Paul Arnott

Many moons ago, I was living in reduced circumstances paying my way through a Psychology degree at Exeter Uni with a tiny grant and no other support except working every vacation to save to survive another term. I was very lucky, however, to be offered a couple of affordable places to live as I progressed and then graduated, one in Bonhay Road near St David’s station and the other on The Strand in Topsham.

One of the subjects we studied was known as “cognitive dissonance”, a term that has to an extent now passed into the wider language. When used today, it essentially means how we feel when confronted with two entirely incompatible aspects or facts. Last weekend, that happened on a huge scale, when many of the residents of our seaside towns heard via East Devon District Council that Beer, Exmouth, Seaton and Sidmouth Town beaches had been awarded Blue Flag Status from Keep Britain Tidy on behalf of the Foundation for Environmental Education.

It would be an understatement to say that residents were gobsmacked, having spent winter witnessing repeated sewage spills with the seawater not fit to enter. Let me just say that, as an example, the Exmouth Facebook pages were boiling over with cognitive dissonance. Or WTF to coin one particular acronym. Understandably so.

Too make it odder, within days of the Blue Flag Awards being announced, there was a superb protest by the Friends of the River Exe with Surfers Against Sewage for a Paddle Out at Exmouth beach. More surreal, along Lyme Bay at Brixham thousands of residents were told to boil their tap water by South West Water, and dozens succumbed to diarrhoea, after cryptosporidium entered the fresh water supply.

EDDC got a bit of a leathering, a classic example of shooting the messenger, for announcing the Blue Flag prizes. I want to assure readers that as far as South West Water and the government are concerned, we are still wholly and actively on the front foot having, as many may recall, voted formally that we have no confidence in SWW a few months back. Much is happening which will be made known as events unfold.

However, and this is the dissonant bit, the Blue Flag awards are actually good news for the communities concerned, all of them needing tourism as a key part of their economies. Crucially, the measurements taken to win this status were between 15th May and 30th September last year, the summer season. It seems highly likely that if these measurements had been taken over the winter, a Brown Flag may have been more apt.

It’s worth pointing out that water quality is not the only criterion. We have provided track matting at Seaton and Beer, soon at Sidmouth and Budleigh, to assist disability access. Facilities such as taps, refill points and benches are adjudged very good. In Exmouth through our concessions around five thousand children per year are introduced to water sports. And much more.

All the above means that for the crucial summer season the work of East Devon District Council and the many local businesses and volunteers is something we can all be proud of. In the rare event of a summer pollution incident, we will raise red flags, and information boards with QR codes will give up to date information.

I hope this helps. Please enjoy the beaches this summer, but if you’re fed up with how the government has lost control of SWW, keep protesting too. I will continue to do both.

The owner of South West Water has announced plans to hand back more than £120 million to shareholders despite facing fresh controversy over water pollution and racking up £9 million in losses.

Emma Powell, Adam Vaughan www.thetimes.co.uk

Less than a week ago, residents of Brixham in Devon were told to boil their drinking water after cases of a diarrhoea-type illness were confirmed and samples of cryptosporidium, a harmful waterborne parasite, were discovered.

Susan Davy, chief executive of Pennon, said that the company was “working tirelessly around the clock” to resolve the problems. Normal service has yet to resume for 15 per cent of affected customers. Households have been offered compensation of a payment or bill credit of £215, which will cost Pennon £3.5 million.

According to the UK Health Security Agency the latest number of reported cases of cryptosporidium infection in the area is 57. Brixham has a population of about 17,000.

The FTSE 100 group declared a final dividend of £86.7 million, which, in addition to the £40.2 million already paid out to shareholders, will take the total dividend for the year to £126.9 million, a move that has prompted criticism.

Anthony Mangnall, the Conservative MP for Totnes, said Pennon should suspend the dividend payments or the chief executive should step aside. “I’m not against dividend payments in general. I’m just saying that at this point in time, where the public have been so badly let down, that we really consider how these dividends are paid,” he told the Press Association.

A government source said it was “completely unacceptable” for the company to be paying a dividend “given its appalling record”, including millions of pounds in fines last year for pollution offences and poor performance.

“The announcement of a £127 million payout only adds to the concerns about the way this company is managed. Steve Barclay [the environment secretary] is clear there is simply no justification for profit from pollution.”

The company said it had adjusted the payout by £2.4 million to account for the fine levied on South West Water last year for dumping waste into rivers in Cornwall and Devon, the largest such penalty imposed for environmental offences in the region.

Davy said the company had “carefully considered” new guidance on dividends from Ofwat, the water industry regulator, in deciding how much cash to return to investors. After the £2 million deduction, the dividend was in line with a policy to increase the payout each year in line with HCPI inflation — the consumer prices index with added housing costs — plus 2 per cent, “signalling we are listening, clearing the way for long-term shareholder value”, Davy said.

She added: “At a time when media, public and regulatory scrutiny is high, it is important we do what is right for all.”

The group underperformed on its outcome delivery incentives, which reward the company for performing against operational targets from leaks and supply interruptions, suffering a net penalty impact of £35 million. Pennon incurred a pre-tax loss of £9.1 million, worsening from £8.5 million the previous year.

The shares closed down 37p, or 5.1 per cent, at 679½p.

Thames directors jump ship

A wave of directors quit Thames Water yesterday ahead of Ofwat’s assessment of the utility’s five-year business plan, due on June 12 (Tom Saunders writes). Six resigned from Kemble Water Holdings, the ultimate parent of Thames, as well as from other entities in the utility’s complex corporate structure, prompting prices for some of the riskiest bonds attached to Kemble to trade as low as 5.8p on the pound, reported Bloomberg, down from 12p a week earlier.

The directors included representatives from Thames Water shareholders such as Omers, USS, QIC, British Columbia Investment Management and Fiera Capital.

An urgent question session was held in Parliament on Monday when the Secretary of State for the Environment, Steve Barclay, was called to answer questions from MPs.

Many searching questions were asked but, in Owl’s opinion, none were really answered. 

Here is a sample of questions from MPs (in order of speaking) to give a flavour:

Anthony Mangnall MP (Con Totnes) outlined the devastating effect on his constituents and asked: will the Secretary of State hold South West Water to account? 

Steve Barclay replied: With regard to an investigation, issues with drinking water are treated with the utmost seriousness within Government, so I can assure my hon. Friend that these issues will be looked at extremely closely.

Emma Hardy Shadow Minister (Flooding, Oceans and Coastal Communities) contextualised the crisis as follows:….  this Government who must show some leadership and take responsibility for it. They were the ones who weakened regulation, leaving our Victorian-era sewerage system starved of investment. They turned a blind eye and left water companies to illegally pump a tidal wave of raw sewage into our rivers, lakes and seas. Only last month, the Labour party warned that our nation’s health is at risk because hospital admissions for waterborne diseases have skyrocketed by two thirds since 2020. Is this an example of the Government’s plan working? Is this what they think success looks like?…….

She had one question: how much worse does the situation have to get before the Government adopt Labour’s plan to put the water industry into special measures?

To which the Minister answered: …..We have a fourfold increase in the number of investigators, so the water companies cannot mark their own homework. In this instance, the Drinking Water Inspectorate is conducting a full investigation; phase 1 has been completed, and it is now on phase 2.

Even Simon Jupp failed to get an answer to his question:  Can my right hon. Friend outline the timescales for the ongoing investigation and when the results of this investigation will become public?

To which the answer was: .The point about speed also applies to the investigation itself, which is why I said earlier that it is really important that South West Water—this is the signal that he and the House are sending it—co-operates fully with the investigation and in a timely manner….  I am sure that South West Water will have heard my hon. Friend’s points.

Richard Foord’s question was short and to the point: In 2022, the Liberal Democrats called for a ban on bonuses for water company bosses if a company has committed criminal breaches. Last year, 10 water bosses received bonuses totalling £2.5 million, and the CEO of South West Water forwent her £450,000 bonus. The Secretary of State said that Ofwat should carry out a consultation to define criteria for a ban on bonuses, but what size bonus does he think the CEO of South West Water ought to receive later this month?

The answer to that was: As a Minister, one has to follow the correct legal process, and the legal process for an independent arm’s-length body requires it to have a consultation. As I have said, we are already moving on that; we have already said that we want to ensure that bonuses are not paid where there is serious criminal wrongdoing. 

Those with the time, there is a bank holiday weekend ahead, might be interested in reading the full question and answer session. Especially in the context of the ducking and diving of those in power being revealed by the inquiries into contaminated blood and the flawed Post Office Horizon IT system.

The Debate in full

From the hansard transcript

Lindsay Hoyle Speaker of the House of Commons

We now come to the urgent question. I will run this short: the question for the water company is about those who are affected, not other parts of the UK—so just for clarification, it is a tight UQ.

Steve Barclay The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

On Monday 13 May, South West Water was notified by the UK Health Security Agency of cryptosporidium cases in the Brixham area. South West Water undertook monitoring from Monday evening into Tuesday, with the results on Wednesday morning identifying crypto in the Hillhead distribution area. A boil notice was issued for customers on Wednesday 15 May to cover both the Hillhead area and the Alston area. I know that has caused considerable concern and disruption to the local community.

To date, UKHSA has identified at least 46 confirmed cases of cryptosporidium but, given that symptoms may take up to 10 days to emerge, obviously that number may continue to rise. Two people have been hospitalised. Two bottled water stations were initially opened on Thursday 16 May, and in my call with the chief executive on Friday, I requested that a third be opened and the hours extended, both of which then happened effective from Saturday.

I also raised concerns with the chief executive, including those shared with me by my hon. Friends the Members for Totnes (Anthony Mangnall) and for Torbay (Kevin Foster) about inadequate compensation. That was raised to £150 for residents in the Alston supply area and has now gone up to £215 for those continuing to be affected in the Alston area. A helpline has been established for businesses and I requested that it work with local MPs to streamline the process. In addition, my right hon. Friend the Minister for Food, Farming and Fisheries visited the community on Friday.

Some 16,000 properties were initially subject to the boil notice, but 85% of them—32,000 residents in 14,500 properties that receive their water from the Alston reservoir—have now had the boil notice lifted. Not only have all the tests on the Alston reservoir been clear, but South West Water says that the positive test of the valve supports its contention that the most likely cause is downstream of that reservoir. If that is the case, those 85% of residents were never subject to any water issues and the boil notice was applied on a precautionary basis. Notwithstanding that, I am sure that there will be ongoing concern, so daily testing of that water will continue for the foreseeable future.

The Hillhead reservoir has now been drained, cleaned and refilled. A flush of the network, which aims to remove traces of cryptosporidium detected in the system, was started this morning. We are working with South West Water and the Drinking Water Inspectorate, recognising the ongoing disruption to the remaining 15% of residents. I know that South West Water will want to comply fully and in a timely fashion with the investigation of the Drinking Water Inspectorate.

Anthony Mangnall Conservative, Totnes

Thank you, Mr Speaker, for granting this urgent question.

I thank the Secretary of State and the Minister with responsibility for rivers, the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend Robbie Moore, for their extraordinary co-operation over the past week. I have wanted for nothing from them, and they have done an extraordinary job. I thank them and their team for being on hand at a moment’s notice to liaise with me and with the local organisations in my constituency and that of my hon. Friend Kevin Foster.

In Brixham the anger is palpable, the frustration is apparent and the sheer inconvenience that has been put on residents by South West Water is absolutely abhorrent. I have spent the past week and weekend delivering leaflets that South West Water should have been delivering —it has failed to update residents on the situation before them. I have spoken with residents and businesses about compensation and the reputational damage suffered by Brixham, one of this country’s finest coastal communities.

Last week, South West Water was accused of making people ill, not by an organisation, but by Tanya Matthews [see Owl’s post] in a Facebook post. That post received 1,200 responses in which people identified common symptoms, yet South West Water did nothing. For 24 hours, people were still able to drink the water and South West Water continued to say that there was no problem. The reason 46 people are ill—and that is most certainly an underestimation—is the time period in which they were able to go on drinking the water.

Of course, it is welcome news that the Alstom reservoir has been cleared and independent monitoring and verification has been undertaken by the UK Health Security Agency and the Drinking Water Inspectorate, but it is still wholly unacceptable that the 8,000 residents in the Hillhead reservoir area are still dependent on bottled water and cannot trust their water systems. In the 21st century, that is a totally unacceptable position for us to be in. South West Water and its management carry the responsibility for it.

I welcome the fact that we have three drinking water stations in Churston, Broadsands and Freshwater Quarry, and that 500,000 bottles have distributed—the teams on the ground have done an extraordinary job, and we should applaud them—but I have four questions for the Secretary of State. Can UKHSA and the DWI continue to provide independent monitoring over the coming weeks and months to ensure that there is confidence in the drinking water supply? Will there be an investigation into South West Water’s handling of this matter? Why, when the compensation is being upgraded, are people still paying their water bills? Finally, the damaged reputation suffered by businesses and the community of Brixham needs to be addressed, so will the Secretary of State hold South West Water to account?

Steve Barclay The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

My hon. Friend is quite right to express the huge local concerns. He and I have spoken multiple times a day since this issue arose, and he has been extremely effective in raising the concerns of those he represents.

There is recognition that the initial comms, the mishap with some of the leaflets and the comms about compensation are all areas that South West Water will address moving forward, having sought to take his feedback. He is right about the urgency in addressing the Hillhead reservoir for the remaining 15% of the population. That is certainly uppermost in my conversations with the relevant stakeholders.

With regard to an investigation, issues with drinking water are treated with the utmost seriousness within Government, so I can assure my hon. Friend that these issues will be looked at extremely closely. I spoke with the chief executive of the Drinking Water Inspectorate at the weekend, and I had a meeting with one of its senior leaders just before this UQ. I can assure my hon. Friend that there will be a thorough investigation, as there always is with these kinds of issues, and I urge all parties, including South West Water, to co-operate fully and in a timely fashion.

Emma Hardy Shadow Minister (Flooding, Oceans and Coastal Communities)

Another day, another example of the depths of failure to which this Government have taken us. I cannot believe that I am about to say this, but after 14 long years of Conservative rule, in 21st-century Britain, our water is no longer safe to drink. Of course, the Government will be flailing around, desperate to clasp on to somebody else to blame, but this crisis is theirs, and it is this Government who must show some leadership and take responsibility for it. They were the ones who weakened regulation, leaving our Victorian-era sewerage system starved of investment. They turned a blind eye and left water companies to illegally pump a tidal wave of raw sewage into our rivers, lakes and seas. Only last month, the Labour party warned that our nation’s health is at risk because hospital admissions for waterborne diseases have skyrocketed by two thirds since 2020. Is this an example of the Government’s plan working? Is this what they think success looks like?

And now this, as the icing on the cake of failure: a parasite outbreak in Brixham with South West Water. Some 16,000 homes and businesses have been advised to boil water before drinking it; over 46 cases of cryptosporidiosis have been reported; more than 100 people have reported symptoms; and a 13-year-old boy has been admitted to hospital. That is appalling.

Enough is enough, so today we are calling on the Government to urgently adopt Labour’s plan to put the water companies into special measures in order to clean up their water. As a matter of utmost urgency, the Government must strengthen regulations so that law-breaking bosses face criminal charges, and go further by giving the regulator new powers to block the payment of bonuses until water bosses have cleaned up their filth. With Labour, the polluter will pay, not the public.

I have one question for the Secretary of State. With contaminated water hospitalising children and record levels of toxic filth in our water systems, how much worse does the situation have to get before the Government adopt Labour’s plan to put the water industry into special measures?

Steve Barclay The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Members on the Labour Front Bench like to claim that their party wants to be taken seriously as a potential party of Government, yet once again we see shadow Ministers pre-empting the investigation and trying to shift the issue to that of raw sewage. Obviously, it is for the Drinking Water Inspectorate to fully investigate this incident and the water company, but the initial information shared with me suggests that the concern is about farm contamination, not raw sewage. Of course, we need to wait for the results of that investigation, but the Labour party is just jumping to a conclusion that fits a narrative; it is not interested in what the facts suggest.

If the hon. Lady had actually listened to my statement, as opposed to pre-empting it with a question that she did not then change, she would have heard that 85% of those who were subject to the boil notice were upstream of this incident. From the information I currently have, they were not subject to any issue with their water. Because of the seriousness with which we take these issues, a precautionary notice was quite rightly issued to those residents, but the evidence presented so far suggests that there was no issue for those residents because the contamination happened downstream.

As for the wider point-scoring and political narrative, in this House there is usually a distinction between serious issues such as this one and the usual party knockabout. What the community want to hear is reassurance that all the investigations have been done, that we are getting the compensation right, and that we are getting the remaining 15% onstream—all of which, incidentally, the hon. Lady did not even ask about. She did not seem interested in those things, as opposed to the natural knockabout that she was trying to do.

However, let me divert to the topic she wanted to talk about. We have a fourfold increase in the number of investigators, so the water companies cannot mark their own homework. In this instance, the Drinking Water Inspectorate is conducting a full investigation; phase 1 has been completed, and it is now on phase 2. I have quite a list, Mr Speaker, but since you are signalling to me, I will close with the fact that the largest criminal investigation launched by the Environment Agency and Ofwat is currently ongoing.

Gary Streeter Conservative, South West Devon

First, I commend my hon. Friend and constituency neighbour Anthony Mangnall for the very effective action he has taken on this issue over the past few days. Does my right hon. Friend agree that, in an incident of this kind, speed is of the essence in diagnosing the problem, taking steps to remedy it, communicating with and reassuring customers and, if appropriate, compensating them? Does he believe that South West Water has shown the necessary urgency in dealing with this problem, and if not, what remedies do local people have?

Steve Barclay The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

I agree with my hon. Friend that speed is absolutely critical, first for the detection of the issue itself and the remediation of any health risk, and then in speed of communication so that there is no vacuum in which misleading information can arise. On the wider point about the speed of comms, I think this is an ongoing issue, because one of the concerns that my hon. Friends the Members for Totnes (Anthony Mangnall) and for Torbay (Kevin Foster) have raised with me is the impact that negative publicity might have on tourism in the area. That is exactly the sort of area I have been pushing South West Water to think about proactively, so that it can get ahead with support for comms and advertising. It should be working with the business groups on which there has been a significant impact, so that it can demonstrate that it gets it, support the business community and create processes that are simplified, streamlined and easy to access.

Ben Bradshaw Labour, Exeter

The belated and pitiful offer of compensation by South West Water is somehow symbolic of the complete disconnect that the very wealthy people who run our privatised water industry seem to be suffering from, and I am afraid the Secretary of State is suffering from the same disconnect. He has given the impression that he is not responsible for the water industry and its failings over recent years. He is responsible, so please can he answer the perfectly reasonable questions from my hon. Friend Emma Hardy: why will he not make the bosses of the water industry criminally liable, why will he not put the industry into special measures, and why will he not stop these outrageous bonuses being paid to their CEOs?

Steve Barclay The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

The right hon. Member seems to have missed what we have done. First, as I touched on in my response to the urgent question, I personally have been chairing calls with the chief executive and key stakeholders —for example, on Friday and Saturday. The Minister for Food, Farming and Fisheries, who has responsibility for agriculture, visited the community on Friday morning and has had daily contact with the chief executive. Indeed, my hon. Friend Anthony Mangnall and I have been speaking multiple times a day on these issues, so the right hon. Member’s suggestion that we have not been involved just does not cut the mustard.

On bonuses, we have already taken action. We have a consultation with Ofwat on restricting bonuses, because I actually agree with the right hon. Member that, where there is serious criminal wrongdoing by a water company, bonuses should not be paid to executives. We actually agree on that point, and we are taking action.

On the right hon. Member’s third point, about prosecution, as I touched on in my answer to Emma Hardy, we currently have the largest criminal prosecution by the Environment Agency of water firms. Much to my frustration, I am restricted in some of the things I am allowed to know about that investigation, because it is a matter for an independent body—the Environment Agency. However, that investigation is ongoing and it is the largest in the EA’s history. It shows that we are prepared to get tough with the water companies.

Simon Jupp Conservative, East Devon

I am grateful to my hon. Friend Anthony Mangnall for securing this urgent question, and I applaud all his efforts over the past week. South West Water’s response to this crisis has left a lot to be desired. Many people in Brixham have fallen seriously ill, while hospitality and tourism businesses across Devon have seen their takings slashed and bookings cancelled. They all deserve compensation. Can my right hon. Friend outline the timescales for the ongoing investigation and when the results of this investigation will become public?

Steve Barclay The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

My hon. Friend makes extremely pertinent points both on compensation and on speed, which was the point made previously by my hon. Friend the Member for South West Devon (Sir Gary Streeter), and I think both apply. The point about compensation applies particularly to businesses because different businesses are impacted in different ways. The point about speed also applies to the investigation itself, which is why I said earlier that it is really important that South West Water—this is the signal that he and the House are sending it—co-operates fully with the investigation and in a timely manner. I know that local Members of Parliament want to be able to explain to their constituents exactly what the cause was, what the monitoring was and what action was taken, and I am sure that South West Water will have heard my hon. Friend’s points.

Richard Foord Liberal Democrat Spokesperson (Defence)

In 2022, the Liberal Democrats called for a ban on bonuses for water company bosses if a company has committed criminal breaches. Last year, 10 water bosses received bonuses totalling £2.5 million, and the CEO of South West Water forwent her £450,000 bonus. The Secretary of State said that Ofwat should carry out a consultation to define criteria for a ban on bonuses, but what size bonus does he think the CEO of South West Water ought to receive later this month?

Steve Barclay The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

As a Minister, one has to follow the correct legal process, and the legal process for an independent arm’s-length body requires it to have a consultation. As I have said, we are already moving on that; we have already said that we want to ensure that bonuses are not paid where there is serious criminal wrongdoing. What would be more refreshing from the Liberal Democrats is an explanation for why their MPs opposed Thames Tideway, the £4.5 billion scheme that will make such a difference to cleaning up the Thames and has been in place for the past eight years. Not once has the hon. Gentleman come to this Chamber to explain why, having asked so many questions on water, his MPs opposed Thames Tideway and that £4.5 billion of investment, which will do so much to clean up the Thames.

Selaine Saxby Conservative, North Devon

Although I am in the north of the county, I have been contacted this past weekend by concerned constituents. What more can be done to reassure them that this issue cannot be repeated in the north of the county, which is very proud of its farming and cattle? If this is found to be the result of a safety valve in a field, what more will be done to reassure other customers who fortunately were not affected this time but might be in future?

Steve Barclay The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

My hon. Friend raises an important point. It is not just those residents directly affected who are concerned; so too will be those in the surrounding areas. Indeed, some of the initial media reports referred to “south Devon”, which led many residents in the wider catchment to think that they might be directly affected. That is why the speed of the investigation and the work that the Drinking Water Inspectorate is doing is so critical, so that the facts can be quickly established. As I said, I spoke to the chief executive at the weekend. It has completed phase 1 of its investigation, and that work is ongoing.

Luke Pollard Shadow Minister (Defence)

There is a crisis of confidence in South West Water. Its response has been hopeless, frankly. It has had poor communications, poor initial compensation, as every extra pound seems to be dragged out of it, and it has a record of failure on sewage. What will the Government do to help restore confidence that South West Water is not only competent and able to manage our water supply, but that the water that comes through our taps is safe for everyone to drink? How can we encourage people to have faith in the outstanding and brilliant tourist offer that we have in the south-west, which has been battered yet again by bad news because of South West Water?

Steve Barclay The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

I agree with the hon. Gentleman about the brilliant tourist offer, and there is work to do to support businesses, particularly in the hospitality trade, which will have been impacted by the reputational damage that the area has had as a consequence. I assure him that I made those points to South West Water. As I said in my statement, I have also spoken to it about compensation, which has moved, although there is further work to do, particularly with the business community. That is also why the investigation is so important, so that we get to the bottom of exactly what happened. That is important for residents who have had the disruption of the boil water notice, and for residents further afield.

Anne Marie Morris Conservative, Newton Abbot

This has been a devastating event. Although constituents in Newton Abbot were not directly affected, this is an issue of trust, as my hon. Friend Selaine Saxby said. It is about trust in South West Water as an organisation—there is a long way to go before that trust is restored—but also about trust in the quality of our water, and in our regulators to hold organisations such as South West Water to account. What do Ofwat and the Drinking Water Inspectorate do to challenge the water plans that these water companies put out to test what could go wrong? What risk analysis and assessment is there? What contingency plans are put in place? Trust can be rebuilt not just through the inquiry, but by making absolutely sure that the regulators—in all their guises—have in place the appropriate testing to ensure that this sort of thing cannot happen again.

Steve Barclay The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

My hon. Friend talks about the huge importance of the quality of drinking water. That is why we have the Drinking Water Inspectorate there, and it will be fully investigating, and it is why a precautionary approach was taken with Alston. As I have said, on the information that I have, the tests suggest it was upstream of any problem, but a precautionary approach was taken. That indicates how seriously we take these issues. It is important we get to the bottom of exactly what has happened and what has caused this incident, and the DWI is working actively to do that.

Lloyd Russell-Moyle Labour/Co-operative, Brighton, Kemptown

In 2022, the Drinking Water Inspectorate found South West Water guilty, saying that the company

“did not follow best practice” to avoid and shorten events where customers report problems about the taste and quality of their drinking water. It was fined a quarter of a million pounds. It was found guilty the year after for a six-year period of illegal discharges of sewage. The CEO awarded themselves almost £2 million in bonuses and awarded £112 million in dividends. Is it not time that all bonuses, all dividends and all bill rises are suspended until our water companies sort themselves out? If they do not, they need special administration.

Lindsay Hoyle Speaker of the House of Commons, 

May I remind Members that when they are asking a question or speaking, they are meant to look at the Chair, not at somebody down at the bottom of the Chamber, because we might be unable to hear what is being said?

Lindsay Hoyle Speaker of the House of Commons, 

In the end, the good work of the hon. Member for Totnes was only allowed by the Chair—think that way first!

Steve Barclay The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

I will take that steer, Mr Speaker, and direct my remarks your way. First, there is agreement on bonuses that where there is criminal wrongdoing, they should not be paid. On dividends, there is a debate with Treasury colleagues on the balance between attracting investment into the sector and taking further measures. I have also touched on the largest ever criminal prosecution currently under way with the Environment Agency. It is important that we do not pre-empt the investigation. We need to get to the bottom of exactly what has happened and who is at fault, where there is fault. I am sure that as part of that, Lloyd Russell-Moyle and Members of the House will look at what monitoring was in place, what different parties did and whether any lessons from previous incidents were sufficiently learned. Those are issues that should rightly be explored through the investigation, and that is what the DWI is doing.

Watch the money, now you see it, now you don’t! – Owl

Options are being explored for how more than £4 million of Levelling-Up cash will now be spent in Exmouth after residents objected to earlier proposals.

Bradley Gerrard www.exmouthjournal.co.uk 

Devon County Council is set to discuss with the Department for Transport how the £4.4 million could be used after a public consultation saw the majority of people reject part of the so-called Exmouth gateway scheme.

The plans involved filling in a subway outside Exmouth train station to provide more space for pedestrian and cycling infrastructure, alongside a new signal crossing to replace the existing zebra one.

In its first public consultation, 60 per cent of respondents did not support closing the subway, with 64 per cent rejecting the idea in a subsequent survey.

The cash is part of a wider Destination Exmouth bid to the Levelling Up Fund, which secured the town a total of £15.7 million. This came with match funding of about £1.75 million from Devon County Council, East Devon District Council and Exmouth Town Council.

The bulk of this is for the Dinan Way extension, which connects the road to the A376 and moves traffic away from residential streets.

Some people, including Tiverton and Honiton MP Richard Foord, whose constituency does not include Exmouth, have raised concerns that the £4.4 million could simply be redirected into the Dinan Way works to account for rising costs for that scheme.

“We learned [recently] that the gateway project around the station in Exmouth will not go ahead, and that roughly £4.4 million that had been earmarked for schemes to help with active travel will be shelved,” Mr Foord said in parliament.

“Instead, the more than £4 million will be rolled into the cost of the bypass in Dinan Way to offset the inflation that we have seen since the bid was submitted.

“If decisions around that investment had been made locally, we might have made different decisions, and we may have prioritised the funding and investment differently.”

But Devon County Council said its discussions with the government would include possible ‘active travel’ improvements around Dinan Way, and others close to the negotiations backed this suggestion.

A Devon County Council spokesperson said: “The decision not to proceed with the Exmouth gateway scheme was based on public feedback, and we couldn’t continue with the scheme without the support of the local community.

“We can now formally explore options with the DfT, including whether we can use remaining Levelling Up funds on delivering wider active travel benefits in the Dinan Way vicinity.”

“Public waterways are a great resource enjoyed by many children and adults and can have a significant positive impact on our health. Whilst there will always be challenges with the efficient management of sewers and sewage treatment works, minimising the entry of human organisms that can cause harmful infection should be a major priority. This report provides clear options for how this can realistically be achieved.”  Professor Sir Chris Whitty, Chief Medical Officer of Health

[Remember SWW claims that Jo Bateman has no inherent right to swim in the sea. – Owl]

National Engineering Policy Centre raeng.org.u

Key findings of the report

This report examines the interventions available to reduce the public health risks associated with using open waters for recreation that may be polluted with faecal organisms from human waste in sewage.

It outlines 15 recommendations for water service providers, UK government, devolved administrations and public bodies to reduce public health risks posed by polluted water. The report’s findings are based on risk-based assessments and consultations with more than 100 engineers, wastewater experts, the water industry, campaign organisations and policymakers.

It focuses on the role of wastewater infrastructure in introducing primarily human faecal organisms into open water through storm overflows and treated wastewater. However, it does not look at agricultural runoff from livestock, wild animals, or septic tanks.

What engineering interventions could we implement to tackle wastewater pollution?

There are a range of interventions that could be deployed across the wastewater system to reduce the public health risks for recreational water users (such as swimmers, anglers and surfers). The report looks at interventions in four broad categories:

• Water management: These interventions seek to reduce the volume of water entering combined sewers to reduce the number of overflows and reduce exposure to polluted water.
• Wastewater treatment: Improving the quality of pathogen removal to reduce the hazard of treated effluent or overflows.
• Monitoring and communicating risk to the public: Reducing exposure by providing better information to the public.
• Maintenance and operations: Improving performance of infrastructure to reduce the number of overflows and improve the quality of treatment.

Recommendations to reduce public health risk

The report makes 15 recommendations which target situations where the risk to public health is highest whilst also balancing cost and other policy priorities. The recommendations can be split between three groups; immediate actions, long-term transformational opportunities, and enabling actions. 

• Asset maintenance.
• Environmental monitoring. 
• Bathing water review.
• Overflow management.
• Runoff reduction.
• Collaborative modelling.
• Public engagement.
• Disinfection assessment.

Explore the recommendations in full

• Visionary strategy.
• Sustainable drainage.
• Water efficiency strategy. 
• Innovative treatment funding.

• Research investment.
• Skill development.
• Wastewater champion.

What is our current wastewater system in the UK?

Any interventions made to the wastewater system to reduce public health risks must consider the context of existing infrastructure and working practices. The recommendations made in the report consider the design and workings of the sewerage system, the wastewater treatment process, the effect they have on faecal organisms, and the governance of the system.

Sewers and drainage

Our sewerage system’s primary role is to remove human excreta and other domestic and industrial wastewaters from properties to protect public health. Sewers collect and convey wastewater to wastewater treatment works where pollutants are removed to protect water quality before the water is returned to a natural body of water.

Sewage treatment

There are around 9,000 wastewater treatment works in the UK. The treatment processes that are deployed depend on the size of the works as well as factors such as the contents of the wastewater, the sensitivities of the catchment that treated effluent is discharged into, and how that catchment is used. Broadly the process is the same across most sewage treatment plants with a primary step to remove large solids and a secondary step involving biological treatment to remove more organic matter. 

System governance

Policy oversight for management of the water and sewerage system is devolved across UK administrations. Government sets the policy framework and then national legislation for water and sewerage services is set by the devolved administrations. Dedicated regulators then set standards, targets, and grant permits for key areas of operation and governance.

What happens next?

It is important that collective action by industry, government, and public bodies is taken to improve the UK wastewater system. This report calls for an evidence-led, risk-based approach to reducing public health risks of both overflows and continuous effluent discharges. 

Work is already being done to improve the wastewater system and generally reduce overflows, including funding for sustainable drainage, increasing storage, and rolling out UV disinfection. However, this activity needs to be guided by an ambitious vision of our future wastewater system. 

This vision should underpin regulatory instruments, technical standards, and policy targets across the UK, so that together governments, regulators, and water service providers can effectively mitigate the public health risks and provide safe open waters for everyone to use.

Explore the full report

Foreword from:

Professor Sir Chris Whitty FRS FMedSci Chief Medical Officer for England

Managing the threat of cholera epidemics, typhoid and many other water-borne diarrhoeal diseases was central to the birth of scientific public health in the UK, and has remained central to it since. The remarkable feats of engineering which separated human faeces from water we come into contact with, and in particular from contaminating drinking water, broke the chain of transmission of the major faecal-oral diseases which were previously a major cause of mortality in children and adults. It was one of the greatest public health triumphs of the last 200 years, responsible for saving millions of lives globally. The principal reason for the existence of the sewerage system is to protect public health.

Minimising ingestion of human faecal pathogens bacteria, viruses and parasites- remains a public health priority. Whilst we continue to have safe drinking water, ensuring both fresh and sea water people regularly come into contact with through leisure or other activities has a minimum number of viable human faecal organisms is one of the many contributions engineering makes to public health. 

There are two principal routes of human faecaloral organisms into public waterways in the UK, both of which have potential engineering solutions. The first is raw sewage entering rivers or the sea Foreword via storm overflows which has received extensive attention over recent months. The second is via continuous effluent discharge from routine sewage works operations. Whilst sewage effluent has undergone treatment processes which significantly reduce the risk, it still can contain viable human bacteria and viruses which have the potential to cause serious disease if ingested. 

I therefore welcome this report from the National Engineering Policy Centre, which demonstrates the many possible solutions available for use across sewage systems and treatment works of varying sizes and settings. It clearly sets out that to reduce the public health risk significantly, a combination of practical solutions can be implemented and tailored to each context. 

Public waterways are a great resource enjoyed by many children and adults and can have a significant positive impact on our health. Whilst there will always be challenges with the efficient management of sewers and sewage treatment works, minimising the entry of human organisms that can cause harmful infection should be a major priority. This report provides clear options for how this can realistically be achieved. 

The International Monetary Fund has signalled its opposition to pre-election tax cuts from Jeremy Hunt as it warned the government of a looming £30bn hole in the UK’s public finances.

Larry Elliott www.theguardian.com 

In its annual health check on the economy, the Washington-based IMF said current spending plans looked unrealistically low and that “difficult choices” lay ahead.

The IMF said it would have advised Hunt not to cut national insurance contributions (NICs) by two percentage points in last year’s autumn statement and March budget, and expressed strong doubts about the wisdom of the chancellor’s reported plans for a third cut in NICs before polling day.

It said that, in order to stop debt rising, the Treasury may need to consider a range of potentially unpopular revenue-raising measures including widening the scope of VAT, road pricing, scrapping the triple lock on the state pension and wider user charges for public services.

The IMF said the economy was on course for a “soft landing” after a faster-than-expected fall in the annual inflation rate and the end of last year’s shallow recession. It believes the UK will grow by 0.7% this year rather than the 0.5% it had estimated in last month’s World Economic Outlook.

With the Bank of England contemplating whether to cut interest rates next month from their current 5.25%, the Fund said it saw scope for two or three 0.25 percentage point cuts in official borrowing costs this year.

But it said the longer-term growth prospects for the economy remained poor and that this – coupled with demands for better public services and “critical investment needs” – put pressure on the public finances.

A team of IMF officials has been in the UK for the past two weeks for the annual Article IV consultation and said in a concluding statement: “In light of the medium-term fiscal challenge, staff would have recommended against the NIC rate cuts, given their significant cost.

“But staff does recognise the potential labour supply benefits of the NIC cuts and that they were accompanied by well-conceived measures (eg reform of the ‘non-dom’ regime) that will partially offset their fiscal cost over the medium term.”

The statement said that “as a general principle, staff would advise against additional tax cuts, unless they are credibly growth-enhancing and appropriately offset by high-quality deficit-reducing measures”.

Government plans involve day-to-day departmental spending rising by 1% a year when adjusted for inflation, and for investment spending to be flat. The IMF said these did not “sufficiently account for known pressures in public services (especially health and social care), and critical growth-enhancing investment needs (including for the green transition)”.

The IMF team said it was assuming higher increases – 2% real growth – in departmental spending, but that this would result in debt as a share of national income continuing to rise, reaching 97% of gross domestic product by the end of the decade.

The IMF said that, to be certain of stabilising debt by 2029-30, the government would need to raise revenue or make savings equivalent to one percentage point of GDP – roughly £30bn – and that this would involve “tough choices”.

It said: “This could be achieved, for example, by raising additional revenue from higher carbon and road-usage taxation, broadening the VAT and inheritance tax bases, and reforming capital gains and property taxation (which could also allow a reduction in stamp duty), broadly echoing the 2023 Article IV recommendations.

“On the spending side, staff continues to recommend indexing the state pension (only) to cost of living increases, recognising the authorities’ efforts to contain the non-pension welfare bill by incentivising work.”

It said other options might include expanded use of charges for public services, as well as pursuing productivity gains, such as from the government’s announced investment in digitalisation and AI within the public sectorincluding in the NHS.

Hunt said: “Today’s report clearly shows that independent international economists agree that the UK economy has turned a corner and is on course for a soft landing.

“The IMF have upgraded our growth for this year and forecast we will grow faster than any other large European country over the next six years – so it is time to shake off some of the unjustified pessimism about our prospects.”