A System Designed to Overflow
Most of Britain’s sewerage system – operated by Southern Water amongst other water companies since privatisation in 1989 but previously under public sector direction – has always, from its origins in the Victorian era, combined carriage of surface water from roofs and drains with sewage. It has been accepted that, in times of heavy rainfall, the system becomes overwhelmed and must be allowed to overflow, so as to prevent backing up that would flood properties, gardens and public spaces. Ironically, the kind of hot, dry summer experienced in 2022 increases the risk of flooding, since hardened ground is unable to absorb water that does eventually fall.
It has become increasingly clear over several decades that major improvements in infrastructure are needed to keep such incidents to a minimum. Indeed, it was argued by proponents of privatisation in the 1980s that the private sector would be better equipped to raise the necessary finance to undertake these improvements, while government regulation would be put in place to compel them.
Southern Water cleaning up after Bulverhythe leak in 2021
CREDIT: Dave Young
However, it seems equally clear now that Southern Water, like many other privatised operators, have failed to invest sufficiently; nor has the Environment Agency (EA), which assumed the role of the environmental regulator from the National Rivers Authority from 1995 onwards, applied sufficient pressure on them to do so.
“Cosy relationship”
This is not a new problem. A past employee of the EA has told HIP that even prior to 2010 the trend was to reduce water quality resources, including staff, as part of deregulation and self-regulation initiatives. And she feels that in recent years the EA has maintained much too cosy a relationship with the companies it is supposed to regulate.
It is a partner, for instance, in the Sussex Nature Partnership chaired by Southern Water, along with South East Water and the relevant local councils. But although most of these councils have declared a climate emergency, neither they nor the EA have so far used this forum to prioritise water quality issues on which climate change may already be impacting.
The county’s Environment Strategy 2020 was produced by another local partnership, the Environment East Sussex Board, of which the EA, the two water companies and the local councils are also members. Addressing the government’s classification of East Sussex as a “water-stressed area”, meaning that demand may exceed what’s available at certain periods, the strategy document seeks to “achieve a resilient and sustainable water supply for consumers and the environment”, noting that “population and housing growth… will drive greater demand for water, while climate change will increase the frequency and duration of droughts”. There’s almost nothing, however, in it about water pollution save a reference to UK regulation having “helped to drive a significant improvement in water quality over the last 30 years, with 99% compliance with statutory drinking water quality standards and 98% compliance with bathing water standards.”
If the 2% non-compliance results in the closure of beaches at the height of the tourist season, along with more widespread environmental harm, more surely needs to be done – and rather more quickly than either the water companies, the local authorities or national government seem to envisage.
We hope you have enjoyed reading this article. The future of our volunteer led, non-profit publication would be far more secure with the aid of a small donation. You can also support local journalism by becoming a friend of HIP. It only takes a minute and we would be very grateful.
Leave a Reply