[And below “Why do water companies use sewage tankers?” (Hint: they are not required to report tanker movements)]

Trucks full of sewage are blighting some of England’s most beloved national parks as water companies scramble to patch up holes in their infrastructure, i has learned.

Lucie Heath inews.co.uk

Residents of villages in the New Forest and Lake District said sewage tankers have become a regular presence on their streets, bringing noise and pollution to previously quaint hamlets.

Last week i reported growing concerns about water companies’ use of tankers to transport high volumes of sewage around their network, often due to infrastructure failures such as burst sewers. In some cases, more than 200 trucks were sent to towns to deal with major pollution incidents.

Locals said the tankers caused endless problems, including bad smells, increased traffic and noise. Now people living in the country’s most protected landscapes say they are being forced to contend with similar issues.

“There’s pollution. There’s a film of fuel that is coming out of the lorries. There’s sewage… there’s debris,” said Amanda Irwin, who lives in the village of Troutbeck, three miles north of Windermere in the Lake District.

The vehicles, she said, had “decimated” lanes in her village: “We’ve got massive craters in [the lanes] because of these huge lorries.”

About four years ago, the local water company United Utilities began regularly sending tankers to a pumping station in Calgarth, which is a 10-minute drive from Ms Irwin’s village.

The “juggernaut” trucks, she said, are being used by the company to relieve pressure on its pumping station nearly “every time it rains”.

In winter it means tankers are travelling past her home, and a local school, “almost every day”, including throughout the night.

“They come and they operate 24/7 so there are two or three of these huge lorries relaying between the pumping station and wherever they go.

“There was a big heavy spell of rain just before Christmas and we’ve had them nearly every day since then. We had about a week where it was dry and they stopped, but they’re back again.”

Local residents have complained about the issue to United Utilities, and claim they have been offered money or flowers as compensation.

“That was not what we wanted,” said Ms Irwin. “We wanted answers and we wanted to know what the long-term solution was going to be.”

She said the arrival of the tankers coincided with people in the local area becoming aware of how much raw sewage was being dumped into Lake Windermere – United Utilities dumped sewage for around 5,904 hours over a period of 246 days in 2022.

Water companies receive permits allowing them to discharge untreated waste into lakes and rivers during times of exceptional rainfall to prevent their network from becoming overwhelmed.

But firms have come under intense criticism in recent years as the public has become aware of how often this is happening. Water companies have been accused of a long-term failure to invest in their infrastructure to cope with pressures including population growth and climate change.

Raw sewage was discharged into England’s rivers, lakes and coastal water more than 384,000 times in 2022.

Matt Staniek, a conservationist and campaigner based in the Lake District, told i Calgarth is not the only location where United Utilities is using tankers to deal with capacity issues in its network when it rains.

“There are just tankers everywhere,” he said, speaking to i on a rainy day in January. “From me driving from Windermere to Ambleside, which is a 15-minute drive, I’ve seen seven tankers.”

Mr Staniek has tried to request data from United Utitlies under the Environment Information Regulations regarding their tanker operations, but has been repeatedly refused.

A spokesperson for United Utilities said the firm is using the tankers at Calgarth during periods of heavy rain to remove “excess water infiltration” from its network before it causes flooding or pollution. The sewage is then put back into the network somewhere nearby with more capacity.

They said United Utilities has already invested in relining pipework and has plans to install additional storage at Calgarth to alleviate the issue.

“In terms of storm water discharges, we are determined to play our part, improving our operations and their contribution to the overall health of Windermere. In the last five years we have halved the amount of phosphorus entering the lake from our operations,” the spokesperson said, adding that work will soon begin to reduce discharges from various treatment plants in the area.

Nearly 100 miles away from the Lake District, residents of villages on the eastern edge of the New Forest have also become used to the presence of sewage tankers on their streets.

“One of the features in recent months and years has been the fact that Southern Water’s infrastructure is failing on a regular basis,” David Harrison, a councillor representing Totton South and Marchwood, told i.

Mr Harrison said there has been “infrastructure breakdowns”, such as pumping station failures, about six times in the past six months.

“This carries with it the threat of pollution, but also it’s extremely costly because what happens is Southern Water employs fleets of tanker drivers to move the sewage from one area to another. I spoke to one of the tankers locally and he told me that it costs about £1,000 a day per vehicle.

“There are people who live on roads where these tankers line up and they see a dozen-odd tankers lining up and taking up road space. That can’t be the most attractive thing to have to live with.”

“We agree with our customers that any pollution event is unacceptable and we apologise when failures have occurred. To improve our performance, we are investing heavily in our wastewater treatment works in the New Forest, with £52m being spent across our Ashlett Creek, Slowhill Copse, Sway, Redlynch, Brockenhurst, Lyndhurst and Whiteparish sites.”

The Lake District and New Forest are not the only national parks that are battling a growing sewage crisis. Protected landscapes across the country are suffering due to the dumping of untreated waste into once pristine rivers and lakes.

An investigation by Greenpeace found that untreated sewage poured for more than 300,000 hours collectively into protected nature sites in 2022, with water bodies in nationals parks including the Lake District and Brecon Beacons among the worst hit.

This week the Campaign for National Parks wrote to political leaders urging them to prioritise stopping sewage pollution in protected lakes and rivers in their manifestos for the upcoming general election.

“In 2024, it’s a global disgrace that the UK treats its national parks like an open sewer,” the group’s chief executive, Dr Rose O’Neill, told i.

“It’s 75 years since national parks were founded in this country and the government and the water companies are squandering this legacy, failing in their legal duty to conserve and enhance the wildlife and natural beauty of national parks.

“That’s why we’ve written to all party leaders ahead of the election. They must take action now to save these most precious landscapes.”

Why do water companies use sewage tankers?

There are various reasons why a water company may use a tanker to transport sewage around its network. 

For example, it is common practise for firms to use trucks to transport “sludge”, which is a byproduct of the wastewater treatment process that can be turned into fertiliser for agriculture. Sludge is often transported from smaller treatment plants to larger ones that have the technology to treat it.

Companies also use tankers to deal with incidents such as burst pipes and pumping station failures, or to relieve pressure on its network when it is over capacity. 

As water companies are not required to report tanker movements, there is little data to understand how often tankers are being used and why. 

Some experts and campaigners believe the use of tankers may be increasing as a result of underinvestment in Britain’s sewer network. However, others say the use of tankers is part of standard practice. 

Dr Clive Dix, Chair UK’s vaccine taskforce, says all activities to prepare for next outbreak are ‘literally gone’ and vaccine manufacturers have been driven away.

The “Long Covid” legacy – Owl

Ian Sample www.theguardian.com 

The UK is less prepared for a pandemic than it was before the Covid crisis after driving away jab manufacturers and relying on a narrow range of shots, according to the country’s former vaccine chief.

Dr Clive Dix, who chaired the UK’s vaccine taskforce, told MPs on Wednesday there had been “a complete demise” of work to ensure the UK was better equipped with vaccines for the next pandemic, noting that all the activities were “literally gone”.

The vaccine taskforce is widely regarded as a rare highlight in Britain’s Covid response. It was led by the venture capitalist Kate Bingham and Dix, who took over as chair in December 2020, when Britain became the first country to roll out Covid jabs.

Speaking to the Commons science, innovation and technology committee, Dix said he and Bingham gave ministers a set of “strong recommendations” to make sure Britain was better prepared when the next pandemic hit, but these were not adopted or published. “[There were] activities already going on that were stopped,” he added.

Another big concern, Dix said, was the UK’s reliance on mRNA vaccines, the approach behind the Pfizer and Moderna Covid shots, to tackle future outbreaks. “That’s really scary,” he told the hearing. “The mRNA vaccines are not the be-all and end-all. They will only work if we know what the virus is and know the antigen,” he said, referring to the part of the virus that triggers the immune system.

Beyond failing to invest in a range of vaccine technologies, the UK also drove vaccine manufacturers away by treating them so poorly, Dix added, leaving the country in an even worse position than before Covid.

“What we’ve seen is a whole list of incompetent decisions,” Dix told MPs. “We have less resilience now because a lot of the manufacturers have walked away from the UK because of how badly they were treated at the tail end of the vaccine taskforce.”

He raised the case of Valneva, a French firm that mothballed a vaccine facility it had built in Scotland after the government cancelled its contract during final stage clinical trials. On scrapping the deal, former health secretary Sajid Javid said the UK would not have approved the vaccine, but the medicines regulator duly approved the shot. Dix called the comments “incompetence at the highest level”.

A statement read to the MPs from the Pandemic Sciences Institute at Oxford University echoed concerns about a lack of resilience, noting that Britain was not prepared for the recent mpox outbreak and “remains unprepared for an avian influenza outbreak”.

Prof Andrew Pollard, director of the Oxford Vaccine Group, who gave evidence alongside Dix, said the danger was in preparing for a future pandemic exactly like Covid. While Covid vaccines took nearly a year to develop, they built on years of crucial research on coronaviruses. Work on dozens of other potential pandemic pathogens lagged far behind, he said.

“For me, we are really unsafe at this moment for future pandemic threats because we just don’t have that knowledge base that you need to even start the gun as we did in 2020,” he said. “And even then it took 11 months to have a vaccine.”

Campaigners in Okehampton are stepping up a fight to get inpatient beds back at the town’s hospital after fears its future could be hanging in the balance.

Alison Stephenson, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk

It comes after plans by NHS Devon to return wards which have remained empty since 2017 to its property landlord NHS Property Services, saving £200,000 a year on rent.

NHS Devon, which is facing a £40 million deficit, wants to reduce spending on empty space, but the move has raised fears that hospital, said to be underused by health officials, could be further scaled down and closed.

As well as losing beds, the birthing centre has been closed for many years due, the NHS says, to a lack of midwives.

Representatives from Okehampton Hospital were among people protesting to save Devon hospitals at county hall this week, urging Devon County Council to put pressure on the NHS to recognise the importance of community facilities.

Cllr Jan Goffey of the North Dartmoor Health Initiative and an Okehampton Hamlets parish councillor has instigated a petition with fellow Liberal Democrats in West and Central Devon, asking the NHS to consider opening beds at Okehampton.

She said frail and elderly patients are being sent all over place to recuperate when they come out of the Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital and is asking that Okehampton Hospital be considered as a special case because of its rurality.

“It takes five hours to get to Sidmouth and back by public transport and Tiverton is even longer. The stress that causes for an elderly spouse juggling bus times, train times and visiting hours, is immense.

“The wards at Okehampton need to be used but the rents are London prices and the costs to the NHS are ridiculous. We could have utilised the wards to assist the healthcare of our communities if the cost were more realistic to local funding.”

She said when the hospital was built in 2004, it had 36 community beds and a maternity unit and £250,000 raised for equipment by local people. Since then the population had increased from 6,000 to more than 9,000.

“We have a sizable population that is increasing all the time and this hospital could cater for many of their health needs. We have 50 clinics here but they are not promoted by the NHS. I know there have been assurances to some of the medical practitioners that the hospital is safe but I don’t believe it.

She added that a second medical practice, dental practice or children’s centre could be incorporated into the hospital if it was feasible economically.

Mark Wooding, Liberal Democrat parliamentary candidate for Central Devon said with hospital waiting lists at over seven million and bed-blocking an endemic problem it was hard to argue current policy against cottage hospitals is working.

NHS Devon says the ward at Okehampton closed in 2017 following a full public consultation.

It said the cost of bringing the beds back into use would be “significant”.

“Based on local discussions and our experience, we do not anticipate that local voluntary, community and social enterprise organisations would be able to take on the ward space,” it said.

Meanwhile, space in the rest of the hospital is “significantly under-utilised” and it would widen work with local partners to improve the use of space in the rest of the hospital to get better value.

Central Devon MP Mel Stride said: “I understand the concern to see the hospital used effectively and I continue to be in close discussions with the relevant parties.”

10 councils combine, but Plymouth stands alone.

A deal which will see Devon councils working together to access millions of pounds in government cash has been hailed as ‘a new chapter in an epic story’.

Guy Henderson, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk

Levelling Up minister Jacob Young visited Paignton’s EPIC centre for high-tech innovation to rubber stamp a historic devolution deal which will bring together Devon County Council, Torbay Council and eight district councils.

More power will be given to what is called a ‘combined authority’ on issues such as adult education, local housing, net zero ambitions and training.

If the deal is approved after public consultation, only Plymouth City Council will sit outside the new body. The city was originally due to be part of the arrangement but pulled out, saying it felt it could retain more power by staying independent.

Torbay Council leader David Thomas (Con, Preston) said: “It’s fitting that we are here at the Epic Centre today, because we have an epic story to tell.

“In Torbay we have £100 million in investment secured already for the three towns, and today we are writing a new chapter in that epic story.

“We have a golden opportunity to conclude a deal that will lead to even more investment, more high-quality jobs, more training and more affordable homes all over Devon.”

And county council leader John Hart (Con, Bickleigh and Wembury) said the deal would encourage more people to invest in Devon, with jobs and homes for local people among the priorities.

He continued: “I’m sad that Plymouth isn’t with us, but we have still left an olive branch for them. We will keep the door open.”

The Devon and Torbay deal is the tenth set up by the government in the past two years.

Mr Young told an audience of local politicians and business leaders: “This is another important step forward in our national mission to level up economic growth opportunities and create a better quality of life for all.

“It means local and central government working hand in hand, giving local leaders who know and love this county best the money and power they need to unleash this area’s great potential.

“It is the start of a new era of greater prosperity for the people of Devon and Torbay.”

The public consultation begins next month.

Nearly one in three children are living in poverty in parts of Devon, as a new report reveals the poorest people would need to double their income just to escape extreme hardship. 

Annie Gouk www.devonlive.com 

The latest official figures show that a shocking 32.4 per cent of children in Torridge are living below the breadline – the highest rate in Devon. That compares to 23.9 per cent of children in the South Hams, which has the lowest rate in the county.

New analysis by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation reveals for the first time just how many thousands of pounds are needed by families to climb above the poverty line. For example, a couple with two children under 14 living in very deep poverty would need at least an extra £12,800 just to reach the breadline.

Very deep poverty is defined as a household income of less than 40 per cent of the average after housing costs – below £14,600 for a couple with two young children. And while the actual amount differs, every family from single parents to couples with no children living in this type of extreme hardship would essentially need to double their income to make ends meet.

The report warns that escaping hardship has also become much harder in the past two decades, with progress to eliminate poverty stalling since the Conservatives came to power in 2010. The number of people living in very deep poverty has increased from about 4.5 million in the mid-1990s to about six million in 2021/22, according to the latest official data.

The amount needed to escape very deep poverty has also increased significantly, rising by two-thirds compared to 1996/97. At that time, a couple with two primary-school aged children living in extreme poverty would have needed around £7,700 in today’s money to reach the breadline, compared to £12,800 in 2021/22.

Similarly, the average person in basic poverty has an income 29 per cent below the poverty line, with the gap up from 23 per cent in the mid-1990s. This is equivalent to a couple with two young children in poverty needing an additional £6,200 per year to reach the poverty line. In 1996/97 the gap was £3,300 after adjusting for inflation.

People are considered to be in poverty if they live in a household with income below 60 per cent of the average after housing costs for that year – below £21,900 for a couple with two children under 14, or less than £9,100 for a single adult with no kids.

Over one in five people in the UK (22 per cent) were in poverty in 2021/22 – 14.4 million people in total, including 8.1 million working-age adults, 4.2 million children and 2.1 million pensioners.

Paul Kissack, Group Chief Executive of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, said: “It has been almost twenty years and six Prime Ministers since the last prolonged period of falling poverty in the UK. Instead, over the last two decades, we have seen poverty deepen, with more and more families falling further and further below the poverty line.

“Little wonder that the visceral signs of hardship and destitution are all around us – from rocketing use of foodbanks to growing numbers of homeless families. This is social failure at scale. It is a story of both moral and fiscal irresponsibility – an affront to the dignity of those living in hardship, while driving up pressures on public services like the NHS.

“It’s a story which can – and must – change. 2024 will be a year of choices, and any political party wishing to form a new Government must set out a practical and ambitious plan to turn back the tide on poverty in the UK. That plan – to ensure the dignity and respect of every member of our society – will be essential for achieving any broader ambitions for the country”.

As we approach a General Election, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation is calling on political parties to urgently address entrenched high levels of poverty by introducing an ‘Essentials Guarantee’ into Universal Credit, to ensure that everyone has a protected minimum amount of support to afford essentials like food and household bills.

A government spokesperson said it was supporting families with the cost of living, while absolute poverty had fallen since 2010. Absolute poverty is a tougher measure than the headline figure used by the JRF, which is defined as living in a household with income below 60 per cent of the median in 2010-11, adjusted for inflation.

The spokesperson said: “Children are five times less likely to experience poverty living in a household where all adults work, compared to those in workless households.

“That’s why we are investing billions breaking down barriers to work and supporting over 1 million low-income earners through our in-work progression offer – all while cutting taxes and curbing inflation so hard-working people have more money in their pocket.”

The government has updated insolvency laws for UK water companies to hedge against losses from potential state bailout funding.

Rhodri Morgan www.cityam.com

On 17th January, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) quietly updated its special administration regime (SAR) framework in a move that appears to protect government investments in water companies should they eventually become insolvent.

The procedure is secondary legislation, where a statutory instrument or document is published and is considered approved unless MPs table a motion in parliament to reject it within 40 days – a process known as negative procedure.

The update moves the government to the top of the priority order with regards to re-couping loans it has made to such a water company, leap-frogging other stakeholders who would be due money such as administrators and creditors.

DEFRA described the legislation as the “ultimate enforcement tool” with regards to monitoring performance of water companies in an accompanying explanatory note.

Colm Gibson, managing director at Berkeley Research Group, told City A.M. that investors should pay attention to the “increasing emphasis on using special administration for companies that perform poorly”.

“These changes make it harder for shareholders to mount a legal challenge if they disagree with the special administrator,” he added.

The changes are timely – Thames Water, the country’s largest water and sewage service provider, continues to struggle under a £18.3bn debt pile and recurring operational failures.

The most recent of these include the quadrupling of sewage spills in the last nine months of 2023 compared to the corresponding period in 2022, according to Thames Water data analysed by London’s City Hall.

New chief executive Andrew Weston said he was confident in the group’s ability to turn the ship around upon his appointment in December.

Nevertheless, these procedural changes cast greater wariness from Westminster over the company’s future prospects as major shareholders exit the company and warnings from both regulators and Westminster increase in frequency and severity.

A former water industry executive told City A.M. that while nationalisation doesn’t seem an immediate possibility, the government’s move shores up its coffers should bailout funds be needed.

“It’s a lesson from Bulb that it’s hard to get your money back, so they’ve changed the priority order” they said.

Former energy supplier Bulb entered into a special administration regime (SAR) after collapsing into administration in 2021 and the government footed a £3bn bill to protect the 1.5 million households affected and paid consultancy Teneo £49.9m as an advisor.

“I cannot imagine why the government would change the priority order here unless they had been asked by a water company to put money in.”

Defra and Thames Water have been contacted for comment.