The Conservatives have pushed through a duty on the water regulator to prioritise growth, which experts have said will incentivise water companies to value their bottom lines over reducing sewage pollution. [With Simon Jupp’s help. – owl]

Helena Horton www.theguardian.com 

Campaigners fear this move will weaken Ofwat’s ability to crack down on water companies as it may force the regulator to consider a company’s financial situation and the impact on its growth if the firm is heavily fined for polluting.

The Liberal Democrats forced a vote in parliament on Wednesday on the government’s new “growth duty” for Ofwat, which requires the regulator to “have regard to the desirability of promoting economic growth” when cracking down on water companies. They lost, as 50 MPs voted against the statutory instrument and 395 voted in favour.

The growth duty specifically mentions fines of companies as a measure that could hamper their growth. It says: “Certain enforcement actions, and other activities of the regulator, can be particularly damaging to growth.

“These include, for example, enforcement actions that limit or prevent a business from operating; financial sanctions; and publicity, in relation to a compliance failure, that harms public confidence.”

Last year water companies were ordered to cut more than £100m from customers’ bills after repeated failures to stop sewage pollution.

Campaigners fear the growth duty could cause the regulator to be less stringent with penalties because it would have to consider the commercial impact of fines on a company.

The financing of some water companies is already in a precarious state; Thames Water is currently at risk of collapse.

Richard Benwell, CEO of Wildlife and Countryside Link, said: “The growth duty once again privileges business bottom lines over nature. Public demand and environmental need are totally clear – Ofwat should be promoting investment in nature and ensuring polluters pay.

“A new duty that obliges the regulator to think twice before taking environmental action is headed entirely in the wrong direction. Parliamentarians are right to oppose this backward step.

“The real economically responsible action is to protect the natural assets we depend on. Political parties should commit instead to a new green duty on regulators to ensure they take action to stop climate change and restore nature.”

Labour MPs voted with the government, and it is understood this is because they did not want to be accused of being “anti-growth”.

The Liberal Democrat environment spokesperson, Tim Farron MP, said: “Conservative MPs have just voted to help water firms get off the hook. Ofwat will now be fighting water companies with one hand tied behind their back.

“This government is all talk and no action when it comes to the sewage crisis. Time and time again Conservative MPs have voted against taking tough action on polluting firms.

“It is a scandalous vote by a government which is woefully out of touch with this environmental crisis. The public will be furious to hear the industry’s enforcer has been weakened even more. Conservative MPs should hang their heads in shame.”

A government spokesperson said: “Ofwat continues to have very clear environmental responsibilities to ensure water companies comply with existing protections, and the growth duty will not change that.

“This extension allows Ofwat to more effectively deliver economic growth alongside its regular duties and does not in any way restrict how regulators enforce the industry.”

Only 14 per cent of people are likely to swim in Britain’s seas and rivers this summer because of raw sewage, a new survey reveals.

“It’s a tragedy that something the whole country should be able to enjoy has become increasingly toxic because of ongoing failures of government who are simply letting the water companies get away with it,”

Adam Vaughan Environment Editor

Figures released last month showed that sewage spills in England doubled to 3.6 million hours last year.

In response to the question “in light of the recent news headlines regarding sewage pollution … how likely, if at all, would you be to consider swimming in UK seas and rivers this summer?”, 73 per cent of people said it was unlikely. You-Gov polled 2,000 adults in Britain.

“It’s a tragedy that something the whole country should be able to enjoy has become increasingly toxic because of ongoing failures of government who are simply letting the water companies get away with it,” said Humphrey Mil-les, founder of the Central Office of Public Interest, a non-profit group of creatives which commissioned the poll.

Maggie Alderson, a novelist and journalist who lives in Hastings in Kent, took up sea swimming during the Covid lockdowns until she got an ear infection in the summer of 2022. Her infection progressed to the point where her ear drum was punctured and she lost hearing in that ear.

“It’s no exaggeration to say it’s affected every aspect of my life,” she said. She attributes the infection to swimming in sea water contaminated with faeces. “I feel like one of the great joys of my life . has been spoilt for me forever,” she said.

The YouGov polling found that 31 per cent of people had swum in UK rivers or seas for leisure since April 2021, with another 16 per cent saying their children or partner had done so.

Water companies are expected to release real-time sewage discharge maps online within weeks. Most of the 424 designated bathing waters in England are beaches. with 27 stretches of rivers proposed as additions recently. Officials-must test these sites for harmful bacteria between May and September. But testing is no guarantee that waters are safe to swim in at any given time.

A Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs spokesman said: “We share the public’s concern about our rivers and the results of this You-Gov survey are another example of why water companies must go further and faster.

“If water companies are found to breach their permits, action will be taken — up to and including criminal prosecution.”

Why not “Reach Out” to “Owl of Honiton” or “Owl of Axminster” with full disclosure?

Caroline Lucas posts on “X”

List of Tories supporting one of the key amendments to water down the Renters Reform Bill. What does the (R) by names mean? Registered interests. Looks like landlords turning out in force to scupper a bill that was meant to protect renters’ interests, not their own finances

[Second down, second column]