echinosum wrote:

lots of sensible stuff that I pretty much see the sense of

So we could have more leakage control, but you the customer would have
to pay for it.

But surely we're *already* paying for the lack of leakage control, in
that we still have to pay the water companies (Wessex Water, in my
case) for providing water that never reaches us (about 25% of the WW
supply is leaked, I believe).

It's going to be hard to persuade anyone that they should pay more
to correct a problem that's already costing us more, so that the
water companies can profit more (because even if they fix every
single leak, you can bet they'll not reduce the price for the
customer even though they're saving money).

James