Repeating the same actions and expecting different results is not a well- regarded tactic for resolving problems. Yet the non-executives of South East Water have time and time again chosen to back a leadership that is clearly not capable of improving outcomes for customers. Their only response to the Tunbridge Wells incident is to author an unhelpful report and appoint more people to the SEW Executive to provide the constructive challenge that they themselves should be providing. On top of this, they were also the decision-maker behind an attempted and unjustifiable injunction which, we believe, is the worst example of the company’s defensive, 43 antagonistic and deceptive attitude towards external stakeholders. The only possible conclusion to draw from this evidence is that the SEW Board, potentially influenced by the “family feel” that they identify alongside the executive, is incapable of holding the executive team to account. As those ultimately represented by the Board, shareholders also must demonstrate a willingness to restore resilience and trust. A new leadership team, more investment and special measures will be necessary to affect meaningful change. (Conclusion, Paragraph 81) 44