Chance to end the sewerage scandal.

Found it

www.ofwat.gov.uk/investment-in-the-water-industry/

Because Ofwat control the amount invested the can’t prosecute for the discharges but they do fine companies for not meeting targets

Ofwat are run by DEFRA

Regulatory framework
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra)

Sets the overall water and sewerage policy framework in England. This includes:

standard setting
drafting of legislation
creating special permits (e.g. drought orders)

I’ll try to find a better link

The EA have (as it should be) a high bar for prosecution. Staff cuts as well as highly skilled staff leaving to seek better remuneration elsewhere severely limits the EA ability to pursue theses companies as well as the level of fines they are able to levy.

OFWAT is not part of the EA

The EA are responsible for water management, including flood management as well as the environment for the population and wild life. So they are directly responsible for the health of our rivers, but consistently have one hand tied behind their backs because of government (or lack of)policy. The EA does not set investment targets, or cost to the consumer that has absolutely nothing to do with the EA.

The water companies can't be managing the business efficiently if they are discharging unprecedented amounts of sewage into our seas and rivers.

I'm sure you don't need to be reminded that there have been cuts to the Environment Agency budgets (and therefore to OFWAT) over the past decade. They cannot afford to inspect and prosecute to the extent that is needed. The water companies are getting away with poor management because they cannot be effectively policed.

I can't see anything on the OFWAT web site about OFWAT setting the amount each water company needs to invest. Where do you get that information from?

You should be directing your ire at OFWAT not the water companies, it’s a Department of the Environment agency that controls the regional Water Companies

They set the water quality standards, the amount each needs to invest and the cost to the consumer, all the water companies do is manage the business efficiently, OFWAT makes all the decisions.

It's not just human waste.

Vast amounts of waste from animals, particularly from chicken farms, is washed into our rivers, polluting them further.

£65 billion has been paid to shareholders since privatisation.

The Environment Agency has estimated that….

“The figures are somewhere in the region of between £3.7bn and £62.bn to deal with the worst of the sewage pollution. This is well within the profits and dividends of these companies and if it were to be passed on to the bill-payer, it could be done at an affordable level.”

The water companies are of course claiming a bigger figure, but most outside interests are of the opinion that the figures quoted are correct. This would add between £19 - £59 pa to consumer if the companies were continued privatised.

Oh and the Victorians were pushed into building the system we are still using by amongst other things typhoid and the “big stink” from the Thames.

During the last century the Thames was dead for much of the time, declared biologically “dead” in 1957, but after decades of restoration it was brought back to life with seal colonies, sea horses, salmon etc reported. However, over 8000 tons of raw sewerage was pumped into the Thames in 2022. But Thames Water was the lowest polluter by loads.

An example of what is being done aiming at reducing pollution by 90%, paid for by water users

Who will pay for the Thames Tideway Tunnel?

The tunnel will cost £3.8bn to complete, and an additional £1.1bn has already been spent by Thames Water for preparatory works. The cost of the project is being paid for by Thames Water’s 15 million wastewater customers through their bills.

Who is to blame, the government or the water companies?

MaizieD

^Maybe many don’t realize that the Thames has been flushed 7 times before it reaches London,^

What on earth does that mean? Flushed with what and by whom?

Rivers are not our foul water drainage systems, sewers are. Storm overflow discharges should be a rare occurrence, not an everyday one.

By all of us, our waste travels to the sewage works where they take out most of the nasties most of the time, what come out into our rivers is far from pure H2O.

Maybe many don’t realize that the Thames has been flushed 7 times before it reaches London,

What on earth does that mean? Flushed with what and by whom?

Rivers are not our foul water drainage systems, sewers are. Storm overflow discharges should be a rare occurrence, not an everyday one.

Maybe many don’t realize that the Thames has been flushed 7 times before it reaches London, rivers are our foul water drainage system and I don’t wish to swim it it thanks. River water is not a risk to the general population, those that ignore advice may get ill, because however much of spent you can never guarantee 100% safety.
Continue improving problem areas at a cost that does not burden consumers.

Katie59

vegansrock

katie59 Of course it’s a public health and environmental issue. It’s not just about swimmers and children paddling - but they should be able to enjoy our waters - what about the wildlife we are wiping out and the ecological disaster that will cause? Of course we should clean up the waterways and it’s isn’t impossible to achieve, with the profits the water companies make for their foreign based owners they could be able to stop this unacceptable pollution. With a swipe of her pen , the environment secretary could force the water companies to obey the law or be taken back into public ownership.

Only fools swim in rivers the health advice is don’t, the rivers are cleaner now than probably the last 200yrs, with storms and floods we can never have river water in populated areas that is “safe”.
Its the pollution that we produce, even if we doubled the cost of water and nationalized the industry (we should), safe river water still would not be guaranteed. You are asking for changes that can never happen

I have a feeling, Katie59, that people more knowledgeable that me would strongly disagree with you. Waterways can be cleaned up and made safe for aquatic life and people. It's been done in the past. I can remember the pleasure that greeted the return of fish to the lower reaches of the Thames many, many years ago.

Anecdotally, we have a small river (or large stream) running round our boundary, probably to the extent of about a third of a mile. When we moved here 30 years ago the banks would be strewn with obvious debris from the storm water overflows after ever heavy bout of rainfall. 20 years ago Northumbria Water undertook a major project of renewing the main sewage pipes and storm overflow chambers in the area. We no longer have banks decorated with nappy liners, STs, and worse, after every downpour.

It's perfectly do-able, if the government is prepared to put the money into policing the water companies. Which they're not...

vegansrock

katie59 Of course it’s a public health and environmental issue. It’s not just about swimmers and children paddling - but they should be able to enjoy our waters - what about the wildlife we are wiping out and the ecological disaster that will cause? Of course we should clean up the waterways and it’s isn’t impossible to achieve, with the profits the water companies make for their foreign based owners they could be able to stop this unacceptable pollution. With a swipe of her pen , the environment secretary could force the water companies to obey the law or be taken back into public ownership.

Only fools swim in rivers the health advice is don’t, the rivers are cleaner now than probably the last 200yrs, with storms and floods we can never have river water in populated areas that is “safe”.
Its the pollution that we produce, even if we doubled the cost of water and nationalized the industry (we should), safe river water still would not be guaranteed. You are asking for changes that can never happen

It is a good job the victorians didn’t take that attitude or we would be waist deep in the stuff.

Oh come, Wwmk2. Sewage was about the only thing the Victorians didn't discharge into our waterways... 🙂

vegansrock

katie59 Of course it’s a public health and environmental issue. It’s not just about swimmers and children paddling - but they should be able to enjoy our waters - what about the wildlife we are wiping out and the ecological disaster that will cause? Of course we should clean up the waterways and it’s isn’t impossible to achieve, with the profits the water companies make for their foreign based owners they could be able to stop this unacceptable pollution. With a swipe of her pen , the environment secretary could force the water companies to obey the law or be taken back into public ownership.

Yes.

Ask people who use our waterways for water activities. Sore throats and ear infections are common, and if you swallow large amounts you can imagine what

The Environment Agency spend money (our money) cleaning up and repopulating depleted rivers. And one lot of discharge can decimate the whole thing. It is heartbreaking.

It is an absolute nightmare and scandal.

It is a good job the victorians didn’t take that attitude or we would be waist deep in the stuff.

katie59 Of course it’s a public health and environmental issue. It’s not just about swimmers and children paddling - but they should be able to enjoy our waters - what about the wildlife we are wiping out and the ecological disaster that will cause? Of course we should clean up the waterways and it’s isn’t impossible to achieve, with the profits the water companies make for their foreign based owners they could be able to stop this unacceptable pollution. With a swipe of her pen , the environment secretary could force the water companies to obey the law or be taken back into public ownership.

Some improvements will be made in the worst cases, to eliminate all overflows is impossible, it’s not a public health issue just don’t swim in rivers.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/apr/25/coffey-muddies-the-waters-as-tories-wash-their-hands-of-sewage-scandal?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Whitewavemark2

Oh well, we weren’t wrong.

Tories vote to continue pouring sewerage into our waterways.

You weren't. I've been out all day so could have got this wrong, but it seems to me that the Conservatives took the Labour motion, took all it's teeth out so it was left with nothing holding the companies to account, and then voted.

I recently signed the campaign from 38 Degrees challenging the CEO of water authorities to swim in the mess they have made. Not acting when there is sewage pollution in our waterways yet reaping rewards when they are not doing their job.

Oh well, we weren’t wrong.

Tories vote to continue pouring sewerage into our waterways.

That’s impossible Grantanow.

I don’t think it’s primarily intended to change anything (well, not about water pollution). It’s an Early Day Motion to force a debate on the government, and to make them look bad if they oppose it.

The last Labour EDM was a great success, as the chaos caused by the government trying to whip it is what brought down Liz Truss, but I bet barely anyone (including me) can remember the subject of the Motion.

The only strategic solution to the sewage problem and the failure of privatised water companies to reduce system leaks is to nationalise them without compensation.