The final report from the Independent Water Commission, chaired by Sir Jon Cunliffe, is being widely hailed as the most ambitious attempt to reform the UK water sector since privatisation. With 88 detailed recommendations, the report calls for a fundamental reset to how water services are governed, regulated, and delivered.
Framed by Cunliffe himself as a modern-day “Great Stink” moment, the report sets out to address the environmental, public health, and structural challenges facing the sector with urgency and vision.
Much like the infamous 1858 pollution crisis on the Thames that spurred Victorian engineering reforms, today’s water issues, pollution, public dissatisfaction, and fragmented oversight have created a crisis of confidence. In Cunliffe’s view, this moment demands equally bold and systemic action.
At the heart of the report are five transformational proposals, which Sir Jon reinforced in his speech at the launch:
A single “super-regulator”
Perhaps the most high-profile recommendation is the abolition of Ofwat, with its economic regulation role merged with the water-related functions of the Environment Agency, Drinking Water Inspectorate, and Natural England. This new integrated body would offer a “whole-firm” view of water companies, moving away from fragmented oversight and towards joined-up accountability. The Government has already indicated support for this change, suggesting rapid progress may follow.
A truly strategic direction
The report criticises government for failing to provide clear long-term planning for the sector. To correct this, it recommends a National Water Strategy supported by independent regional planning bodies in England and a single national planner in Wales. These authorities would be empowered to align investments with climate, environmental, and customer priorities.
Improved governance and accountability
To rebuild public trust, the report recommends that regulatory powers be expanded to block changes in water company ownership that are not in the public interest. New “public benefit” duties would be inserted into company licences, and a more rigorous framework introduced for senior executive accountability.
Strengthened consumer and environmental protection
A series of recommendations target pollution, fairness, and water efficiency. These include accelerating the rollout of smart metering, strengthening sludge and drinking water standards, promoting water reuse, and creating a national social tariff for low-income households. The Consumer Council for Water would be upgraded to an ombudsman service to enhance complaint resolution.
A modern infrastructure delivery model
The Commission recommends creating a Water Infrastructure Company within the new National Infrastructure and Skills Transformation Authority (NISTA). This body would oversee long-term infrastructure delivery, standardise procurement, and help bring innovation to scale. It would play a coordinating role across complex, multi-stakeholder water investment projects.
The report has sparked a wave of reflection across the sector. It recognises the dedication of frontline workers but makes clear that the current governance model is not fit for purpose. It also presents a call to action: to redesign systems around resilience, sustainability, and trust.
Organisations such as Future Water, which represents a cross-section of the supply chain, from utilities and equipment providers to consultants, technologists, and academics, have found strong alignment between the Commission’s recommendations and their own policy positions.
Future Water’s submissions to the Call for Evidence and Interim Report repeatedly called for:
- Integrated regulation to streamline accountability.
- Clearer long-term investment signals.
- A joined-up approach to standards and innovation.
- A proactive strategy to address digital resilience and cybersecurity.
- The introduction of a national water skills plan.
The Commission’s final proposals reflect many of these themes. In particular, Future Water’s work on standards mapping, which models the relationships between utilities, regulators, and supply chain actors, could serve as a practical foundation for shaping the structure of the new single regulator.
While the report has been widely praised for its scope and clarity, it has not been without criticism. Sir Jon Cunliffe himself acknowledged that implementation would take time, requiring primary legislation and sector-wide consultation. He estimated that establishing the new regulatory model could take two years, referencing previous large-scale regulatory mergers such as the creation of Ofcom.
There are also voices arguing that the reforms do not go far enough. Various campaign groups have criticised the report for staying within the boundaries of the current privatised model. They argue that the report fails to address what they see as the root cause of underperformance: a system that places profit above public interest. While the Commission did consider stronger public benefit duties and tighter governance, it was not permitted to examine public ownership as a structural alternative, a limitation some view as a missed opportunity.
Despite the complexities, the report presents significant opportunities, particularly for the supply chain. The call for smart metering, digitalisation, and standardisation of delivery models offers a clearer entry point for suppliers and innovators. The proposed Water Infrastructure Company could help de-risk procurement and drive consistency across regions.
Future Water’s working groups, including those focused on metering, digital resilience, emerging talent, and innovation, are well positioned to support delivery. Their experience developing maturity frameworks, advising on data interoperability, and building sector-wide collaboration will be invaluable as the sector transitions into this new model.
Framing this as the water sector’s “Great Stink” moment is no empty metaphor. Just as the 1858 crisis catalysed the creation of London’s sewers, today’s challenges, pollution, mistrust, and fragmentation, are prompting a long-overdue systemic shift.
As Sir Jon Cunliffe put it, “there is no single, simple change” that will fix the sector, but the breadth and depth of the Commission’s recommendations offer a genuine opportunity to rebuild the system on firmer, more transparent foundations.
The next step lies with the Government, which is expected to respond later this year. The sector, meanwhile, must prepare for transformational change. Future Waters voice has clearly resonated throughout the Commission’s process and will be central in turning vision into reality.
