End sewage discharges to rivers by water companies

Since I and others raised this in the Commons last week during the passage of the Environment Bill the Minister has supplied additional information about how they are proposing to get rid of bad discharges to rivers as we all want:

 

  • “Between 2020 and 2025, water companies will invest ÂŁ7.1bn on environmental improvements in England.
  • Of this, ÂŁ3.1 billion will be invested in in storm overflow improvements specifically.
    • We have also made our expectations crystal clear in our draft Strategic Policy
    Statement to Ofwat where, for the first time, the Government will tell the industry’s
    economic regulator that we expect water companies to take steps to “significantly
    reduce… storm overflows”, and that we expect funding to be approved for them to
    do so.
    • In August 2020 we established the Storm Overflows Task Force to bring together
    key stakeholders from the water industry, environmental NGOs, regulators, and
    Government in order to drive progress in reducing sewage discharges.
  • The Task force has agreed a long-term goal to eliminate harm from storm overflows.
    • We have committed to reviewing the case for implementing Schedule 3 to the Flood
    and Water Management Act 2010 in England, which would set mandatory build
    standards for sustainable drainage schemes on new developments, and which
    many have called for. This action has the potential to markedly reduce quantities of
    water unnecessarily entering the sewerage system.
    The significant action I have detailed will deliver real reductions in the harm caused.”

 

 

46 Comments

  1. Fedupsoutherner
    October 25, 2021

    This was discussed on GB News this morning. Apparently the Duke of Wellington wanted to table a motion not to allow discharge into rivers during flooding. If it had been successful it would either have meant billions spent on our Victorian sewerage system or letting sewerage onto our streets. Trust our media to mislead with sensational headlines.

    1. Nottingham Lad Himself
      October 26, 2021

      The fundamental problem is that the lads in charge of providing sewerage services are literally only in it for the money. That is, to keep as much of customers’ bills for themselves as possible, and to spend as little they can on providing any service or on maintaining plant etc.

      They will fumble the ball with any publicly-financed support so that it ends up in their pockets rather than getting spent as intended too.

      And it doesn’t matter what the rules or standards are. If you won’t pay people with the necessary knowledge to monitor and to inspect, and give them the teeth to enforce, then they will be ignored.

      Even then, they will still be ignored until ex-public schoolboys – for that is who those profiting generally are – start going to prison.

      Chances, anyone?

      1. Peter2
        October 26, 2021

        Previously you said it was foreign owned companies that owned utilities NLH

      2. a-tracy
        October 26, 2021

        NLH – which companies are you accusing?
        When they were awarded the water contracts were they tied into a % of investment spending on maintaining plant and investment?
        When you are making comparisons -v- what was invested when it was publicly owned do you have any comparison figures or sources for your accusations.

      3. Nottingham Lad Himself
        October 26, 2021

        I’ve never commented on the ownership other than to say that these are nominally private.

        Whoever the owners, we know the sort who are the top brass – as ever – anyway, don’t we?

        1. Peter2
          October 26, 2021

          Do we?
          Who are the owners NHL?
          Do tell.

        2. a-tracy
          October 26, 2021

          NLH – I don’t know that’s why I asked you.

          There must be terms on their contracts to provide water and I’d love to be able to compare directly viz what was invested as a % of turnover when it was in public hands.

      4. MWB
        October 26, 2021

        @NLH +1.

    2. DavidJ
      October 26, 2021

      Indeed; the Duke of Wellington should have sought some knowledge before spouting such drivel. Much of our sewerage infrastructure dates from Victorian times when sewage, as most people imagine it, was discharged into the same pipework as run-off from rainfall. So storm overflows were a necessity as it was impracticable to subject the total flow to full treatment. More recent developments have been required to provide separate systems for storm flows and foul flows. All very well you might think but there has always been a problem of connections being made to the wrong system by incompetent builders and householders. Peak storm flows are very much greater than foul flows from house owners and industry.
      There has been more regulation of storm overflows in recent years but the cost of eliminating them would be enormous, all to be borne by the taxpayer or water user.

      The problem is far more complex and costly than the Duke seems to think and, as always, the consumer / taxpayer always has to foot most of the cost. However significant improvements have been made over the past several years.

    3. rose
      October 26, 2021

      Yes, indeed, and trust the immature Duke not to have done his homework.

  2. Fedupsoutherner
    October 25, 2021

    Well done John on GB News this evening. You looked as though you enjoyed your pint with Farage. My only complaint is that you were too kind to Boris and his idiots in the cabinet. Farage was quite right when he said you should be in the cabinet. He and you are singing from the same hymn sheet.

    1. Nottingham Lad Himself
      October 26, 2021

      Just a technical point if I may – are not overflows during storms a completely separate matter from the recent authorisation to sewerage firms to discharge untreated sewage owing to the inability of the UK’s transport system to get the needed chemicals to the plants at present?

      John’s piece would imply that the former – which has been known about for years – is the main topic of concern for the public right now, but as I read it most public outrage is over the Tories’ recent vote of approval on the latter issue.

      reply Our system mixes storm water with sewage and lacks capacity to handle storm levels. We need new bigger pipes. That takes time and a lot of roadworks.

      1. Nottingham Lad Himself
        October 26, 2021

        Thank you Sir John, that enlarges on the former issue.

        However, correctly or otherwise, the public have been led to believe that your party voted to allow discharges of untreated sewage owing to a shortage of ferric sulphate, in turn stemming from the supply chain chaos caused in large part by your brexit. It is this in particular which rightly outrages so many.

        What is being done about this, please? Because as it stands the general suspicion is “probably nothing – they’ll just leave the privateers to it”.

    2. DavidJ
      October 26, 2021

      +1

    3. rose
      October 26, 2021

      I thought Farage quite wrong to say the Government is substandard. Who has set the standard? The 13 years of Blair and Brown? The Coalition? Mrs May? Poor Farage is still suffering his moral collapse, despite having landed this plum position, and his judgement is not what it was.

      1. rose
        October 26, 2021

        PS But of course Sir John should be in no 11. And we should have some unionists in the NI Office and in the chair of the NI Select Committee. Lewis and Hoare were disgracing us again today with their appeasement of you know who.

  3. Shirley M
    October 25, 2021

    Almost fully foreign owned! Putting essential utilities in the hands of foreigners is just one more failure of successive governments. It leaves us open to being ripped off and blackmailed, takes money out of our country to support lower prices in other countries.

    I despair!

    1. Andy
      October 26, 2021

      Not successive governments. Tory governments. It is Tory governments which sell things off to foreigners.

      Despite public opposition water was privatised by the Tories after Thatcher won her majority – despite most voters voting against her – at the general election in 1987.

      Water ended up largely in the hands of foreigners. You get poor customer services, huge bills, constant roadworks and an antiquated system which pumps raw sewage into our rivers and seas – and the foreigners shareholders get rich.

      Why do you vote for these people?

      Reply The pipe system which is inadequate was built by the nationalised industry. the privatised one is just spending ÂŁ4.5bn on improved capacity in London

      1. Peter2
        October 26, 2021

        15 years of Blair and Brown and no re nationalisation.
        PS
        Can you tell NHL you say foreigners own the water companies he says its all Tory public school boys.
        You two need to rehearse your lefty trolling more.

      2. rose
        October 26, 2021

        This is just one more consequence of overpopulation. Unmentionable, of course.

    2. a-tracy
      October 26, 2021

      ShirleyM – I thought we had a quango to deal with checking up on these industries. A quick google – Ofwat – “The Water Services Regulation Authority, or Ofwat, is the body responsible for economic regulation of the privatised water and sewerage industry in England”.

      We should ask for them to be brought in front of a committee of MPs as any other private business would. Jonson Cox, who has been chair of Ofwat since 2012 so why don’t we hear them on the news answering these accusations?

  4. Sakara Gold
    October 25, 2021

    Many thanks to Sir John for taking a cessation stand on the river sewage issue

    The articulate musician Fergal Sharkey was given nearly 5 mins on BBC R4 Today this morning to discuss the state of our rivers and beaches. He was unimpressed with these government reasurances, as are many Conservative MPs.

    The Environment Bill has now been sent back to the HoL without the recommended changes. Given the strength of feeling among their Lordships about this, it is likely to come back to the House with even more amendments.

  5. Jasper
    October 25, 2021

    Can I suggest you make public your plan of action as the tories are being vilified on the many websites this is being reported on and quite rightly so. How Boris can claim to want to protect the environment and then allow raw sewage to be dumped in our rivers is a joke!! What on earth is that about??

  6. agricola
    October 25, 2021

    TALKING PINTS

    For the first time in my experience I feel I have seen the real SJR. In truth I wondered whether you had sunk a couple before you came on air. What the hell, you came across as passionately believing in everything you advocated. Refreshing in a politician. It also says a lot for Nigel in his ability to orchestrate it. Ten out of ten to you , a politician in whom we can trust.

    As to our water companies disdain for our rivers and beaches, a disgusting hors-d’oeuvre to COP26. I imagine it is what they thought they could get away with during a bad news eighteen months.

  7. formula57
    October 25, 2021

    Who would be the luckless minister?

    The minister tells us “This action has the potential to markedly reduce quantities of
    water unnecessarily entering the sewerage system.”
    . Good!

    And what action is that? Ponder not for the minister tells us it would arise from ” …implementing Schedule 3 to the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 in England”. Excellent!

    But would it be churlish to enquire that has been going on in the eleven years since the Act? Well yes it would for we can infer that nothing has been going on in that time for now the minister tells us that the Government is only “…committed to reviewing the case for implementing Schedule 3…”. This is truly Patel-like in its decisiveness, boldness, and efficacy!

    Can we have a Government that is on our side please? And that means not cramming rivers full of sewage, lest the minister is unsure.

    1. Andy
      October 26, 2021

      You voted for them. Most of us didn’t.

  8. Elli Ron
    October 25, 2021

    How can a civilized country allow water companies to discharge raw sewage into rivers without heavy cost to them.
    The water companies are creating third world environment here, killing rivers, polluting beaches because they can do so without being financially and criminally punished.
    You can understand once in a 10 year event, but this polluting rivers has become part of their methodology, they do not need to invest to solve the problem and now parliament refused to create a serious deterrent. Reporting on events has no consequences for them, it is less than a slap on the wrist, and it is obvious that the water companies will continue with their polluting ways, because there is no cost to them

  9. Mark
    October 25, 2021

    I’ve a feeling we are not going to get much honest information about this. We have one problem due to inadequate supply of water treatment chemicals, with little clarity on steps to ensure it is resolved. The Environment Agency has a very poor track record over water management, and is quite likely to indulge in cover-ups of its failures. Whether the water industry has been exceeding the permits on additional discharges is another uncertainty with likely cover-ups. Probably the only thing that is certain is that the system is not really able to cope. Equally certain is that people would probably prefer not to be flooded out with sewage if it can be evacuated via rivers instead. The remakable feature was the estimate that it would cost ÂŁ150-650bn to rectify the system to the standards being asked by the proposed bill amendment. Such a rapid cost estimate, when we still don’t have the beginnings of one for net zero.

    Perhaps a good place to start would be with reform of the EA.

  10. Ed M
    October 25, 2021

    I come from military family (paternal grandfather, and two uncles on both sides, career officers – and loads of others). I fairly recently buried my uncle (nearly 40 years in the army) and what a FINE man he was! (God bless him).
    Loyal to God (Christian man) and to Queen and Country (a true British patriot).
    The army gave him such a GREAT grounding in life. To be properly grounded as a human being and man with true purpose. Around which he based his family, all friends, social life and interests, in particular poetry and polo.
    The army made him (and my grandfather and other uncle). I really believe that our young men would benefit greatly if they had to do National Service. To make proper men of them as well as patriots. And not just ‘proper men’ more responsible for themselves and their families but also fill them with a certain sense of adventure for life as well.
    God bless the British Army.

    1. Cheshire Girl
      October 26, 2021

      I agree with that. I am old enough to remember National Service. Three of my foster brothers had to take part. It was hard for them at first, but all believed it did them good in the end. They were posted to Germany, Cyprus and Egypt.

      I don’t wish anyone to be in a War, but I believe that it would reduce crime in the UK, and be very beneficial, especially to those who have chaotic home lives.

      I know my views don’t chime with many these days, so I speak for myself only.

    2. a-tracy
      October 26, 2021

      I disagree with you. My nephew has recently left the RAF after ten years of service and enjoyed his training and camaraderie and life in the services, I also work with lots of ex-forces people however, this is not for everyone. I would not want my children being compulsorily conscripted. They are all properly grounded as human beings.

      1. Ed M
        October 27, 2021

        Western Civilisation is in serious decline. Something’s got to change.
        Everyone is obsessed in their own individualism: money, sex, power. Our Western World has become far too individualistic.
        Money, sex and power are all wonderful things (in the right context) but only if people act like human beings instead of like rats. Western Civilisation is just turning more and more into one giant rat race.
        Centuries back, when Western Civilisation was more healthy than now, and when people believed more fully in patriotism and public duty AND family life, people acted more like bees than rats. A bee is a sacred symbol because bees work together for the common good. And they produce honey. And so Civilisation can prosper / flourish. But not if its one big giant rat race, each rat for himself.
        National Service is about reminding young men of their duty to family and country (and to themselves). It’s also about turning them into proper men (there’s now also a crisis in dating / marriage because men are not acting like men and so women aren’t attracted to them – and vice versa).
        Not saying National Service for a long period. Maybe 3 months. And for this who really want to do some other form of public duty, then fine, go with that.
        Whilst also combing National Service with other basic, useful, free training (how to do computer coding, basic plumbing, introduction to accountancy, digital marketing etc).

  11. Christine
    October 26, 2021

    Yet again it’s overpopulation of this country that is causing the problem. Net immigration continues to run at hundreds of thousands a year. We build more and more new houses, stopping rainwater from soaking into the earth and causing flooding. My water provider is so short of water they have written to me three times this summer asking me to reduce consumption. When will politicians tackle the real reason for our problems rather than gloss over them?🤷

    1. MWB
      October 26, 2021

      This will never happen whilst people vote for Con/Lab/Lib. New parties are required, and urgently, but more importantly, we need larger numbers of thinking voters.

    2. Shirley M
      October 26, 2021

      +1 Christine. Overcrowding among many animal species causes them to turn on one another. I often wonder if that is part of the problem we have with violence in the UK. The violence does seem to be more prevalent in our crowded cities. Is this yet another downside of overpopulating our country? We are among one of the highest populated countries, in comparison to land size.

      1. Andy
        October 26, 2021

        We don’t have a problem with violence in the U.K.

        We have a problem with ill informed old people moaning about non existent violence.

        1. rose
          October 26, 2021

          Do you know what a “bleed kit” is? Well, they have been rolled out all over the country and more are being called for.

        2. Peter2
          October 26, 2021

          Total nonsense young andy
          Check out crime figures

    3. Nottingham Lad Himself
      October 26, 2021

      Christine, the pollution of our rivers and coastal waters in the 1960s was far worse than it is now. They were little more than stinking, murky, open sewers and waste dumps.

      That was almost completely cured by European Union standards however, but now – as warned – we appear to be rapidly sliding back towards that dismal state of affairs.

      It is not the small increase in population since 2016 which is the cause of this, self-evidently.

      1. Peter2
        October 26, 2021

        Come off it NHL
        Your claim about 1960s rivers and seas is ridiculous.
        Just check on the internet.
        Eg
        Clean Rivers (estuaries and tidal waters) Act 1960
        Rivers (prevention of pollution) 1961

    4. DavidJ
      October 26, 2021

      +1

  12. a-tracy
    October 26, 2021

    We are building thousands of new houses and apartments, millions more ÂŁs are being collected from water rates each year from this mass building program. When these new estates are planned aren’t the new sewerage pipes and extra outflows provided for?
    When contracts for water were given by the government what conditions were there in the contracts and what punishments if these conditions weren’t met. If one water board is not keeping to the terms can the work be offered out to others or do they have a monopoly on an area?

  13. X-Tory
    October 26, 2021

    Sir John, the trouble is that people do not trust the government on this because they do not believe that they have the right priorities or REALLY CARE. If the government really cared they would not allow the utilities to make ANY profits or issue ANY dividends until they had brought their infrastructure up to standard. Instead we see these companies – mostly FOREIGN companies (whose profits therefore do not benefit Britain or the British people) – making billions in profits which are then exported abroad. A truly patriotic government that cared about the environment would not allow this. Whenever a company is fined for breaking the rules the fine should automatically be the equivalent of that company’s ENTIRE profits the previous year. They would not offend a second time!

  14. MWB
    October 26, 2021

    The rivers are polluted not just by raw sewage, which they are, but also by phosphate run-off from industrial farming enterprises (River Wye turning green) as well.
    The Environmant Agency is not much good, making very few prosecitions, and when a case is won, the fines levied by judges are derisory and not paid by the water company directors.

    1. rose
      October 26, 2021

      The EA has gone indoors, on to its computers, as have the police.

  15. Micky Taking
    October 26, 2021

    On the BBC NEWS Internet page.
    Drone captures sewage pumped into sea for days.
    ( a video is provided to watch).
    A photographer has captured a pipe pumping filtered sewage into Langstone Harbour in Hampshire.
    Cannot be seen from the shore, but aerial technology illuminates the truth.
    Disgusting.

Comments are closed.