I intervened in this debate to say: Does the Minister understand the depth of disappointment that a lot of environmental campaigners have felt because the remit did not include taking water out of private hands? There is a general feeling of absolute anger that public ownership was not considered. Does the Minister accept that? I include Feargal Sharkey and myself among those environmental campaigners who are horribly disappointed.

Lord Katz replied for HMG:

I am afraid to say to the noble Baroness that I do not accept that there was widespread public anger that nationalisation was not used as a solution. We have committed to a once-in-a-generation reset of the water sector; we have been very clear that we have no intention of nationalising it. It would cost around £100 billion to do that, it would be immensely disruptive and it would create more problems and more costs than solutions. As a Government, we are determined, as we have already demonstrated through the legislation of the Water (Special Measures) Act and the hard work we are doing with Sir Jon Cunliffe, to get a system that works on the side of consumers and on the side of the environment and not worry about structural nostrums.

Hansard record here