Public control of water and energy at heart of Burnham agenda, sources say | Andy Burnham

A ten-year project to bring water and energy under public control will be at the center of Andy Burnham’s agenda if he becomes prime minister, according to sources close to the mayor of Greater Manchester.

Several close allies of Burnham have said he wants to take over large swaths of U.K. utilities in a bid to improve performance and potentially reduce consumers’ bills.

The move would constitute one of the biggest transfers of ownership of British industry since privatizations in the 1980s, but could also leave the public on the hook for infrastructure improvements and running costs worth billions of pounds.

An ally of Burnham said: “We have to believe Andy when he says he wants the public to have control over ‘the basics of life’. He’s completely serious.”

Burnham said he wanted to see “the fundamentals of life run primarily for the public good and not for private gain” but did not explain exactly what that meant on a national scale.

Burnham’s spokesman had no further comment on policy plans.

With Labor confident of victory in next week’s Makerfield by-election, Burnham’s senior allies are now starting to turn their attention to how they can translate her political vision into concrete policies.

While the mayor of Manchester spends his time knocking on doors as polling day approaches, a small group of people close to him are also gathering ideas for the government.

Those harboring ideas include former Makerfield MP Josh Simons and former energy minister Miatta Fahnbulleh. Although Fahnbulleh’s friends said he was acting with his own policy in mind that Burnham could use rather than doing it on his behalf, neither of them commented.

Other contributors include John Wrathmell, Labour’s former head of economic policy, who now works with Burnham in the mayor’s office, JP Spencer, a devolution expert at the ThinkLabour think tank, and Tom Whitney, an adviser to transport minister Heidi Alexander.

According to those informed, the center of the agenda is the proposal to bring public services back under public control, especially the damaged Thames Water.

Burnham told the Guardian last week: “Public ownership is certainly an option. I would say that’s what needs to be done for Thames Water.”

Its allies want the government to put the company into private administration rather than accept a deal offered by creditors that would see up to £1bn of environmental fines wiped out.

They then said the government could take over the company, but executives were likely to insist that creditors receive some compensation because it would come at a cost to taxpayers.

The government claims such action would cost £100 billion, but some legal experts say it could be done much more cheaply if administrators agreed that creditors would receive little or no compensation.

From now on, Burnham’s government will take over water companies either if they fail or if their franchises come up for renewal, supporters said.

The model for this may be the government initiative on railways, which was first brought into public ownership through a scheme launched by Burnham’s campaign manager, Louise Haigh, when she was transport secretary.

They claim that the entire sector could come under public control in about 10 years. They argue that the British sector should follow the example of utilities in Berlin or Paris, where water services are run by independent bodies but the majority of shares are owned by the municipal government, which gives workers and residents representation on the board.

Such a structure could give political leaders the power to pressure for bill reductions; But doing so could jeopardize repair and rebuilding programs that many experts say are desperately needed.

Meanwhile, it is possible that part of the energy sector will be transferred to public ownership within the scope of plans prepared by people close to Burnham.

These will include grid operations currently carried out by National Grid and distribution by smaller companies operating at a regional level. However, it does not seem possible to take over the electricity production, which will remain in private hands, or to sell the electricity to consumers.

Critics say plans like this would come at a heavy cost to taxpayers, which Burnham can’t afford given her promise adhere the government follows existing borrowing rules and does not increase income tax, VAT or national insurance.

He also said some employers would consider cutting national insurance contributions and suggested business rates cuts for pubs and small businesses.

The mayor of Manchester has already had to backtrack on one policy in recent days; He promised to support Waspi women who said they were unfairly affected by the state pension age change and announced that he would not pay them compensation.

If he becomes prime minister, he will also face urgent calls to increase the defense budget following the row over his defense investment plan that led to John Healey’s resignation as defense secretary this week.

Some people close to the mayor also want him to announce a package of measures that will reduce the cost of living if he becomes prime minister.

In one of the plans, he would announce three key measures: a one-year freeze on private rents, a cap on bus fares and the removal of green levies from electricity bills, paid for through taxes instead.

Combining the three proposals would cut inflation by 0.6 percentage points, supporters say, and could be paid for in part by raising capital gains tax, as advocated by Wes Streeting, the former health secretary and one of Burnham’s most likely rivals for the leadership.