Reservoirs became a proxy for a broader failure: a country facing hotter, drier summers while water infrastructure stands still. That decisive verdict was driven less by enthusiasm for lakes than by impatience with hosepipe bans and the companies blamed for them.
The floor’s most-respected Yes case called the situation “woeful mismanagement of the country's resources.” Another highly rated voice pointed to “thirty years asset stripping, paying billions in dividends”, while other Yes voters wanted public ownership, desalination and mandatory investment alongside new reservoirs.
No voters did not form a simple anti-building bloc. Their sharpest case was that “Mend the network and punish the leak”, while another argued, “We need to build desalination plants instead”; the disagreement was over whether new capacity solves water insecurity when pipes leak and sewage still reaches rivers.
The debate also complicated the easy story of corporate reluctance. A Yes voter noted “British planning regulations that prevented them previously being built”, a point echoed by a No argument blaming dysfunctional planning rather than the companies; the wider dispute is about who should carry the risk and cost of long-term infrastructure.
The room voted for more reservoirs, but its deeper demand was for water security that cannot be postponed, privatised or explained away by the weather.
26 Opinions
It's utterly ridiculous that a so-called first world country has to implement hosepipe bans due to woeful mismanagement of the country's resources.
I voted yes but really I want water companies who are responsible for supplying water to ensure they supply water and don’t hide behind weather as an excuse for their inability to do so. Build more reservoirs if that helps. But I’m equally happy with an alternative answer that enables taps to turn on in the summer.
We need to build desalination plants instead, we are loosing to much farmland and need to save as much as we can to have food security
But with the important note it was British planning regulations that prevented them previously being built
As stated by others government should build reservoirs. I also believe desalitation plants should be built around our coasts to use all sea water available. Should never run out of water.
Water companies have spent thirty years asset stripping, paying billions in dividends, and not building a single major reservoir... now two weeks of sunshine triggers hosepipe bans and lectures on shorter showers. It’s pathetic. We've increased population dramatically but water storage has barely moved since 1992... I don't get how these companies can be allowed to operate whilst failing to provide basic water infrastructure
Isn’t this completely redundant if new reservoirs ARE being built, and the consensus here is that water infrastructure should be re-nationalised. Thanks to Brexit it can be.
But they should be made to fix leaks
The last reservoir built in the UK was approved in the 70s!! But not sure who, per the question, is “to be making” the water companies build more - they currently DO want to, but it’s govt (local+national) stopping them!
The ‘hotter summers’ preface is irrelevant. Problem is fixing leaks & addressing the ‘mulligans’ given to water companies to dump raw sewage in river system. Labour sold Golden Shares so many of the issues can as usual be laid at their door. Privatization was botched but State ownership involved v little investment There of course should be returns for companies if they invest. Issue is financial engineering & should not be permitted for utilities. We do need reservoirs.