This morning, Geoff Crawford, one of the Admin and Group experts of ESCAPE (End Sewage Convoys and Poollution in Exmouth), posted on their Facebook page that there will be a meeting tonight. (Thursday 24th October, 2024.)

“ESCAPE are looking forward to attending the “on the same page”meeting tonight. MP, SWW, EA, ETC, BTC, EDDC, DCC, Sideshore, ESCAPE. Progress?”

MP – Mr David Reed, SWW – South West Water, EA – Environment Agency, BTC – Budleigh Town Council, EDDC – East Devon District Council, DCC – Devon County Council, Sideshore, ESCAPE. 

In the comments on this post, a member of the ESCAPE facebook page asked, “What is this please?”

Geoff Crawford replied, “Its a big meeting of “a limited number of interested parties and SWW and EA so that we can all be on the same page” arranged by David Reed MP. Fortunate that ESCAPE have been included though realistically it is we who have brought this about through pressure. The aim of the briefing session is to inform local elected representatives on the current situation, and to give councillors the opportunity to ask SWW about the feasibility and timelines around their delivery plan.

This will allow all of us to collectively assess and judge SWW’s plans and delivery, and to ensure that we are getting the local network upgrades that we so desperately need. None of us want a repeat of the summer we have just had.”

As a correspondent, it is reassuring that these different organisations are working together. It will be interesting to find out if the Secretary of State for the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Steve Reed has replied to the letter that Exmouth Town Council sent him last month inviting him to Exmouth.  https://exmouth.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Letter-to-the-Sec-of-State-re-SWW-no-sig.pdf

Water companies in England could be banned from making a profit under plans for a complete overhaul of the system.

The idea is one of the options being considered by a new commission set up by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) amid public fury over the way firms have prioritised profit over the environment.

Helena Horton www.theguardian.com 

Sources at the department said they would consider forcing the sale of water companies in England to firms that would run them as not-for-profits. Unlike under nationalisation, the company would not be run by the government but by a private company, run for public benefit.

The nonprofit model, which is widely used in other European countries, allows staff to be paid substantial salaries and bonuses but any profits on top of that are returned to the company.

Welsh Water, which runs under this model, has no shareholders and any surplus money is reinvested back into the business or into customer services.

Since Welsh Water was bought in 2001 it has reduced its debt substantially; its ratio of debt to equity has dropped from 93% to 58% since not-for-profit Glas Cymru acquired the company with debts of £1.85bn.

The environment secretary, Steve Reed, said: “Our waterways are polluted and our water system urgently needs fixing. That is why today we have launched a water commission to attract the investment we need to clean up our waterways and rebuild our broken water infrastructure. The commission’s findings will help shape new legislation to reform the water sector so it properly serves the interests of customers and the environment.”

The news comes as Ofwat considers how much it will allow companies to raise bills by, with water firms having asked the regulator to let them increase charges by up to 84% over the next five years. All options were on the table to reform the regulators, including abolishing Ofwat, Defra officials said on Tuesday.

Public anger has grown in recent years over the large sums of money made by water bosses in England while water supplies have dwindled and sewage has been spilled into rivers.

There has also been anger at the mismanagement of companies such as Thames Water, which have been loaded with debt and paid shareholders billions in dividends. Since privatisation in 1989, the English and Welsh water companies have collectively paid £78bn in dividends and accumulated £60bn in debt.

Reed said he was not considering nationalisation as part of the review, which would cost “tens of billions of pounds”.

But the commission, chaired by the former deputy governor of the Bank of England Jon Cunliffe, will consider all other options to ensure infrastructure is built and sewage stops spilling into waterways.

Cunliffe’s independent commission will draw upon a panel of experts from across the regulatory, environment, health, engineering, customer, investor and economic sectors. Water company representatives will not be on the panel but will be consulted for their views.

Environmental groups have expressed concern after Defra said the key aim of the commission was to reform the regulators so they encouraged investment and growth. They have said the environment should be prioritised over economic growth, but Defra sources said that without investment, the reservoirs and sewers needed to tackle the climate and nature emergencies could not be built.

James Wallace, the CEO of campaign group River Action, said: “We must not see the environment sacrificed on the altar of economic growth. The water commission must stop vampiric business interests and international investors sucking the lifeblood and money from our waterways and communities. It must deliver a fully funded national action plan to end pollution for profit, enforce laws, and reform regulators.

“Taking a look at our neighbours in Europe shows a range of approaches from wholly nationalised to not-for-profit organisations including a blend of private, public and mutualised models. The key is effective economic and environmental regulation that incentivises operating for public benefit and makes polluters pay.”

Doug Parr, policy director of Greenpeace UK, said: “Too much emphasis on making the sector attractive to big international investors like Macquarie is the exact reason why our waterways are in such an appalling state today. With a natural monopoly on an essential resource like water, we need a regulatory system that forces the industry to provide an acceptable minimum level of service, including an end to the routine discharges of raw sewage.

“If big international investors are unable to make sufficient profit in that environment, then clearly this is not a problem that can be solved by big international investors, and the government will have to do what every other country in the world has done and look at other ownership options.”

Decisions made by the independent commission will not come into force until the 2029 price review. For this year’s price review, which sets water bill levels over the next five years, water companies on Tuesday made requests to increase bills by more than they had at the beginning of the process.

Thames Water is now asking to raise bills by 53% to an average of £667 a year by 2029/30, making them the most expensive water bills in the country. Southern Water is seeking the biggest hike at 84%.

Ofwat will make its final decision for how much water bills can rise on 19 December, but its interim decision made in July said the average bill could rise 21% a year. Government sources confirmed on Tuesday that this number could rise.

The prime minister’s spokesperson said: “Clearly no one wanted to see a situation where water bills are rising, where the water sector has got into the situation that it has, with record levels of sewage spills and ageing infrastructure. From the government’s perspective, our priority is making sure that money goes where it’s needed and ensuring that water companies are putting customers first. If money isn’t spent, it will be returned to customers.”

Southern Water wants to raise bills by 84 per cent to £772 by 2030, compared with the £603 the regulator proposed. The UK’s biggest water firm, the embattled Thames Water, is seeking a 53 per cent increase in bills. The industry body Water UK has argued that Ofwat’s proposed limits would slow down efforts to clean up rivers and seas with more storm tanks and other measures.

Figures published by Ofwat on Tuesday show that water companies want to raise average bills by 40 per cent by 2030, compared with the 21 per cent, or £94, increase the regulator suggested in a draft ruling in July.

Out of the 11 water companies in England and Wales, it is just Wessex Water that has not requested higher prices since the decision was made in July. On average, companies have called for a 40% increase in bills on average instead of the proposed 21%, as reported by Sky News and www.thetimes.com

Plans for new homes in an East Devon village will have to be brought back to planners after votes to approve and reject the scheme failed.

Bradley Gerrard, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk

Thirty-four homes south of Windmill Lane in West Hill, near Ottery St Mary, came close to being approved as long as additional requirements on renewable energy were stipulated.

But when this vote at East Devon District Council’s planning committee failed, another motion to refuse the scheme emerged, largely based on the premise that too many homes were planned, out of kilter with the character of West Hill.

Before that could be put to the vote, though, it was withdrawn once a third motion emerged to defer a decision, with council officers tasked to work with the developer, Strongvox, on a proposal with fewer properties.

Cllr Sarah Chamberlain (Liberal Democrat, Broadclyst) said she believed it was overdevelopment. “There are too many houses on the plan,” she said.

“I do think the site can be developed but that 34 is too much, and so if the proposal to reject the scheme can be withdrawn, then I would propose a deferral so that the council can consult with the developer to see if the numbers on the application can be adjusted.

“I would rather do that than risk the applicant appealing.”

When refusing applications, councils must be confident they can defend their reasons in front of a planning inspector because if they lose, they are liable for the costs of the proceedings and have to approve a scheme they wanted to block.

West Hill Parish Council is also worried about overdevelopment. It said the village had already provided around 80 dwellings, more than it needed in order to comply with East Devon’s local plan.

“In addition to the current proposal, there are two other significant planning applications in West Hill, as yet undetermined, which could provide a further 54 dwellings,” comments provided by the parish council stated.

“Excessive levels of new house building will put pressure on the infrastructure of the village – notably primary school provision, secondary school provision, health services, and public open space and recreation facilities, and also on community cohesion.”

The developer had proposed 35 per cent of the homes on the site be ‘affordable’, together with a cash payment to the council in lieu of an additional 15 per cent affordable properties. It is not clear whether that will be impacted if the developer brings forward a scheme with fewer homes.

Earlier, some councillors had been encouraged by the renewable energy aspects of the scheme, with all homes set to have air-sourced heat pumps.

A proposed stipulation to ensure solar panels had also been considered and installed where suitable also proved popular with some councillors.

But the motion to approve the scheme failed because seven members voted against.