten percent
worry that water companies will spend too much on reducing leakage and their bills might go
up to pay for it.
Figure 11: Anglian Water knows that customers are concerned about leaks. What
worries you most about leakage? Is it:
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
63 of 116
% of respondents
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Precious water and the
cost of treating it is being
wasted
No option selected
45
50
N=2,283
47%
If water companies don’t
fix the obvious leaks very
quickly, then no one else
will do anything to save
water
Water companies will
spend too much on
reducing leakage and my
bills might go up to pay
for it
40
N=1,741
36%
N=491
10%
N=356
7%
Base: 4,871
7.2 Other comments on leaks
Many respondents add multiple-choice options or comment on the multiple-choice options
provided for question 8, in particular (185 of the total 461 instances). Respondents also
comment on leaks and related issues in their responses to other consultation questions. The
1,179 comments on leaks are reported on here.
Overview of responses
Many view the prevention, reporting and repairing of leaks as some of the most important
aspects of Anglian Water’s work. Respondents see this as part of conserving water,
minimising damage and helping to keep down costs for customers. Indeed, some
respondents say that fixing leaks should be one of Anglian Water’s top priorities.
Saving money and water
A number of customers discuss leaks in the context of costs. Comments include the
suggestion that if all leaks were fixed, Anglian Water would not need to increase its tariffs;
that it is in Anglian Water’s interest not to fix leaks as this allows the company to keep bills
high; and that some leaks may involve changes to core infrastructure and hence resolving
them may not be cost-effective.
“I feel the massive water wastage from leaking pipes must be addressed before
anything else as this would reduce the cost to customers in the long run and
conserve future needs.”
Household customer
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
64 of 116
A large number of respondents want Anglian Water to improve its efforts to stop or prevent
leakages and mains bursts, with most citing water conservation as their primary concern.
Along these lines, several respondents link conserving water by reducing leakages to
reducing the cost of supplying water and, thus, lowering customers’ bills. One respondent
suggests publicising the economic impact caused by leakages. Meanwhile, another calls for
leakage to be reduced by 50%, while another respondent wants leakage reduced to 10% of
demand.
“Leaks must be the first thing to be fixed, all leaks. The water lost through this is
unacceptable in this day and age of technology.”
Household customer
On the other hand, a few respondents question whether chasing down every leak is costeffective. It may be a question of the level of leakage or a cost comparison of alternatives
such as providing extra capacity in new or existing reservoirs as a remedy to increase the
water supply.
“If it was 'significant' leaks that were dealt with (or not as the case may be) and this
was communicated with customers then this would allow Anglian Water to help
customers understand that it may be 'obvious' but it may not be significant.”
Organisation – Norfolk County Council
A number of respondents refer specifically to the relationship between infrastructure and
leaks. Some refer to ageing iron mains and the importance of maintaining pipes, drains and
sewers to reduce the volume of water wasted through leakages. Maintenance and upgrades
are also seen as essential for ensuring that pipes and drains can handle increases in
rainwater that could otherwise lead to an increase in leaks. Putting up with the road works
needed to carry out pipe maintenance to resolve or prevent leaks is seen as acceptable by a
small number of respondents. A handful of respondents generally suggest spending more
money to fix more leaks. A few respondents comment more specifically that repairing leaks
as they happen, in patchwork fashion, is not as cost-effective as widely replacing the older
pipework and infrastructure, which is more likely to burst or need repeated repairs.
“I know that they [leaking pipes] were repaired, but was it considered how old these
pipes are and whether renewal would not be more beneficial?”
Household customer
Detection, response and repair time
The time it takes Anglian Water to respond to and repair leaks is raised as a concern by
many respondents, with almost all specifying that leaks should be fixed more quickly. Several
note that repairing leaks quickly should be a priority because it reduces the amount of water
wasted, with some going further and suggesting that Anglian Water should collect the clean
water leaking out while it is repairing pipes, such as with a pump system. Some suggest that
repair time might be taken as a measure of how effectively Anglian Water handles leakage.
Several comment that they have seen leaks that took more than an entire month to fix.
While most respondents focus on leaks that have been reported, some recommend that
Anglian Water proactively look for existing leaks or places likely to develop into leaks soon.
One suggests using ultrasound and sonar equipment to detect even minor leaks before they
result in major leakage. Another suggests Anglian Water create a map based on the age of
the pipe network to guide routine maintenance and for identifying potential problems before
they occur. Wider comments on the infrastructure and assets are reported on in Chapter 11.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
65 of 116
Several respondents also comment on how leaks are reported. A few suggest that Anglian
Water run an awareness campaign to encourage people to report leaks themselves instead
of assuming that someone else already has done so. Meanwhile, a few other respondents
recommend establishing a specific report-a-leak scheme, as no such thing currently exists.
“The strategy for reporting water leaks and resolving them should be strengthened so
that as little water as possible is lost.”
Household customer
A few respondents identify specific time frames in which Anglian Water should respond to
and fix leakages, ranging from one to 12 hours to 5 days, and vary depending on where a
leak is and how many people it affects. One respondent requests that Anglian Water repair
leaks more quickly in the winter. And, when repairs – such as those involving roadworks –
interrupt traffic or cause a large inconvenience for the public, Anglian Water should work
around the clock to minimise the impact.
“I hope you will try to mend leaks promptly. There is nothing more annoying than
seeing gallons of water gushing down the road, knowing I have to pay for every drop I
use.”
Household customer
A few respondents mention specific locations suffering recurrent or long-lasting leaks. These
include Upper St. Giles in Norwich, Floods Ferry in March, and various locations in
Huntingdon, including the town centre, Nursery Road, Ambury Road and the Ring Road.
Other concerns
A few respondents add that Anglian Water does a good job finding and repairing leakages,
but the company does not publicise their efforts enough. As a result, some respondents feel
that customers do not hear about the good things Anglian Water does, and instead they only
comment on problems like leaks that they can see.
Finally, a few respondents consider that there could be diminishing returns on seeking out
and repairing leaks as compared to other investments. For that reason alone, “curing
leakage” may not be cost-effective, as one household customer put it. A few other
respondents fear that repairing leaks may be prioritised for investment over other outcomes
they feel are more important, such as the environment.
7.3 Water usage
A number of respondents remark generally on Anglian Water’s supply in terms of usage and
efficiency – both their own and that of Anglian Water. Some of these comments are linked to
a concern for future scarcity while others demonstrate an interest in water-saving devices
and practices. In this section, we look at comments relating to efficiencies for customers and
Anglian Water. In section 7.4 that follows, we look at some of the broader concerns raised by
respondents in relation to water use, including population growth, and some of the
suggestions made for mitigating the impact this could have on supply. A total of 799
comments discuss water usage and efficiency.
Conservation devices and practices for customers
Most comments about conservation and efficiency are made with reference to household
customers although there is some overlap in responses about water use within the home and
industry-level issues.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
66 of 116
Many respondents say that education and awareness around water efficiency and
conservation should be a core part of Anglian Water’s activities. Education and awareness
activities are discussed in detail in Chapter 10, ‘Caring for Communities’. In particular, many
respondents say that Anglian Water should offer tips, advice and incentives to encourage
customers to use less water. At some point, respondents suggest, it will also be necessary to
use “sticks as well as carrots”, as one household customer put it, to enforce water efficiency
and reductions in water use. Some respondents suggest that it is the company’s
responsibility to investigate unusually high consumption among its customers and that this
should be done proactively.
Respondents suggest a range of water-saving measures and mechanisms that could be
promoted or provided to customers. The role of Anglian Water is emphasised regularly by
respondents in this regard with a number of people suggesting that the company should help
with installation and retrofitting of water-saving devices in properties and take a more
proactive approach to assisting customers with domestic water efficiency. The emphasis on
the company’s role is also reflected in the fact that the majority of comments on water-saving
devices are linked to comments on customer services.
Suggestions include provision of free or discounted water-saving devices, such as meters
and water butts to harvest rainwater; reducing charges or offering incentives for customers
who install water-saving devices or perform other water-conservation activities, such as
using grey water to water their garden; passing on harvested rainfall to customers at no cost;
and promoting waterless toilets and urinals. Finally, one creative suggestion made was for
cooperatives of young people to produce water butts – some of which could be customised
for properties – thus both saving water and providing needed employment for young people.
As raised in section 5.2, of particular concern to respondents is the use of high quality water
for purposes other than drinking which is seen as wasteful in both cost and resource terms.
Respondents who comment on this issue often highlight the use of potable water to flush
toilets with many suggesting domestic water recycling as a means of avoiding such waste.
These suggestions include the use of bath and shower water as well as rain water harvesting
and sea water for non-essential use. Some respondents suggest that the possibility of
providing a dual supply of potable and non-potable water in properties is investigated by
Anglian Water.
“More should be done to capture wastewater and rainfall to use for gardening and
toilet flushing. Using drinking water to flush a loo is a crime!”
“We need to find a way using water in a better way, washing clothes and flushing the
toilet with drinking water is madness.”
“Have a dual system come into the dwelling with treated water for drinking, and lesstreated water for other uses, this would save money […]”
Household customers
A number of other water efficiency measures aimed at customers are suggested by
respondents. These include introducing a water allowance, or the provision of low-flow taps.
Recycling is also mentioned in relation to the cooking oils and fat collected from dining
facilities, restaurants and the sewers; it is suggested that they could be used to create
biodiesel.
A few respondents link their comments on water efficiency to the suggestion that Anglian
Water should require the installation of water meters on all properties. While a more detailed
analysis of all comments on metering can be found in section 4.2, it is worth noting here that
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
67 of 116
meters are seen not only to impact the cost of water but as water-saving devices. Some
respondents make comparison to electricity and gas provision commenting that these are
metered:
“Most people are conscious of the need to save on electricity, gas, oil, etc – water
should have the same priorities but this has become forgotten as water is apparently
'free' to the user – hence the need to meter, and pay for, direct usage – this
concentrates minds. My own experience since metering proves this.“
Household customer
Other respondents suggest that Anglian Water should provide water meters to customers
who struggle to pay their bills and encourage them to use recycled or grey water where
appropriate and possible.
A handful of respondents refer to large-scale users, such as farmers and car wash
companies, and say they should be held more accountable for their water use, including
taking care of leaking irrigation pipelines, and made to be more water efficient. Suggestions
for ways in which this might be done include requiring landowners and developers to provide
their own facilities for water conservation and self-sufficiency and ensuring that waterintensive industries do not divert too much water from rivers, which is felt to disrupt the
natural balances in water systems. Others suggest that large-scale users should not be using
drinking water in their operations and instead should use grey water or harvested rainwater.
Higher charges, government involvement and legislation are also suggested as a means of
encouraging businesses to reduce their water usage.
Water efficiency within Anglian Water
A large number of respondents believe that Anglian Water should continue to improve its
own water conservation efforts. Some suggest that finding efficiencies in Anglian Water’s
own practices could eventually save customers money. However, a few employees of
Anglian Water note that implementing change within the company is challenging.
“Encouraging customers to have showers rather than baths, to use eco-toilet flushes,
and to cease using sprinklers are all fine, but customers expect Anglian to treat water
as the precious resource it is rather than allow it to be wasted. In short, practice what
you preach.”
“[…] you can't tell customers you use water wisely and then be seen to be wasting it
yourself.”
Household customers
A small number of respondents make specific suggestions to improve the company’s water
efficiency level in relation to the company’s water and wastewater operations. These include
recycling selected treated wastewater to raw water storage reservoirs instead of discharging
it back to rivers only to extract it again for potable treatment and use.
Many respondents also make further comments on the issue of leaks, as elaborated on in
section 7.2, in relation to the company’s water efficiency. Comments on leaks are often made
at a high level with the majority of respondents expressing general concern. However, some
people go on to make more detailed comments linked to more specific concerns regarding
infrastructure efficiencies, such as greater capital investment to maintain assets by repairing
or replacing pipes – particularly old iron pipes associated with recent leakage.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
68 of 116
7.4 Other demands on supply
Aside from managing water usage and promoting water efficiency across customers and the
company, a number of respondents comment on future demands on Anglian Water’s supply.
A total of 580 comments concern these pressures.
Some respondents relate these concerns directly to their own domestic supply, raising
questions about current and future water pressure levels. Areas mentioned in particular
include Great Hallingbury, Harlington and Pulloxhill and some respondents suggest that rural
areas have traditionally suffered from low water pressure.
“I know this survey is about supplies in 2015 – 2020, but how about doing something
about water pressure in my area now?”
Household customer
A number of respondents express specific concerns about the impact of population growth
and new developments on the balance between water supply and demand. Some refer
specifically to the cost of coping with these issues and oppose these costs being passed on
to customers while others suggest discouraging further new builds across the region.
Other respondents discuss efficiency measures in relation to the changing profile of supply
and demand that population growth and new builds could bring. Many want Anglian Water to
ensure new builds are water efficient, through the installation of better, efficient water-saving
or water reuse systems such as dual potable or grey water supply systems and mechanisms
to harvest rain.
Some respondents suggest wider measures as a way of coping with the increased pressure
on the water supply. These include improving drainage in areas of new developments;
requiring building projects of more than 15 houses to pay towards the cost of maintaining the
existing, or building a new, water supply; and using good catchment management as a way
of helping to manage increased water demand.
A handful of respondents relate abstraction practices to water supply, suggesting that if the
supply is under pressure, the license of farmers and landowners to extract water directly from
the land should be reviewed.
“Future proofing our water supply is very important. Even if it costs more now, it would
be worth it, to ensure safe water for future generations.”
“More and more new build is happening in the East, traditionally the driest area. Do
we have enough water to service these?”
“All new buildings should, if possible, have rainwater re-used or discharged into
soakaways to return it to the ground rather than into the waste pipe system.”
Household customers
Reservoirs
A large number of respondents comment on water collection and storage, encouraging the
preservation, improvement and expansion of existing reservoirs and building new ones to
meet increasing water requirements. A few suggest that farmers and landowners should selfsupply some of their water with storage facilities on their property. Some respondents raise
questions about whether more or expanded reservoirs will be enough to bolster supply or
whether alternative approaches such as desalination plants will be more cost-effective as
water shortages make extracting water from the sea more viable.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
69 of 116
“Looking at alternative sources of water, especially desalination as we have coast all
around the UK.”
Household customer
Some respondents see building more reservoirs as an obvious, easier and potentially more
cost-effective option than fixing leaks for resolving demand escalation, particularly given the
rainy UK climate.
“Anglian Water should consider the diminishing returns of chasing down leaks in the
system versus the simpler approach of providing extra capacity in new or existing
reservoirs. An additional benefit of trapping more water in reservoirs is the reduction
in flooding problems when there is an unusual rainfall event. Better to trap the water
coming downstream for later use instead of allowing it to flow into houses.”
Household customer
A few respondents suggest ways of making best use of or constructing reservoirs. These
include creating smaller reservoirs in greater numbers; covering existing reservoirs and
building more covered reservoirs in future; funnelling flood water into specific reservoirs with
additional treatment facilities to allow contaminated flood waters to be recovered for use;
building new reservoirs underground; and exploring new underground water sources.
“The water companies ought to be empowered to create smaller but more numerous
reserves rather than relying on large expanses of reservoir water. Such an approach
would surely help in flood prevention too.”
Household customer
A very small number of respondents make specific suggestions on reservoir and storage
improvements, such as deepening the Pitsford reservoir.
Other ways of coping with demands
In facing demands on water supply, some respondents suggest Anglian Water should
collaborate with local councils, the Environment Agency, and property developers in the case
of new builds. A few comment on the role of Ofwat in encouraging collaborative solutions.
“It is important that all WASCs [water and sewerage companies] and WOCs [water
only companies] are encouraged to innovate, whether through individual and/or
collective initiatives and that these are properly funded – an issue which Ofwat seems
not to properly consider or attach adequate importance to when setting price
controls.”
Household customer
Collaboration with central government and the introduction of legislation is also suggested as
a means of introducing such measures.
“How about lobbying government to make all new builds self-sustaining re: toilet
water and waste, etc?”
Household customer
In addition, a few respondents make general comments such as “keeping up with progress”,
seeking out innovative solutions through use of new technology – rarely specifying what that
technology might be – or drawing on existing examples such as the Fens Waterways Link as
a successful model for North-South water movement.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
70 of 116
Some respondents make the observation that water shortages tend to be more acute in the
southern regions of the UK than those in the North, with East Anglia particularly affected.
Many comments discuss the advantages of inter-regional water policies and envisage more
efficient supply and reservoir management resulting from greater collaboration between
water companies. A frequently raised suggestion is the potential for Anglian Water to source
water from other regions with a few respondents suggesting the creation of a “grid’ for water
as a means of doing so. A handful of respondents urge that Anglian Water provide
leadership on this issue. Aside from a few references to a pipe, road or rail network to move
water, few respondents offer precise views on what might constitute an appropriate
mechanism for sharing water resources.
“Surely a UK wide canal grid (or something similar) should be a national priority to
spread water to drier regions of the UK.”
Organisation – North Hertfordshire District Council
Similarly, few of those respondents proposing collaborative water resource management
offer much insight on how to finance such an approach. A few respondents express concern
at the likely cost of establishing a grid system, although a very small number of respondents
indicate that they might be willing to assume some of the cost through higher bills, provided
that any flood risks are appropriately mitigated.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
71 of 116
Chapter 8 – Flourishing environment
In this chapter, we look at responses to question 9. Question
9 is a multiple-choice question, presenting a number of statements about customers’
attitudes towards investment in environmental management and asking respondents to
select the one that most closely matches their view. The chapter then goes on to report on
responses to other questions that raise issues concerning the environment.
The consultation document describes a good outcome in relation the supply meeting demand
in the following terms:
“The environment in our region flourishes. Rivers, lakes, aquifers and coastal waters
support a rich biodiversity, contribute to a growing economy and provide a valuable
amenity for families and communities. There is joined-up, effective and collaborative
management of the water cycle in our catchments (an area drained by a river) from
source to tap and back to the environment. Our activities are sensitive to
environmental needs, and risks and adverse impacts are avoided. People,
businesses, water- and land-users in our region are engaged in the challenges of
maintaining a sustainable environment. All legal requirements are met.”
8.1 Environmental management
Question 9 is a multiple-choice question which asks respondents to identify which, if any, of
three statements about investment in environmental management best reflects their own
view.
Q9. Which statement best describes your attitude towards our investment in
environmental management? Anglian Water should:

Make the minimum investment required to meet legal obligations – 789

Go beyond what is legally required to protect and enhance the environment but only if
there are clear economic benefits to local people such as increased tourism/jobs – 2,384

Go beyond what is legally required to protect and enhance the environment because the
environment is important to me, regardless of the economic benefits to local people –
1,260

No option selected – 438
As illustrated in Figure 12, approximately half (49%) of respondents say that Anglian Water
should go beyond what is legally required to protect and enhance the environment but only if
there are clear economic benefits to local people such as increased tourism/jobs. About a
quarter (26%) of respondents think that Anglian Water should go beyond what is legally
required to protect and enhance the environment because the environment is important to
them, regardless of the economic benefits to local people. Sixteen percent of respondents
feel that Anglian Water should make the minimum investment required to meet legal
obligations.
Figure 12: Which statement best describes your attitude towards Anglian Water’s
investment in environmental management? Anglian Water should:
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
72 of 116
% of respondents
0
10
20
30
Go beyond what is legally
required to protect and
enhance the environment but
only if there are clear
economic benefits to local
people such as increased
tourism/jobs
50
60
N=2,384
49%
Go beyond what is legally
required to protect and
enhance the environment
because the environment is
important to me, regardless of
the economic benefits to local
people
N=1,260
26%
Make the minimum
investment required to meet
legal obligations
No option selected
40
N=789
16%
N=438
9%
Base: 4,871
8.2 Other environmental concerns
Some respondents comment on environmental management and the environment in their
response to other consultation questions. A total of 585 comments concern aspects of the
environment. While most comments are supportive of environmental work, some
respondents qualify their support of Anglian Water pursuing environmental activities beyond
the company’s statutory obligations based on whether local people realise “clear economic
benefits”, in terms of jobs or tourism revenue, as a result.
In addition to helping local ecosystems, responsible environmental management of areas in
the vicinity of the water supply network is seen to reduce treatment costs due to
improvements in the underlying water quality. Some respondents praise efforts already
undertaken by Anglian Water to foster better environmental stewardship, though projects
such as RiverCare and BeachCare.
“Cleaning up the environment around water supplies would in the long run save
money as there would be less loss of 'good clean' water and less contaminated water
to clean up.”
Household customer
A number of respondents express support for measures aimed at improving environmental
outcomes, with some mentioning wetland areas and other wildlife habitats. While many of
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
73 of 116
these comments are general in nature, a few make specific remarks about harmful practices
that they believe Anglian Water should help to redress. For example, one respondent urges
the company to lobby for changes in the legislation governing the use of detergents at
carwashes, as they believe this measure will help to reduce contaminants in local
watercourses. Other respondents advise on possible mitigation measures Anglian Water
might take, such as building habitats for wildlife ranging from reed beds for herons or ponds
for toads.
A few respondents raising concerns about wildlife attribute the deterioration of local habitats
to Anglian Water, such as system leakages polluting rivers and harming fisheries. Several of
those commenting feel that Anglian Water should take steps to reduce their impacts on the
environment such as by reducing the flow of wastewater into rivers and the sea or improving
treatment facilities. Others advise the company to investigate alternative uses for sewage
through composting and anaerobic digestion, the process that allows for the generation of
fertilisers, biodiesel and renewable electricity.
Many respondents also place greater emphasis on the role played by water users in driving
poor environmental outcomes. Of particular concern are consumer behaviours that result in
excessive use of “scarce” water and lack of vigilance with respect to non-flushables and
waste liquids. Respondents expressing these views frequently comment on the ignorance of
the public regarding how the disposal of substances can affect the environment and go on to
recommend that efforts be undertaken to improve environmental awareness among water
users, as is discussed in Chapter 10, ‘Caring for Communities’.
The use of chemical fertilisers and pesticides in the agricultural sector is also seen as a
factor contributing to the deterioration of local watercourses and surrounding wildlife, with
references to excessive crop spraying, surface run-off and nitrates appearing in several
comments.
“It is conceivable to me that these can also affect insects and other creatures when
they get into our river systems; we certainly have a problem with fish survival which
may be linked.”
Household customer
Some respondents believe that local rivers and drains are suffering eutrophication as a result
of the higher concentrations of these chemicals in the water, leading to accelerated growth of
plants such as river weeds. The role of Anglian Water here is seen as being that of
discouraging these practices, although few specify how this might occur; a few respondents
name approaches such as catchment management. A more detailed appraisal of comments
relating to farmers and landowners in relation to catchment management can be found in
section 5.1. Apart from catchment management, a few respondents suggest the company to
work with local groups to help reduce nutrient levels in specific areas and habitats.
Respondents express support for collaborative working between Anglian Water and local
environmental groups and agencies on a number of occasions. There is a sense that local
habitats can be improved if Anglian Water is able to forge closer relationships with wildlife
organisations such as the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, the National Trust or the
Environment Agency. For instance, there is support for the Environment Agency’s Yellow
Fish Campaign concerning water pollution.
Meanwhile, a few respondents feel that collaboration with volunteer groups engaged in
clean-up activities along local waterways could help augment river and wetland maintenance
projects being managed by Anglian Water.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
74 of 116
Chapter 9 – A smaller footprint
In this chapter, we look at responses to question 10. Question 10 is a multiple-choice
question, presenting a number of statements about views on Anglian Water’s reduction of its
carbon emissions and use of natural resources. This chapter then goes on to report on
responses to other questions that comment on these issues.
The consultation document describes a good outcome in relation to decarbonisation and
resource efficiency in the following terms:
“We lead by example on mitigating climate change and protecting natural resources.
Decarbonisation and resource efficiency are central to investment and operational
decisions. We continue to reduce energy consumption and carbon emissions related
to water production, consumption and disposal. Water footprinting is established as a
social and business norm and drives down usage.”
9.1 Carbon emissions and natural resources
Question 10 is a multiple-choice question asking respondents to identify which, if any, of
three statements about Anglian Water reducing carbon emissions and the use of natural
resources most closely reflects their own view.
Q10. Which statement best describes what you think we should be doing to
reduce our carbon emissions and use of natural resources?

Anglian Water should continue to lead even if it involves taking some upfront cost which
might increase bills – 1,188

Anglian Water should continue to lead but only if there are clear benefits for customers
and bills don't increase – 3,027

Let others lead on reducing emissions and resource scarcity – 239

No option selected – 417
As outlined in Figure 13, about six in ten (62%) respondents say Anglian Water should
continue to lead but only if there are clear benefits for customers and bills do not increase.
Approximately one in four (24%) respondents think Anglian Water should continue to lead in
this area even if it involves taking some upfront cost which might increase bills. A small
proportion (5%) of respondents feel that Anglian Water should let others lead on reducing
emissions and resource scarcity.
Figure 13: Which statement best describes what you think Anglian Water should be
doing to reduce their carbon emissions and use of natural resources?
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
75 of 116
% of respondents
0
10
20
30
Anglian Water should
continue to lead but only if
there are clear benefits for
customers and bills don’t
increase
No option selected
50
60
N=3,027
62%
Anglian Water should
continue to lead even if it
involves taking some upfront
cost which might increase
bills
Let others lead on reducing
emissions and resource
scarcity
40
N=1,188
24%
N=239
5%
N=417
9%
Base: 4,871
More broadly in relation to supply resilience, several responses comment on the reduction of
Anglian Water’s carbon footprint, climate change, energy savings or make suggestions
regarding these issues. These 331 comments are reported on below.
9.2 Carbon footprint reduction
Several respondents comment on Anglian Water’s carbon footprint in their responses to
other questions. Some express support for a carbon neutral agenda, while others feel that
efforts ought to remain focused on core aspects of the business, such as repairing leaks and
minimising water charges, or they prioritise other outcomes such as reducing the risk of
droughts and flooding. Many of these respondents are concerned about the cost of
supporting the reduction of Anglian Water’s carbon footprint. A few respondents feel that
water charges are already unaffordable, leading them to question whether this is an
appropriate spending priority, particularly given the current economic climate.
“It's daunting, but we need to question customers' perceived 'right' to massive
quantities of fresh water (given its carbon cost).”
“The best thing you can do is keep bills to a minimum and stop investing in pie in the
sky environment and carbon emission projects. It is hard enough to pay the bills as it
is.”
Household customers
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
76 of 116
70
In addition, a few respondents argue that carbon abatement policies should not aim to
reduce emissions below levels prescribed by law, unless Anglian Water is able to
demonstrate that the local economy will realise real economic benefits as a result.
Occasionally, those favouring a carbon neutral agenda recommend specific policies. For
example, a few respondents would like Anglian Water to increase on-site capacity for
renewable energy generation through investments in wind turbines and solar panels. Others
say they would like Anglian Water to increase home-working opportunities for employees,
convert more company vehicles to cleaner transport fuels, or hold sub-contractors to the
same carbon footprint reduction policies as the company.
A minority of respondents indicate that they would be willing to accept slightly higher water
charges should this help Anglian Water to finance investments in abatement technologies.
Support for this approach is offered with the caveat that bill payers are provided with details
about any such investments.
9.3 Climate change
Comments on resilience and carbon emissions are often made in the context of climate
change. Respondents raise concerns about anticipated changes in weather conditions and
the likely consequences on overall water resources and the supply network. Some of those
commenting recommend demand-side measures to alleviate pressure on dwindling water
resources, such as smart-metering and community engagement activities that build
awareness or increasing prices to levels that more accurately reflect the future scarcity of
water. Others address supply side measures, such as increasing underground water storage
and creating inter-regional networks to allow the sharing of UK water resources.
Some respondents suggest that any efforts undertaken by Anglian Water to reduce their
carbon footprint will have “no measureable impact” upon total emissions. These respondents
advise the company to concentrate its investment on drought and flooding mitigation, with
the aim of safeguarding the supply system from any climate change impacts.
Several respondents raise concerns about the resilience of Anglian Water, without
questioning the effectiveness of particular carbon neutral policies. Some respondents seek
reassurance from the company concerning its resilience. There is a sense among these
respondents that extreme weather events are likely to become more frequent as a result of
climate change, and that Anglian Water must prepare for more pronounced flood and
drought cycles.
“The Anglian region is very vulnerable to climate change and more effort should be
directed at tackling this issue.”
“Working more closely with all responsible authorities (councils, the Environment
Agency, property developers) to ensure sewage and rainwater systems can cope with
the challenges ahead with predictions of more unsettled weather.”
Household customers
A few respondents dispute climate change and its impacts, questioning the scientific basis of
claims as well as the likelihood of any appreciable effects in the UK. They suggest that
problems associated with the mismanagement of the water supply pose a greater risk to
resources than climate change. Finally, a few respondents challenge some of the climate
and environment-related statements made by Anglian Water.
“The British Isles has a temperate climate. There is not a water shortage problem;
there is a distribution problem. Please sort this out with the other distribution
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
77 of 116
companies and stop messing about planning for droughts that are simply not
happening to any greater extent than previously. Global temperatures have not risen
with any degree of statistical significance since at least 1998; stop using global
warming as an excuse for inefficiencies, price increases and the imposition of meters
upon people that don't wish to use them.”
“Your plans for the future? Other than trying to ‘manipulate climate change’ for your
own profit, or, indeed trying to manipulate anything to increase your own profit, what
are your plans for our future?”
Household customers
9.4 Energy savings
A number of respondents emphasise the importance of reducing dependency on fossil fuels
and express particular concern around the rising cost of fuel and its scarcity.
Some respondents enthusiastically urge Anglian Water to make investments in on-site wind
and solar power generation. Other respondent support the company considering energy
savings that can be made through secondary uses of its water and wastewater resources.
There are particular requests for more information from the company about hydro-electric
schemes.
“Gravity + Water is the most reliable source of continuous flow energy we have
available to us. Going forward, what are your plans with regards to micro-hydro, or
medium-scale hydro electricity generation?”
Household customer
Several respondents would also like Anglian Water to investigate more productive uses for
sewage and wastewater, including the generation of biofuels through anaerobic digestion
and from “salvageable products” commonly found in wastewater, such as fats and vegetable
oils, or methane capture. A few of these responses discuss the potential to generate
electricity from these sources, and Anglian Water is encouraged to collaborate with an
energy company to pursue this option.
Another suggested use for biogases generated from anaerobic digestion is as source of fuel
for Anglian Water’s fleet of vehicles. Those remarking on fuel consumption among company
transport more frequently make the recommendation that vehicles are converted to use
Liquid Petroleum Gas (LPG), or that steps are taken to reduce the number of journeys
undertaken.
A few employees of Anglian Water complain that diesel is wasted when company vehicles
move unnecessarily between jobs, and that fuel could be saved with more effective
scheduling of work. Additionally, they advise that a review of tanker movements and sewage
cake haulage is undertaken to find areas for further fuel savings.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
78 of 116
Chapter 10 – Caring for communities
In this chapter, we look at responses to question 11. Question 11 is an open question asking
for views on which aspects of Anglian Water’s community work are most important to
respondents. The chapter then goes on to report on responses to other questions that
comment on Anglian Water’s work with communities.
The consultation document describes a good outcome in relation to the community in the
following terms:
“An inclusive and accessible service, sensitive to the needs of individual customers.
Our infrastructure underpins and contributes to a successful regional economy. Our
operations do not unduly disturb the community. Our water parks and nature reserves
provide valued recreational benefits. Our sites are maintained to ensure the health
and safety of visitors and our staff. The next generation has a real personal belief in
the value of water.”
10.1 Work with communities
Question 11 asks for respondents’ view on the most important aspects of Anglian Water’s
work with communities.
Q11. Which aspects of our work with communities do you feel are most
important?
A total of 2,715 respondents answered question 11. Respondents also comment on this
issue in their responses to other questions and we have included these comments in the
following sections.
Overview of responses
The respondents who make supportive comments about the community work undertaken by
Anglian Water outnumber those expressing criticism. A small number of respondents
question the decision to engage in community work, which they do not consider to be within
the remit of a water company.
Many respondents discuss activities that they would like to be prioritised, such as education
and awareness building concerning water usage and environmental protection with a few
making direct reference to campaigns launched by Anglian Water. Some specify
mechanisms for community engagement which they believe will help promote better
management of water resources. Though some of the comments refer to existing
programmes, most are general in nature, reflecting the course of action respondents would
prefer, rather than what is already in place.
Many of those responding to question 11 say they are not aware of any community activities
undertaken by Anglian Water. While some of these respondents decline to comment further,
a number express views about the value of community work. A few others request that
Anglian Water should promote this aspect of their business more effectively.
Priorities for working with communities
Behaviour around water use – often understood to interfere with the supply network, threaten
overall resources and impede environmental protection – is a recurrent theme in responses
to question 11 and comments on the community across other questions. Customer education
about the impact of individual behaviour on the environment and wildlife; community work
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
79 of 116
focused on nature reserves, watercourses and beaches; and helping to increase the profile
of local wildlife are all identified as priorities.
“Educating customers about what they can and can't flush down the drains. To think
about their environment for today and the future.”
“I think more could be done to help people see the connection between the water
they use, what they tip down the drain (chemicals, detergents, etc.) and whether the
otter gets it."
Household customers
Some respondents mention vulnerable people in relation to this question, though their
remarks tend to be very general, referring to the WaterCare register and the need to “help” or
“look after” older people or those on low incomes. Concern for the water needs of people
suffering from health problems is also raised in a few of these responses.
A number of respondents appear to use “community” in the sense of the Anglian Water
region, and suggest that the company ought to continue providing clean drinking water and
wastewater services to the community. Although most respondents choose not to elaborate
on this point, a few specify that they would prefer Anglian Water to dedicate resources to its
core business activities, rather than community projects, seeing “public relations work” and
educating customers as good but non-essential in comparison to the core responsibilities of
supplying water and wastewater services.
“I thought I was paying for a water supply and soiled water disposal, not social
engineering.”
Household customer
Opposition to community work is occasionally raised in conjunction with concerns about cost
for that work being passed on to customers. Other respondents use question 11 not as a
space to comment on community work but rather to comment on the cost of water overall,
asking that costs be kept to a minimum.
Engagement
Respondents widely support developing awareness in the community about the water supply
system and for education programmes that encourage people to value water resources, as
respondents believe these activities will help foster more responsible usage behaviour now
and in the future. A few respondents refer to generational differences. For example, some
older people refer to growing up without running water and feel people do not value water
enough and are careless in using it.
“[…] far too many people take our water for granted. Those are the ones who will feel
it the most if it was no longer on tap and had to collect it from a stand pipe! Many of
us know what that is like.”
Household customer
Education centres and programmes in schools targeting children and young people are
especially favoured. Respondents expressing support for school programmes emphasise the
importance of children as drivers of behaviour change, trustees of future water resources and
the company’s future bill payers. Many of those advocating school activities would also like
Anglian Water to incorporate environmental messages within these, as they feel that such an
approach will encourage children to consider the wider impacts of water usage on local
ecosystems.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
80 of 116
“Anything that involves educating the next generation to appreciate and understand
the way water is used and managed is great – children’s enthusiasm tends to seep
through to their parents and grandparents and get them interested too.”
“Involving children and educating them about the importance of clean water, the need
for reducing waste in the homes (e.g., leaving tap on while brushing teeth) and
teaching them to love and care for their environment by ’ownership’ of stretches of
river banks when they are in senior schools to keep the ethos going.”
“Educating the children; they are the future. My daughter loves finding ways to
improve the environment and to reduce wastage. They also remind us that they can
be involved with implementing the changes.”
Household customers
A few respondents are familiar with some of the work done in schools by Anglian Water,
raising questions about whether this is being maximised. For instance, some wonder if
“teacher packs” provided to schools are being downloaded and used. Several say that local
schools should be provided with more information about the options available to them to
engage with the company on educational initiatives.
A handful of respondents propose visits to Anglian Water works as a way of improving
awareness among schoolchildren and the wider community. Others suggest road shows,
village meetings, and public events as ways to promote water-saving behaviours. A few
respondents mention Anglian Water visits to assess water usage in their home as a
potentially useful avenue for awareness activity as well.
Opportunities for engagement with business, industrial and agricultural customers are
discussed in a few responses. Besides suggesting that large companies be targeted as part
of a business engagement strategy, most of those who comment do not propose specific
activities.
“Further work with industrial and agricultural customers to manage their water use
efficiently and sustainably; many Waterwise campaigns focus on domestic customers
yet the commercial industries use the vast majority of the valuable water we supply.”
Employee of Anglian Water
Volunteering and charity work
In keeping with concerns raised about the environment, a number of respondents would like
Anglian Water to continue steering voluntary conservation programmes. Volunteer work
cleaning litter from rivers and beaches is frequently cited, often with specific reference to the
RiverCare and BeachCare schemes. Some respondents suggest there is scope to seize on
these programmes as opportunities to develop greater awareness and education about
environmental protection among those volunteers participating. A few suggest that these
programmes could do more to educate the greater number of people who use rivers.
RiverCare and the Love to Help programmes are identified by a significant number of
respondents. In nearly all cases, these comments are positive. RiverCare is seen as
becoming increasingly popular, and some suggest that the programme be extended into
other areas, such as Buckinghamshire. Some of the Anglian Water employees involved in
the company volunteering scheme matching work time to help staff do more volunteering,
Love to Help, feel the voluntary work they do is really valued.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
81 of 116
“The RiverCare initiative has been a real success in Diss and we have had excellent
support from […] Keep Britain Tidy. We now have over 40 members and rising.”
Household customer
In praising volunteering schemes established for Anglian Water’s employees, a handful of
respondents also refer to the Give Me Five campaign, which preceded Love to Help.
According to a current employee of Anglian Water, the earlier scheme benefited from
superior management and clearer, more “defined” objectives, whereas Love to Help is felt to
be underutilised. They recommend that subsequent volunteering projects target communities
with clear relevance to the company, such as those which have been impacted by sewer
flooding or other problems associated with Anglian Water infrastructure
Most of those commenting on Anglian Water’s involvement with the charity WaterAid are
supportive; a few further respondents make a general call for the company to take on
activities in developing countries. However, some respondents question whether funds
should be spent overseas, owing to concerns about corruption and the need to prioritise UK
citizens. A further few express a preference for charity work in the local area, without
specifying whether this might be in addition to at the expense of working with developing
countries. Among these comments are a number of specific requests for assistance from a
local charity and an amateur football club for young people.
A few respondents comment on voluntary work more generally, mainly with respect to
outreach sessions or encouraging volunteering within the community, without providing
details on how this might be done.
Recreation areas
Anglian Water’s various recreation areas and water parks are popular with respondents, who
appreciate being allowed to use reservoirs for leisure activities.
However, several of those commenting feel that the company’s recreation areas could be
managed more effectively. A few respondents believe that conditions have been allowed to
deteriorate at some locations. For instance, the sailing facilities at Alton Water Park,
particularly the changing rooms, are criticised in this respect. A few urge Anglian Water to
review management policies at the recreation areas, to ensure sites are maintained to the
highest standards. One respondent suggests increasing the number of staff working at them,
while another proposes that Anglian Water allow other private companies to manage the
areas on their behalf.
Respondents also raise the question of parking charges with a few making specific
complaints about the cost of parking at Rutland and Grafham. Most of these comments
suggest charges discourage people from visiting these venues. Respondents also highlight
the potential impact of charges in the wider area as visitors seek alternative free parking in
surrounding residential roads.
“Can you please stop charging at the car parks in and around Alton Water? We as
locals have to suffer the cars that park close to our drive ways when people refuse to
pay to park their cars in your car park. Working with the local community is essential. I
appreciate that money has to come from somewhere to keep the costs of the
footpaths and cycle paths in good order but there must be other ways of finding this
money rather than upsetting local people who support you on a regular basis.”
Household customer
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
82 of 116
“Bad point for me is pay car-park. Some people will not visit as would not pay £3 to
stay half an hour. Charges should be price per half hour minimum or should be free
for the first 45 minutes.”
Employee of Anglian Water
Others believe that Anglian Water should do more to encourage greater use of the water
parks and nature reserves through further investment in the facilities and enhancement of
their amenities. Suggestions include improving access for visitors with disabilities, supplying
more signposting on nearby roads, improving conditions for walkers at the nature reserves,
and creating more opportunities for kayaking and angling at reservoirs.
“I feel the investment made in water parks such as Brixworth water is an excellent
way to support the community also. I would however like to see these areas become
self-sufficient with your support (cafes, parking payments, etc).”
“Keeping the reservoirs accessible for tourism and hopefully generate additional
income for the company or at least keeping the cost of running the reservoir down.”
Household customers
Finally, some of those commenting recognise the potential of recreation areas as a point of
contact or opportunity for exchange between Anglian Water and the local community. They
argue that more could be done to use these facilities to develop awareness about
environmental issues and responsible water use. Respondents suggest they feature relevant
exhibitions, advertising for campaigns such as Love Every Drop, and educational visits.
“It seems to me that opening up reservoirs to the public for sailing and leisure is
beneficial as it creates jobs and gives people access to lovely areas of countryside.
There is also the opportunity to educate people while they are there- for example you
could show where water levels have been in certain years and also have exhibition
boards to give information re water usage. You also have the opportunity to lead by
example in things like toilets on site, the type of taps you use etc”
Household customer
Campaigns
Several respondents refer to existing campaigns in their responses, with the FOG (fats, oils
and grease) campaign being the most widely discussed. The aims of the FOG campaign
receive strong support, as many respondents share concerns about the build-up of these
residues in the sewage system and the potential negative environmental impacts. A few
respondents express alarm at practices in local schools and restaurants in relation to the
disposal of fats, oils and grease and urge Anglian Water to direct FOG campaign messages
accordingly. Requests are also made for an increase in the reach of the FOG campaign
through greater promotional activities and expanding coverage across the region. A few
respondents, including employees of Anglian Water, remark that customers stand to benefit
from lower bills if the FOG campaign is successful, as fewer resources will need to be
dedicated to the maintenance of waste water assets.
“I think that restaurants, and school food classes should be your main target as if all
schools had posters in the cookery classrooms reminding students to put their left
over FOG in the bin rather than down the sink this would have a huge impact.”
Household customer
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
83 of 116
The Keep It Clear campaign also receives supportive mentions, alongside more general
comments about the incidence of non-flushables in the sewage system, which can incur
operational and environmental costs. A few respondents suggest that Anglian Water take
steps to encourage or collaborate with product manufacturers to ensure consumers are
informed about which items can and cannot be flushed down the toilet.
Several respondents comment on the Love Every Drop strategy, which most consider a
“good” and “effective” campaign. Some respondents suggest that more resources should be
dedicated to enhanced promotional activities via radio, television and print advertisement.
Public relations and customer service are also discussed more generally within an appeal for
the company to ensure the “fantastic” work being done across the business is properly
conveyed to customers.
“As I said before we need stands at local shows. We need to keep making use of the
internet, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube etc. Getting into schools. Bill boards are a little
old-fashioned these days but people still look at them while driving. Now the cost isn't
cheap but what’s to say we could have boards besides the entrances to some of our
sites plugging Love Every Drop for example or water quality campaigns; change the
poster regularly and it keeps the local people that look at it every day up to date on
what we're doing.”
Household customer
Employment, tourism and other economic benefits
Several respondents consider local employment to be the most relevant community benefit
of Anglian Water as a company. A few of those commenting discuss jobs created at the
water parks and nature reserves, while others suggest how Anglian Water might do more to
boost employment in future. Youth unemployment is a particular concern, with a couple of
respondents suggesting that the company offer apprenticeships. A general recommendation
that Anglian Water focus upon “the disadvantaged” appears in a handful of responses.
Some respondents believe that promoting Anglian Water as a career destination for young
people will make the company better able to deliver strong services over the medium- and
long-term. For example, one household customer feels that the presence of younger
employees will help “combat the inverted pyramid age profile” that many utilities feature.
“They are our next customers; make them aware of all the possible careers within the
water industry. We need young people to help us deliver our aims for the next 10-15
years.”
Employee of Anglian Water
In addition to job creation, respondents believe that Anglian Water can facilitate growth in the
local economy through its investments. Among those who comment on this issue, there are
general requests that Anglian Water continue “investing in the local area” and sustain
“activities which stimulate economic growth”. However, more common are suggestions that
Anglian Water undertake efforts to improve tourism in the region. As is discussed above, a
number of respondents believe that recreation areas could be made more appealing to
tourists. In addition, several respondents say that by improving the quality of local beaches
and watercourses, Anglian Water could help develop the tourism potential of areas within its
region.
“Improving coastal water quality to boost tourism also sounds like a great idea!”
Household customer
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
84 of 116
Chapter 11 – Other themes
The consultation document presented ten outcomes for Anglian Water’s future business and
service priorities. Two of the outcomes were explained in sections with no corresponding
consultation questions. These are ‘Investing for tomorrow’ and ‘Fair profits’. In this chapter,
we report on responses that address these themes and on more general comments about
the consultation.
11.1 Investing for tomorrow
The consultation describes a good outcome in relation to
Anglian Water’s assets in the following terms:
“Assets (such as our pipes, works, buildings and
equipment) are maintained effectively so they
provide the services customers expect both now
and in the future.”
No direct question was asked about this issue but 374 comments on infrastructure and
assets that are relevant to this outcome were made in response to other questions.
Many of respondents’ comments are very general, expressing no more than a broad
expectation that Anglian Water should “get down to improving repairs” or support for
“investment in the infrastructure and sustainability of tomorrow” and long-term planning.
Other respondents are slightly more specific. Their comments include broad concerns about
pipe maintenance across the infrastructure and calls for the company to adopt a preventative
approach by replacing old pipes before they burst or using stronger materials in pipe
construction. Some comment on the particular need for infrastructure development in rural
areas. Others name locations, including Harlington, Pulloxhill and Spalding. A number of
respondents suggest that investment funds should be used to develop and maintain Anglian
Water’s reservoir capacity. Another common suggestion is that investment is made in
research into water-saving devices which can be used within the home. A number of
respondents refer to energy efficiency grants provided to householders through government
and utility company initiatives, suggesting Anglian Water could set up a similar scheme.
For many respondents, asset maintenance – including regular checks, cleaning and
upgrades to ageing infrastructure – should be Anglian Water’s main concern. Some of these
respondents acknowledge that investing in upgrading and maintaining the infrastructure will
require some cost to be passed to the customer. Others support enhancing assets only in
balance with keeping customer costs low. A few respondents suggest that the company does
not want to invest in maintenance and reliability of supply despite being aware of its
necessity. A number of these respondents refer to past maintenance plans and suggest that
earlier mismanagement and inefficiency is the cause of current resilience and supply issues.
Despite a general consensus on the need for investment in assets and infrastructure for
present and future benefit, a significant number of respondents raise concerns regarding the
funding of this outcome, most often in relation to Anglian Water’s profits. This is discussed
below in section 11.2.
Finally, and usually separate from calls for investment in asset maintenance and
improvement, some respondents express concern about the quality, impacts and duration of
such works. Most commonly, respondents express discontent with traffic disruptions, noise
and dust during works and unsatisfactory reinstatement of roads after their completion. Some
suggest greater coordination of works with other utilities companies so that roads need to be
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
85 of 116
dug up less often and impacts are minimised. A few respondents cite concern for the quality
of work completed by contractors; a few Anglian Water employees mention having had to
repair contractors’ work, costing double the time and money.
11.2 Fair profits
The final section in the consultation document concerns ‘Fair
profits’. The consultation document describes a good outcome
in relation to Anglian Water’s profits in the following terms:
“We deliver our services efficiently compared to other
leading companies. We can raise finance efficiently at
relatively low costs to ensure enough money to fund future investment. Our business
is financially stable over the long term and we demonstrate responsible stewardship
of financial resources.”
Again, no consultation question was asked in relation to this outcome but a significant
number of respondents made comments on Anglian Water’s profits and the water industry
more generally in their responses to other questions. A total of 700 comments address this
theme.
Profit levels and usage
Respondents make both general and specific comments about Anglian Water’s profits. The
most recurrent themes in these comments challenge either the level of profit or its use. More
specific comments include the suggestion that all profits should be directed towards
improvements to the company’s assets and infrastructure, with shareholders receiving lower
dividends. A few respondents challenge Anglian Water’s motivation for encouraging the use
of meters in relation to profit; they comment that the use of meters is more likely to increase
shareholder profits than to protect the environment by reducing water usage.
Respondents who comment on the use of profits make a number of suggestions about how
these might be better used. Some say that profits should be shared by shareholders and
customers alike. The benefits noted include improved infrastructure, lower costs overall or
the funding of a special lower tariff scheme for customers struggling to pay. Some
respondents indicate general support for price increases for the outcomes Anglian Water has
put forth in the consultation document but make their support conditional on any additional
revenue not finding its way “into shareholders’ pockets”, as one household customer put it.
Others oppose price increases outright and suggest instead that reducing profit margins
would provide the capital necessary to fund Anglian Water’s desired outcomes.
“A fair balance has to be found between bills and profits.”
Household customer
Other responsibilities are also raised in relation to profit. A few respondents emphasise
Anglian Water’s responsibilities to pay “their fair share of tax”, in the words of a household
customer. However, some respondents take the view that the company’s profit should be
used to pay off company debt to reduce its loans, especially given the current interest rates.
There is also a recurrent call for transparency around the company’s profit and its relation to
price increases.
“Yes I'd like to see a clear statement of what investment you (Anglian Water) will
make over and above the extra hit you are inevitably softening us up for.”
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
86 of 116
“I don't mind my costs going up if Anglian Water are investing in the future (e.g.,
reservoirs, technology, etc) but the schemes taking place should be communicated to
customers so that we know what our money is being spent on.”
Household customers
A few respondents argue that Anglian Water should not motivated by profit alone and should
operate with a greater sense of social responsibility and transparency, with a view to
providing services to the benefit of all. For instance, some respondents urge the company
and customers to save water, even if doing so will reduce profit.
“Every drop of water we can collect and reuse has to be a good thing, even if there’s
no profit in it for the water companies.”
Household customer
This point is sometimes raised in conjunction with comments about water as a “free”
resource which Anglian Water does not have to pay for. For instance, an Anglian Water
employee makes the point that “we [the company] don't pay for water we just charge for it to
be treated and supplied”, whereas a few other respondents feel that company is seen to
make money from a supply provided by nature.
“The commodity Anglian Water supplies comes to the company free. Yes, it costs to
capture and treat, etc. but you are not in a position where the raw material is either
scarce or rising in basic cost. In my opinion, this upward drive in price happens
because the company has a vested interest in creating an apparent scarcity in order
to be able to push the price up. It's more profitable than investing in the right amount
of infrastructure and leads to vastly better shareholder returns.”
Household customer
The water industry
Some respondents comment on the private ownership of the water industry. Of those who
do, a few advocate re-nationalisation, arguing that vital resources that address basic needs
should not be in the hands of organisations driven by profit. Among these, there are more
cautious comments supporting re-nationalisation in principle but casting doubt on the ability
of the state to run the industry. Some respondents link these comments to Anglian Water’s
profits levels and how, under state ownership, these monies could be devoted to assisting
customers.
A number of respondents raise concerns that the structure of the industry creates
monopolies and prevents consumers making a choice among suppliers. Some respondents
express resentment at being in a “captive market” as they cannot live without water. A very
small number of respondents suggest that they would not use Anglian Water services if they
were given a choice of supplier. Respondents who support a more competitive water industry
often make comparisons with other utilities such as gas and electricity. Other respondents
emphasise the company’s responsibility, as sole supplier, to keep bills down and to consider
its plans and their effects on customer bills with care.
“I believe Anglian Water should act fairly as a commodity supplier as the receiver has
no alternative options.”
“The consumer is stuck with their water supplier and so the company must do their
utmost to provide a quality service.”
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
87 of 116
Household customers
Some respondents refer to Ofwat and its regulatory role. A few suggest that Ofwat’s price
regulation activities are not understood by the public; more specifically, a few Anglian Water
employees think that customers need more guidance to understand why the cost of
additional investment impacts customer cost. These respondents suggest that Anglian Water
should help customers to understand the regulatory framework surrounding price-setting. A
small number of respondents raise the idea of standardised water charges set across the
industry by Ofwat, including the thought that a level playing field in terms of charges would
improve the performance of all water companies.
11.3 Other comments and questions
Question 12, the final consultation question, was an open invitation to respondents to make
any further comment or ask questions. Two thousand, four hundred and ten (2,410) people
made comments in response to question 12.
Q12. Do you have any other comments or questions about what we do now and
our plans for the future?
Responses to this question were very varied and cover the breadth of the consultation
themes. Many respondents say that they have no further comments or questions to make.
Others voice their appreciation for this opportunity to add more to the consultation. Many
respondents who comment on the substance of the consultation raise themes addressed in
other questions: these responses are reported on in the preceding chapters.
Comments on Anglian Water employees’ pay, job satisfaction and working conditions do not
fit within the themes covered already. We report on employee issues below.
Employee issues
Forty-nine (49) comments raise employee issues. The great majority of those commenting
identify themselves as Anglian Water employees.
Dissatisfaction over pay is a prominent theme and one which respondents occasionally link
to the profitability of the company and the pay of directors and senior management. A few
respondents raise low morale in relation to the transition periods between the industry’s fiveyearly Asset Management Plans when Ofwat reviews and sets the price for the next five
years. Employee conditions are the subject of a few comments, with respondents expressing
anxiety about job security, retirement benefits and health and safety. Some employees
suggest that they want to feel motivated and “proud” to work for Anglian Water but that
waning job satisfaction, especially among employees in client-facing roles, may diminish their
goodwill and negatively impact the company.
“Do not lose site that a happy workforce will relay itself to the customer in lots of
ways.”
Employee of Anglian Water
Several respondents link their frustrations with aspects of the operation of the company.
Among the topics discussed are cumbersome tiers of management, a need for more crossdepartmental work, a lack of support for new ideas, and concerns about understaffing and
“overstretching” staff. Some respondents request a more bottom-up approach to
management, including upward appraisals. A few suggest there is insufficient reward and
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
88 of 116
therefore motivation for employees to continue achieving high results in terms of Ofwat’s
customer services measurement, the Service Incentive Mechanism.
11.4 Consultation and information
A number of respondents comment specifically on how issues are treated in the consultation
document, either conceptually or in terms of presentation; these tend to be negative
comments or include suggestions for improvement. In addition, there is a mix of comments
praising the consultation or expressing concerns. Finally, some respondents challenge
Anglian Water’s motivations for consulting its customers and stakeholders, or doubt the
influence that respondents’ comments can have on the company and future planning. A total
of 326 comments were made concerning the consultation and information.
Consultation document and questions
Respondents comment on the consultation questions, seeing them either as on the “right
track” but improvable, or as leading. Those commenting on question 5 (about catchment
management and paying farmers and landowners to change their behaviour) say either that
it should be more specific or that it is leading and unlikely to elicit responses that support
catchment management.
A number of respondents, especially those who added multiple-choice options saying as
much, found some of the multiple-choice questions to be problematic. Question 7 (about
increasing the resilience of water supplies) is seen as biased because it does not provide
respondents with the option to state a preference for investing less in resilience. Engagement
on investment is a particular concern for many respondents who believe that the consultation
as a whole is designed to pave the way for bill increases and does not address the scope for
a reduction in company profit.
“[…] there is an option that you do not mention anywhere and that is to avoid
increases in customers' bills by capping the return to your shareholders. Every option
to improve investment seems to lead you to increase the cost to the consumer!”
Household customer
Other comments relate to the consultation document itself. These include the suggestion that
it should make sufficient objective information available to customers so that their decisions
and responses are better informed. This could take the form of a few sentences that
summarise in objective terms the decisions that Anglian Water needs to make and make
clear what input Anglian Water is asking for from customers. In addition, a number of
respondents comment that the perceived lack of information in the consultation document
mirrors communication of Anglian Water’s work more generally.
“The questions are rather ambiguous. I do not know how you lead with the
environment, etc so how can I comment if you should continue to lead or let other
agencies lead? Regarding the cost: I do not know how much you spend now so how
can I say increase or decrease the spend?”
Household customer
“My gripe is that you had a chance to really show the cost behind everything and its
impact so people could answer with knowing a little more than they do from their own
experience. For instance, why not tell people how much we spend fixing leaks? Tell
them where we are in the league table of leaks. Should we be proud of this? Should
we keep it up or allow it to drop and divert money else where?”
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
89 of 116
Employee of Anglian Water
Some respondents find the topic areas complex. Respondents attending events suggest that
the consultation documents provide too much information for people to review and respond
to in that particular context. Other comments include concern that the improvements
discussed in the consultation document mention a cost to the consumer, but nothing about
reduced profits for the company; some are surprised that metrics describing Anglian Water’s
operational efficiency levels are not included in the consultation information.
“Questions 9 and 10 are completely leading and should not be used. ‘Anglian Water
should continue to lead...’ is completely unsubstantiated. You will probably use the
results to say ‘2,500 respondents agreed that Anglian Water was leading the field in
(whatever subject)’.”
Household customer
Consultation website
A few respondents comment on the consultation website. The comments range from positive
remarks that it is attractive, accessible and likely to engage customers to complaints about it
being cluttered, difficult to navigate and with consultation materials difficult to access via the
links. More information is also requested, particularly in relation to Anglian Water’s work with
communities.
Further engagement
Some respondents commenting on the consultation mention further future engagement,
suggesting that this consultation is aimed at people who already have concerns. Expanding
the consultation to include events such as roadshows would, it is suggested, garner wider
input from people who do not use the internet or who are not on an e-mail list. Parish
councils are seen as another route through which wider engagement might be carried out.
Customers’ bills are seen as a way of publicising future consultations with many respondents
requesting that more consultation and involvement with customers be undertaken.
Several respondents focus on catchment management in particular, suggesting that
additional consultation should be tailored to the issues this theme raises. This should clearly
lay out and explain the costs and benefits for all those involved. Respondents raising this
point say that their support for any scheme involving Anglian Water paying farmers and
landowners to change their behaviour would be conditional upon such additional focused
engagement. Other areas where consultation or engagement might be of value include
reviewing how large businesses like supermarkets use water and whether Anglian Water
should pay them to change their behaviour, as has been suggested with farmers and
landowners as part of catchment management.
Challenging the consultation
A few respondents question Anglian Water’s motivation for the consultation. Challenges
include the accusation that it is simply a public relations exercise, it will not change the
company’s decisions, and that it does not give sufficient importance to solving genuine and
ongoing problems.
More information
A recurrent theme across respondents and in responses to all questions is that of the level of
Anglian Water’s investment. Respondents would like more information about this and explain
that this would enable them to respond better to questions, especially those framed in terms
of “more”, “stay the same” and “less”. There is also interest in how other water companies
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
90 of 116
have approached the consultation process, and in hearing how Ofwat responds to the
consultation in order to understand and assess whether and how regulators address or
respond to customer feedback.
Other comments
Some respondents see the consultation as an example of the good job they think Anglian
Water is doing in regard to customer service. Gathering customer input – as has been done
through the consultation – is seen as an important aspect of Anglian Water’s work in
engaging with communities. A few respondents suggest that the consultation is not a wise
use of Anglian Water’s resources and money.
While a number of respondents use question 12 for any other comments or questions to
simply say “no thank you”, a handful of respondents say that they appreciate the opportunity
to provide input. Some also express hope that the consultation leads to improvements. A few
respondents comment on the value of collecting everyone’s views and look forward to seeing
the findings.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
91 of 116
Chapter 12 – Conclusions
The consultation process has generated a wide variety of comments and suggestions from
across Anglian Water’s household customers, business customers, employees and
stakeholders. The issues that have attracted the most attention are help with bills, lower
tariffs, catchment management, customer services, more communication about Anglian
Water’s work and the importance of education on water conservation. In this chapter we give
an overview of the responses by issue.
12.1 Overview of responses by issue
Satisfied customers
The majority of people who comment directly on Anglian Water’s customer service are
satisfied, praising it for providing excellent support and urging it to maintain its current high
standards.
Where room for improvement in customer services is identified this is primarily in relation to
communications, including timeliness of response and reliability from Anglian Water’s
customer services. Positive suggestions made by respondents range from providing more
frequent updates on engineer calls at home and works in the community, to providing more
information and advice on bills. Some respondents list specific targets against which to
measure customer services, such as fixing a problem on the first visit, better management of
calling customers back, following cases through, and learning from the best practice in the
field. Many respondents call for more self-service options for payments and meter readings
as well as greater use of technology and social media networks. A number of respondents
call for the company to prioritise operational efficiency and cost-effectiveness. Other
respondents express serious concern for sewer flooding in homes and want the company to
prioritise eliminating this risk. Some Anglian Water employees offer suggestions for internal
improvements to communications, service levels and staff training.
Fair charges
Respondents who comment on the idea of lower tariffs to help some people who struggle to
pay their bills have mixed views. Some support this idea while others oppose it, and many
give reasons for their views. Some feel a social duty to help out those who might have
difficulty paying their bills and can identify specific groups that might fall into this category,
such as older people, people with disabilities and families on a low income. Others see
financial benefit in this idea, suggesting that lower payments would reduce non-payments
and help to keep everyone’s bills at a reasonable level. Many of the people who oppose
lower tariffs do so on the basis of fairness: they say that everyone should pay their own way
and be treated equally in terms of tariffs.
Metering is another of respondents’ central concerns. Many think that everyone should be
made to switch to a meter as soon as possible. Some think the choice to switch to a meter
should remain a choice for the customer to make either in their own time or with
encouragement from Anglian Water. Others would still like to see everyone made to switch to
meters but phased in over time to allow people to adjust to changes in their bills.
Some respondents comment on the cost of water generally and many of these say it should
either be reduced or that increases in prices should be minimal: while many of these people
say that water is currently affordable, they worry that price increases will change this. Others
compare the cost of water favourably with the cost of other utilities. A few think that water is
undervalued and too cheap. Some respondents are motivated to save water in order to save
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
92 of 116
on their bills, while others say that the company can also find ways to save money across its
operations.
Safe clean water
Respondents were asked about their views on catchment management, which is defined by
Anglian Water as “influencing land-use practices to reduce pollution before it affects water
sources”. Catchment management can involve paying farmers and landowners to change
what they do.
People supporting catchment management plans – whole-heartedly or conditionally –
outnumber those opposing them. The most common reasons for support include concerns
about the safety of drinking water and the health of the environment. Preventative
management of water resources is also seen as more efficient and effective than post-event
clean-up. Many respondents are concerned about the cost of these proposals, however, and
that this will be passed onto customers through bills. Some people think that farmers and
landowners should not be paid to change their behaviour, often on the basis of the “polluter
pays” principle. Others argue that tackling water pollution should involve other organisations
as well as Anglian Water, including the government and the Environment Agency. Many
respondents say they would like more information on this issue before offering a view.
Many respondents say that the quality of their drinking water is fine. Some are concerned
about water hardness, others would like improvements in its taste, and a few comment on
water discolouration. When responding to the multiple-choice question about the quality of
water, a number of respondents identified other ways in which Anglian Water could improve
this. These concerned the taste and smell of chlorine, the presence in water of other
chemicals such as fluoride and nitrates, and variance in the appearance of water, in terms of
cloudiness and colour. Many respondents would like to see water recycling in place and
some suggested dual water supplies for potable and non-potable uses.
Resilient services
Anglian Water asked respondents how quickly the company should improve the resilience of
its service. The majority of respondents think that Anglian Water should invest at the same
rate as they do now, reducing the risk to supplies slowly to keep bill increases to a minimum.
Fewer respondents support an increase in the rate of investment to improve Anglian Water’s
resilience quickly, with an increase to customers’ bills in the short-term. Some respondents
would like more information about the company’s current levels of investment, which would
enable them to respond better to whether to maintain or increase the rate of investment.
Flooding and drought issues relating to resilience are raised in respondents’ comments on a
number of questions. Many encourage Anglian Water to reduce these risks and support
improved resilience in the water network to ensure continued supply in the face of weatherrelated water pressures. Many respondents want to avoid limits to supply or use during
periods of drought, and are particularly frustrated by hosepipe bans. Some respondents want
Anglian Water to ensure an effective but balanced course of action to tackle both issues,
while others are concerned about the costs of taking action.
Supply meets demand
Many respondents are concerned about leaks, often saying that they waste treated water
and cost money to fix. Many think that Anglian Water should focus on preventing and
repairing leaks to conserve water, minimise damage and keep costs down. The time that it
takes Anglian Water to repair leaks is another recurrent theme, with respondents noting that
the longer it takes to fix leakages, the more water gets wasted.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
93 of 116
Some respondents express wider and more long-term concerns about water supply,
including the possibility of scarcity as the population grows and more development takes
place. Education and awareness-raising – about water efficiency and conservation, in
particular – are seen as very important in relation to these issues but many respondents are
unaware of Anglian Water’s work in these areas. Some think that Anglian Water should
supply water-saving devices such as meters and water butts, either free or at a discount.
Other suggestions for addressing growing pressure on supply include expanding existing
reservoirs and constructing new ones, rain harvesting and the use of grey water where
appropriate, and ensuring water efficiency measures are incorporated in new builds. Some
respondents express concern about the impact on water pressure as population growth
increases demand.
Finally, some respondents think that Anglian Water can improve its own water efficiency,
both across the infrastructure and in its operations. Building partnerships with other water
companies, local councils and property developers could result in innovative and
collaborative solutions, according to some respondents.
Flourishing environment
Investing in environmental management beyond legal obligations is important to most
respondents. About half of those commenting on environmental management qualify their
support by saying that investment should generate clear economic benefits for local people.
Others support investment because the environment itself matters to them.
In particular, some respondents are concerned about the impacts of Anglian Water’s work on
local ecosystems, including the deterioration of habitats and pollution of rivers. These
respondents argue that Anglian Water should concentrate on reducing negative
environmental effects resulting from its own system and practices. Some respondents
commend Anglian Water for its environmental programmes and awareness campaigns.
However, for some respondents, environmental management activities do not fall within
Anglian Water’s purview. Others contend that water users – including the agricultural sector
and other large-scale users – are more to blame for the negative environmental impacts and
that more environmental awareness activities are needed.
A smaller footprint
A majority of respondents say that reducing carbon emissions and use of natural resources
should continue to be a goal of Anglian Water as long as bills do not increase. Only some
support this even if bills might increase. Some raise concerns about the impact of climate
change on weather conditions and hence on overall water resources and a few suggest
demand-side measures, such as smart meters, to address this concern. Others suggest that
factors such as water companies’ mismanagement of water supplies are a greater threat to
water resources.
Some respondents suggest that collaborating with other regional water suppliers, energy
companies and local planning authorities would help Anglian Water’s efforts to ensure a
water supply that meets future demands.
Caring for communities
In general, respondents support Anglian Water’s work with communities, and many mention
specific issues in the context of community work – including water usage and environmental
protection – that they would like to see the company prioritise. Community engagement and
education activities – particularly educational programmes aimed at children and young
people – are seen as an important aspect of Anglian Water’s efforts to raise awareness
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
94 of 116
about water resources and water usage. Recreational areas are also supported for their
leisure, economic and educational value.
A large number of respondents say they did not know about Anglian Water’s community
activities, and some think that Anglian Water should publicise its work in the community more
effectively. A few respondents do not see community activities as the responsibility of a water
company and think that Anglian Water should focus on supplying clean drinking water and
wastewater services.
Other themes
Two of the outcomes in the consultation document were not addressed in specific questions.
These are ‘Investing for tomorrow’ and ‘Fair profits’. Some respondents comment on these
outcomes in their answers to other questions.
Many respondents comment generally on Anglian Water’s infrastructure and assets. Some
respondents are particularly concerned about pipe maintenance across the infrastructure. In
addition, some take the view that asset maintenance – including regular checks on and
cleaning of the system – and improvement across the ageing infrastructure should be the
company’s main concern. A few respondents are concerned about the quality of subcontracted work. Of these respondents, some acknowledge that investing in upgrading and
maintaining the infrastructure will require some cost to be passed to the customer. On the
other hand, others support enhancing assets only in balance with low customer costs.
Some respondents comment on the structure of the water industry and on Anglian Water’s
profits. A number of respondents say that the industry allows for monopolies and prevents
consumers making a choice among suppliers. A few respondents feel that the public do not
understand Ofwat’s price regulation of the industry and think that Anglian Water should help
to clarify this. The most recurrent comment on profit is a challenge to either the level of profit
or its use. Sometimes the roles of shareholders, owners or management are challenged:
many respondents think that lowering dividends to shareholders is an acceptable and
preferable way forward.
Finally, a number of respondents comment on the consultation process itself and how issues
are treated in the consultation document. Some praise the consultation while others express
some concerns.
12.2 Next steps
The ‘Discover, Discuss, Decide’ consultation suggests that Anglian Water’s customers are
interested in taking part in a wide-ranging discussion and in having their views heard as part
of the price review process and longer-term strategy of the company. The consultation
responses analysed here contain numerous remarks, reservations, suggestions, support for
and opposition to Anglian Water’s ten outcomes. They touch on individual circumstances,
regional issues such as population growth and national and global concerns such as drough,
flooding and water scarcity. Insights from this consultation will feed into the dry run business
plan to be developed over the summer of 2013. At this point, Anglian Water will again ask for
the views of their customers and stakeholders concerning the proposed business plan.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
95 of 116
A.1 Appendix – Details of engagement activities
Roadshows
The map below shows the geographic coverage of the customer engagement roadshows,
along with the number of response forms collected at each location.
33
30
170
140
75
36
546
61
68
117
287
142
277
67
50
210
Print and broadcast media
All media strands were targeted to achieve wide-reaching coverage including:

64 direct newspaper articles and 15 additional
references covering the consultation, including
a double page spread in the Eastern Daily
press

Letters to editors in twelve regional papers

Coverage of the extension of the consultation
from closing on 10 March until 24 March 2013
in eight different papers across the region

Roadshows attracted local media resulting in 12 articles and photo stories

BBC ‘look East’ feature on the consultation with filming on location and live studio
interview with Martyn Oakley, Customer Services Director

BBC ‘look North’ feature on the consultation with interview with Paul Valleley, Director of
Water Services.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
96 of 116

Four hour-long radio phone-in shows on BBC Radio stations in Suffolk, Lincolnshire,
Northamptonshire and Cambridgeshire.
Radio advertising
Two weeks of radio advertising were commissioned
on 16 radio stations across the region. The first
week-long campaign took place between 13 and 20
February 2013 and a second week between 4 and
10 March 2013. Both had a potential reach of over
1.7 million listeners who may have heard the advert
as many as eight times. The map shows the
coverage of the radio advertising campaigns:
Web and social media
Throughout the consultation, web and social media helped ensure maximum coverage and
opportunity for engagement. Anglian Water’s dedicated engagement website
(www.discoverdiscussdecide.co.uk)
received 4,182 visitors with 3,024 of those
visits coming from unique users. The site
featured background information on the
consultation and allowed customers to
engage with information in a number of
ways. There were discussion forums, quick
polls and the ‘My 2020 Water View’ budget
simulator tool.
The conversation pages featured an Anglian
Water led ‘question of the week’ as well as a
chance for customers to start their own
discussion threads with topics ranging from
sewer flooding to value for money and climate change. During the consultation, 81
comments were posted in response to nine topics posted by Anglian Water and three by
customers.
During the consultation there were also 54 posts on Facebook to encourage customers to
engage with the discussions taking place on Anglian Water’s website and complete the
consultation online. Throughout the consultation period there was a total reach of 1,134
Facebook followers, with 85 actively engaging with the content by use of comments or voting
in polls. Facebook was also used to promote the locations of the roadshows.
Twitter was also used to promote the consultation with new discussion topics of the week
and inviting customers to visit roadshows. Over 2,000 customers and stakeholders follow the
Anglian Water Twitter feed.
Stakeholders
Throughout the consultation there has been a broad range of engagement with different
stakeholder groups: 286 letters were sent to MPs, MEPs, LEP chairs, CEF, Independent
Advisory Panel members and other regional organisations. These letters included a copy of
the consultation document, paper response form and prepaid envelope. These letters were
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
97 of 116
sent not only to collect their views but for their support in promoting it to their networks,
constituencies, employees and members.
On top of this, over 1,500 communications teams within regional councils and stakeholder
organisations were asked to help promote the consultation. They were sent a toolkit including
draft press releases, website content and information on how people can take part.
The consultation received strong support in terms of publicity from a wide range of
stakeholders who promoted it to their networks. For example, ‘Chambers’ magazine was
circulated to members of the East of England chambers of commerce and the CBI Eastern
region newsletter was sent to all regional members. Several MP’s also included information
about the consultation on their websites with details of how constituents could respond.
Employees
All Anglian Water employees were engaged throughout the consultation period with weekly
updates in Newstream (the internal company newsletter), banners in the offices and paper
response forms sent out in ‘Anglian Water News’, the company newspaper.
Household customers
Household customers were engaged in a number of ways in order to offer them the
maximum opportunity to respond. A total of 106,429 emails have been sent to customers
with a personal invitation from Martyn Oakley, Customer Services Director, to participate in
the consultation online. A total of 3,048 customers have visited the website as a result.
Anglian Water customer service representatives also raised awareness of the consultation
while on site visits at customers’ homes; the metering team collected responses from around
260 customers recording their responses digitally on their laptop devices.
To maximise awareness, email signatures on all outgoing messages from the customer
contact centre were edited to provide a link to Anglian Water’s website promoting the
consultation. In addition, 560,000 annual billing envelopes also carried information on the
consultation, as well as an information leaflet inside annual billing. Customers who had taken
part in previous research were contacted and informed as well.
Furthermore, 800 customers on the Anglian Water WaterCare register with a medical need
for water were contacted and customers registered as blind or partially sighted were sent
Braille and large print communications explaining how they could have their say. Some
consultation responses were recorded by Anglian Water’s customer services representatives
over the phone.
Business Customers
Business customers were also engaged throughout the consultation period with personal
emails being sent to over 400 Account Managed customers from Bob Wilson, Director of
Anglian Water Business. Business account managers
also promoted the consultation at all customer
meetings and encouraged customers to take part.
Future customers
Throughout the consultation, a series of eight
education workshops took place to understand the
views of future customers. The sessions worked with
mainly GCSE and A-Level students exploring the ten
outcome areas and consultation questions using
interactive discussion packs and facilitated
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
98 of 116
discussion. A total of 213 future customers were involved and the results of this work will also
be published by Anglian Water in a future customer research report. Consultation
documents, paper response forms and pre-paid envelopes were also left at the schools and
sent home with the pupils to encourage parents and teachers to take part.
Hartlepool Water Customers
Throughout the engagement process, efforts were also made to ensure that customers of
Hartlepool Water (a sub-set of Anglian Water) were engaged as much as possible and to
ensure their views were considered and fairly represented in the business plan. The
roadshow team spent two days in Hartlepool and two education workshops were also held in
Hartlepool schools (Manor College and St. Hilda’s). The media in Hartlepool was also
contacted and press releases were issued to inform more customers in the region.
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
99 of 116
A.2 Appendix – Consultation questionnaire
The questionnaire available to respondents online and in paper form consisted of 12
questions:
Question 1: Thinking about our future customer service in 2015–2020, what would you
expect us to be doing that we’re not doing now?
Question 2: Of all the aspects of our services, customers tell us they are particularly worried
about flooding from sewers inside their homes. What best describes how you feel about the
risk of people’s homes being flooded by sewage:

It’s unacceptable and the risk should be eliminated for all customers, whatever the cost

We should continue to invest at around the same rate as we are now to reduce the risk
for some customers

Reducing the risk should not be a priority
Question 3: What do you think about extending special lower tariffs to help some people
who struggle to pay their bills, even if it means a small increase in other customers’ bills?
Question 4: We know that it will not be possible for all properties to have a meter. However,
for those that can, what best describes your attitude towards metering:

I think everyone should be made to switch to a meter as soon as possible

I think everyone should be made to switch but this should be phased in over time to allow
for people to adjust to changes in their bills

I think the decision should be voluntary and people should make the decision in their own
time

I think the decision should be voluntary but Anglian Water should encourage people to
make this change
Question 5: ‘Catchment management’ plans involve investing now for potentially uncertain
benefit. It could also involve paying farmers and landowners to change what they do. What
are your views on this approach?
Question 6: There is strict regulation of the quality of drinking water. But there may be other
aspects relating to your water quality which you think are important to improve. Which, if any,
is most important to you:

Discolouration

Taste

Hardness

The quality of my drinking water is fine

Other (please specify)
Question 7: We want to increase the resilience of our water supplies to prolonged drought.
How quickly do you think we should do this?

Invest at the same rate as we do now, reducing the risk to supplies slowly to keep bill
increases to a minimum

Increase the rate of investment to improve our resilience quickly, with an increase to bills
in the short term
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
100 of 116
Question 8: We know that customers are concerned about leaks. What worries you most
about leakage? Is it:

That precious water and the cost of treating it is being wasted?

If water companies don’t fix the obvious leaks very quickly, then no-one else will do
anything to save water?

That water companies will spend too much on leakage and my bills might go up to pay for
it?
Question 9: Which statement best describes your attitude towards our investment in
environmental management? Anglian Water should:

Make the minimum investment required to meet legal obligations

Go beyond what is legally required to protect and enhance the environment but only if
there are clear economic benefits to local people such as increased tourism/jobs

Go beyond what is legally required to protect and enhance the environment because the
environment is important to me, regardless of the economic benefits to local people
Question 10: Which statement best describes what you think we should be doing to reduce
our carbon emissions and use of natural resources?

Anglian Water should continue to lead even if it involves taking some upfront cost which
might increase bills

Anglian Water should continue to lead but only if there are clear benefits for customers
and bills don't increase

Let others lead on reducing emissions and resource scarcity
Question 11: Which aspects of our work with communities do you feel are most important?
Question 12: Do you have any other comments or questions about what we do now and our
plans for the future?
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
101 of 116
A.3 Appendix – Analytical framework
Table 1 provides a full list of the top-level themes used and the count of comments coded
within each theme. Table 2 provides the complete analytical framework consisting of themes,
sub-themes and codes.
Table 1: Themes
Themes
Count of comments coded within theme
Charges and Profit (CH)
9,130
Communities (CO)
3,335
Consultation and Information (CI)
326
Customer services (CS)
3,060
Environment (EN)
585
Location (LO)
211
Other (O)
2,789
References (R)
421
Supply meets demand (SD)
3,296
Supply resilience (SR)
901
Water quality (WQ)
5,719
Table 2: Analytical framework
Charges and Profit (CH)
Bill assistance

CH – Assistance – comment on welfare/benefits

CH – Assistance – compare to other service/utility

CH – Assistance – concern

CH – Assistance – cross-subsidy – concern

CH – Assistance – cross-subsidy – more info required

CH – Assistance – cross-subsidy – oppose

CH – Assistance – cross-subsidy – support

CH – Assistance – cross-subsidy – support with caveat

CH – Assistance – customer debt – concern

CH – Assistance – customer debt reduction – support

CH – Assistance – customer debt reduction – support with caveat

CH – Assistance – lower tariffs – concern
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
102 of 116

CH – Assistance – lower tariffs – more info required

CH – Assistance – lower tariffs – oppose

CH – Assistance – lower tariffs – support

CH – Assistance – lower tariffs – support with caveat

CH – Assistance – lower tariffs – unaware

CH – Assistance – oppose

CH – Assistance – other/government responsibility

CH – Assistance – request more info

CH – Assistance – specific suggestion/alternative

CH – Assistance – specific suggestion/alternative – metering

CH – Assistance – specific suggestion/alternative – vulnerable groups

CH – Assistance – support

CH – Assistance – support with caveat
Cost

CH – Cost – affordability/value for money

CH – Cost – compare to other service/utility

CH – Cost – economic climate/cannot keep climbing

CH – Cost – equality/fairness across customers

CH – Cost – incentives for lower usage/reuse

CH – Cost – keep to a minimum/increases to a minimum/freeze

CH – Cost – may rise to meet profits even if saving water

CH – Cost – reduce overall for customers

CH – Cost – reduce wastewater cost for customers

CH – Cost – save water to reduce

CH – Cost – specific charge/rate
Industry

CH – Industry – no choice/monopoly

CH – Industry – other ownership model

CH – Industry – price regulation

CH – Industry – request more info

CH – Industry – standardised charges

CH – Industry – state v. private ownership
Metering

CH – Meter – compare to other service/utility
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
103 of 116

CH – Meter – compulsory

CH – Meter – cost – concern

CH – Meter – not compulsory/customer choice

CH – Meter – option to remove/leave

CH – Meter – phase in/allow for adjustment

CH – Meter – request more info

CH – Meter – save water to reduce

CH – Meter – smart meter

CH – Meter – specific suggestion

CH – Meter – support/encourage
Profit

CH – Profit – challenge level/use

CH – Profit – repay debt/loans

CH – Profit – request more info

CH – Profit – role of shareholders/owners

CH – Profit – should not motivate AW
Communities (CO)

CO – Behaviour change – support

CO – Charity/volunteer work – general

CO – Charity/volunteer work – Love to Help/Give Me Five

CO – Charity/volunteer work – more info

CO – Charity/volunteer work – specific suggestion

CO – Charity/volunteer work – WaterAid

CO – Community work – concern

CO – Community work – oppose

CO – Community work – support

CO – Community work – support with caveat

CO – Economic benefit

CO – Employment

CO – General

CO – Health/hospital projects

CO – Recreation areas – concern

CO – Recreation areas – specific suggestion

CO – Recreation areas – support
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
104 of 116

CO – Request more info

CO – Service provision – general

CO – Specific suggestion

CO – Tourism

CO – Visits – Anglian Water works

CO – Visits – homes

CO – Work with vulnerable people
Awareness and education

CO – Awareness/education – concern

CO – Awareness/education – environmental protection

CO – Awareness/education – general

CO – Awareness/education – generational difference

CO – Awareness/education – through advertising/PR

CO – Awareness/education – through business/companies

CO – Awareness/education – through community/councils/parishes/collaboration

CO – Awareness/education – through events

CO – Awareness/education – through schools/children/teaching future

CO – Awareness/education – through visible works/river/beach

CO – Awareness/education – through workshops/programmes

CO – Awareness/education – unaware/make more aware of AW work

CO – Awareness/education – water supply/resources

CO – Awareness/education – water usage/conservation

CO – Awareness/education – water value
Communication

CO – Communication – campaign – Bits and Bobs

CO – Communication – campaign – Drop 20

CO – Communication – campaign – FOG

CO – Communication – campaign – Keep It Clear

CO – Communication – campaign – Keep Your Pipes Cosy

CO – Communication – campaign – Love Every Drop

CO – Communication – campaign – Potting Shed

CO – Communication – general support
Consultation and Information (CI)

CI – Call for further consultation
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
105 of 116

CI – Call to act on feedback

CI – Challenge AW’s motivation/consultation influence

CI – Comparison to other water company consultation

CI – Engagement – events/local community

CI – Engagement – publicise consultation more widely

CI – Info/materials – not useful/not informative/unclear

CI – Info/materials – other comment/question

CI – Process – appreciate/welcome opportunity to comment

CI – Process – challenge value/cost of consultation

CI – Refer to consultation document

CI – Request follow-up from AW

CI – Scope – focus/questions/response options too narrow

CI – Scope – should encompass other specific issue

CI – Specific suggestion

CI – T&Cs – unclear

CI – Website – problems/criticism

CI – Website – useful/appreciate
Customer Services (CS)

CS – Advice – understanding bills/appropriate tariff

CS – Alerts – more warning of engineer visits

CS – Appointments – more flexibility/narrower scheduling windows

CS – Availability

CS – Compare to other service/utility

CS – E-bills/e-communication – more/reduce post

CS – Expansion – services beyond the Anglian region

CS – Flooding – concern/response

CS – Insurance

CS – Internal operations/management

CS – Leakage – concern/response

CS – Meter – reading/placement/service

CS – Operations – company efficiency/cost-effectiveness/waste – concern

CS – Operations – company reputation – concern

CS – Operations – environmental sustainability

CS – Payment options
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
106 of 116

CS – Records – track jobs history

CS – Request more info

CS – Self-service – more online/SMS/phone app functions

CS – Service level – seek to improve – general

CS – Service level – support with caveat

CS – Service level – well done/keep up current level

CS – Services AW should provide

CS – Sewer flooding – concern/response

CS – Specific/individual case – complaint

CS – Specific/individual case – praise

CS – Specific suggestion

CS – Staff – knowledgeable

CS – Staff – lack of knowledge/improvement required

CS – Support for vulnerable customers

CS – UK call centres

CS – Wastewater flooding – concern/response

CS – Water pressure – concern/response

CS – Water-saving packs
Communication

CS – Communication – AW website – improve

CS – Communication – call centre resolution/updates

CS – Communication – direct face-to-face

CS – Communication – emergency response

CS – Communication – faster response

CS – Communication – free phone line

CS – Communication – general

CS – Communication – inform/update community more on works

CS – Communication – listen to customers/consult more/know your customers better

CS – Communication – minimise

CS – Communication – more information on AW services

CS – Communication – social networking/Twitter/Facebook
Environment (EN)

EN – Bathing water quality – concern

EN – Environment – concern
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
107 of 116

EN – Collaboration – environmental groups

EN – Environmental outcomes – oppose

EN – Environmental outcomes – support

EN – Environmental outcomes – support with caveat

EN – Environmental sustainability

EN – Legal requirements – UK regulation/EU directives

EN – Project – BeachCare

EN – Project – RiverCare

EN – Nature, biodiversity, heritage reserves – concern

EN – Request more info

EN – River water quality – concern

EN – Wastewater/sewage – find alternative use/compost

EN – Water/wetland protection/maintenance

EN – Wildlife – concern
Location (LO)

LO – A421/hospital roundabout

LO – Louth

LO – Abberton Reservoir

LO – March

LO – Aldeburgh

LO – Milton

LO – Alton Water

LO – Milton Keynes

LO – Bawdsey

LO – Nene Valley

LO – Beeston

LO – Norfolk

LO – Boston

LO – North Walsham

LO – Breckland

LO – Northampton

LO – Brixworth Water Park

LO – Norwich

LO – Buckingham

LO – Orwell

LO – Buckinghamshire

LO – Ouidle

LO – Burley

LO – Perry

LO – Cambridge

LO – Peterborough

LO – Cambridgeshire

LO – Pitsford

LO – Cheddington

LO – Pulloxhill

LO – Chesteron Fen

LO – River Ancholme

LO – Colchester

LO – River Cam

LO – Corby Treatment Works

LO – River Nar

LO – Cromer Treatment Works

LO – River Nene
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
108 of 116

LO – Denver sluice

LO – River Stour

LO – Diss

LO – River Waveney

LO – Dorset

LO – River Wenson

LO – Downham Market

LO – Rockingham Forest

LO – Dunston

LO – Rutland Water Park

LO – East Cambridgeshire

LO – Rural area

LO – East Lindsey

LO – Silsoe

LO – Essex

LO – South Lincolnshire

LO – Feltwell

LO – South Walsham

LO – Fens

LO – South Willingham

LO – Floods Ferry

LO – Spalding

LO – Godmanchester

LO – Stalham Treatment Works

LO – Goxhill

LO – Stamford

LO – Grafham Water Park

LO – Stanway

LO – Great Coates

LO – Stanwick

LO – Great Hallingbury

LO – Stoke by Nayland

LO – Greatford

LO – Suffolk

LO – Grimsby

LO – Tendring

LO – Harlington

LO – Thorney

LO – Hartlepool

LO – Thorpe

LO – Heighington

LO – Thorpe Meadows

LO – Histon and Impington

LO – Trent

LO – Hovel

LO – Watton

LO – Huntingdon

LO – Welney

LO – Ipswich

LO – Wensum Valley

LO – Jack Hunt School

LO – Westbury/A422

LO – Kings Lynn

LO – Westcliff

LO – Langtoft

LO – Whaplode

LO – Langworth

LO – Whitlingham

LO – Leighton Buzzard

LO – Whittlesey

LO – Lincoln

LO – Wilbarston

LO – Lincolnshire

LO – Wisbech

LO – Linford Wood

LO – Witham

LO – Lorrenham

LO – Yaxley
Other (O)
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
109 of 116

O – Employee issues – pay/conditions/job satisfaction

O – General/other comment

O – Illegibility

O – No comment

O – No opinion/not qualified/not enough info

O – Personal details removed

O – Q2 – written additional tick box option/comment

O – Q4 – written additional tick box option/comment

O – Q7 – written additional tick box option/comment

O – Q8 – written additional tick box option/comment

O – Q9 – written additional tick box option/comment

O – Q10 – written additional tick box option/comment

O – Refer to other question

O – Response over character limit

No comment was made (Q6 other)
References (R)

R – DEFRA

R – Drinking Water Inspectorate

R – Environment Agency

R – Incident/event

R – Natural England

R – NFU

R – Ofwat

R – Other

R – Other companies/cases/comparison

R – Other water/wastewater companies

R – Participant – info about
Supply Meets Demand (SD)

SD – Concern for future scarcity

SD – Long-term planning

SD – Maintain/repair/upgrade infrastructure/assets – general

SD – Quality and impacts of works/repairs – concern

SD – Request more info
Leakage
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
110 of 116

SD – Leakage – asset maintenance/repair/upgrade

SD – Leakage – concern

SD – Leakage – fix leaks faster

SD – Leakage – specific suggestion

SD – Leakage – stop/prevent leaks/mains bursts
Other demands on supply

SD – Demands – abstraction/water extracting – concern

SD – Demands – new builds – concern

SD – Demands – new builds – ensure efficiency

SD – Demands – new builds – oppose

SD – Demands – new builds – specific suggestion

SD – Demands – population increase – concern

SD – Demands – specific suggestion – collaboration/innovation with others

SD – Demands – specific suggestion – more/expanded reservoirs/catchments

SD – Demands – specific suggestion – seek alternative sources

SD – Demands – specific suggestion – use IT/tech/high energy

SD – Demands – water pressure consistency – concern
Wastewater supply demands

SD – Wastewater – asset maintenance/repair/upgrade

SD – Wastewater – flooding - concern

SD – Wastewater – reduce sewage flooding – oppose

SD – Wastewater – reduce sewage flooding – support

SD – Wastewater – reduce sewage flooding – support with caveat

SD – Wastewater – specific suggestion
Water usage

SD – Usage – large-scale users – accountability

SD – Usage – large-scale users – incentivise lower use

SD – Usage – efficiency/conservation – general

SD – Usage – efficiency/conservation – within AW

SD – Usage – water-saving advice/devices
Supply Resilience (SR)

SR – Drought & flooding – concern/risk

SR – Drought measures – concern

SR – Drought measures – minimise
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
111 of 116

SR – Drought measures – not a priority/oppose/water shortage not a problem

SR – Drought measures – support with caveat

SR – Flooding – concern/risk

SR – Fuel efficiency – fuel use in operations/transport

SR – Man-made risks – concern

SR – Request more info

SR – Resilience – general – support

SR – Specific suggestion

SR – Specific suggestion – collaboration/innovation with others
Carbon footprint

SR – Carbon footprint reduction – oppose

SR – Carbon footprint reduction – support

SR – Carbon footprint reduction – support with caveats
Climate change

SR – Climate change – concern

SR – Climate change – impacting AW services

SR – Climate change – scepticism/disbelief

SR – Climate change measures – oppose

SR – Climate change measures – support
Water Quality (WQ)
Catchment management

WQ – CM – collaboration – beneficial

WQ – CM – compensation – concern

WQ – CM – compensation – oppose

WQ – CM – compensation – oppose – benefits concern

WQ – CM – compensation – oppose – consumer cost concern

WQ – CM – compensation – support

WQ – CM – compensation – support with caveat

WQ – CM – concern

WQ – CM – consideration – fertiliser/pesticide manufacturers

WQ – CM – consideration – food production/price/market

WQ – CM – consideration – other businesses/industries

WQ – CM – farmers – already/gradually changing

WQ – CM – farmers – educate on cost/benefit of practices
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
112 of 116

WQ – CM – farmers – force to change

WQ – CM – farmers – should be encouraged/helped to change

WQ – CM – farmers – should change

WQ – CM – meaning/wording unclear

WQ – CM – more research/testing needed

WQ – CM – need more knowledge/info

WQ – CM – oppose

WQ – CM – others/government – should police/national level issue

WQ – CM – polluter pays

WQ – CM – refer to existing UK/EU subsidies

WQ – CM – request more info

WQ – CM – specific suggestion

WQ – CM – support

WQ – CM – support with caveat
Drinking water

WQ – Drinking – air/bubbles – concern

WQ – Drinking – chemical alternatives/natural treatment/aeration

WQ – Drinking – chemicals/treatment – concern/more info

WQ – Drinking – cloudiness – concern

WQ – Drinking – discolouration – concern

WQ – Drinking – fluoride - concern

WQ – Drinking – hardness – concern

WQ – Drinking – hardness – cost concern

WQ – Drinking – hardness – health benefits

WQ – Drinking – health – concern

WQ – Drinking – lead – concern

WQ – Drinking – other – unspecified

WQ – Drinking – quality – acceptable

WQ – Drinking – quality – concern/contamination

WQ – Drinking – quality – improve

WQ – Drinking – quality is too good

WQ – Drinking – quality – maintain

WQ – Drinking – request more info

WQ – Drinking – safety – priority

WQ – Drinking – specific suggestion
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
113 of 116

WQ – Drinking – taste – acceptable

WQ – Drinking – taste – chlorine

WQ – Drinking – taste – concern

WQ – Drinking – taste – improve

WQ – Drinking – taste – unacceptable

WQ – Drinking – use bottled water

WQ – Drinking – use home treatment/filter/softener
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
114 of 116
A.3 Appendix – Organisations and businesses responding

Anglian Water Sub-Environment Panel

Aylesbury Vale District Council

Bawdsey Parish Council

Bedford Borough Council

Bedford Group of Internal Drainage Boards

Borough Council of King's Lynn & West Norfolk

Buckinghamshire County Council

Citizens Advice

Clifton Park Residents' Association

Cranfield Parish Council

Culworth Parish Council

East Lindsey District Council

ECDP (‘enhancing the everyday lives of people in Essex and beyond’)

Environment Agency

Essex Chambers of Commerce

Future East

Grantchester Parish Council

Halcrow

Ipswich Market

Kier Homes (business)

Larkfleet Homes (business)

Lincolnshire County Council

Lindum Construction (business)

Milton Keynes Council

MWH Treatment Ltd

Norfolk County Council

Northampton Borough Council

Northamptonshire County Council

North East Lincolnshire Council

North Hertfordshire District Council

Persimmon Homes (business)

River Mel Restoration Group

Rochford District Council

Royal Society for the Protection of Birds
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
115 of 116

Southend Association of Voluntary Services

SPA Future Thinking

Step One Daycare

Weston Colville Parish Council

West Stockwith Parish Council

Wilbarston Parish Council
Discover, Discuss, Decide: Consultation
Dialogue by Design
116 of 116