MPs block new duty for water companies to reduce sewage discharges

MPs have blocked moves to force water companies to reduce raw sewage discharges into rivers.

On Wednesday (20 October), the House of Commons voted by 268 votes to 204 to back a watered-down version of a House of Lords amendment to the Environment Bill, which would have required firms to take immediate action to stem sewage outflows.

The government’s amendment introduces a new statutory requirement on the government to produce a plan to reduce discharges from storm overflows and their adverse impacts before the beginning of September next year.

It also commits the government to report to parliament by the same date on the actions that would be needed to eliminate discharges from storm overflows in England, and their costs and benefits.

However, the government’s wording strips out provisions in the Lord’s amendment, which was tabled by the Duke of Wellington, to impose a legal duty on water companies to progressively reduce harm from storm overflows.

Water minister Rebecca Pow told MPs that she is “personally determined” to reduce sewage outflows, pointing to the moves in the draft policy statement for Ofwat to incentivise water companies to “significantly reduce the frequency and volume of sewage discharges from storm overflows.”

The government’s moves on tackling sewage mean that the proposed legal duty to stop discharges is “unnecessary”, she said.

“It is not the case that nothing is happening – there is a great deal happening – but there will be a great deal more happening as a result of the bill.”

Philip Dunne, the chair of the House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee, said the bill does not go far enough.

He said: “We need to ensure that water companies feel that provision is there in statute to compel them to pay attention to the issue. The water management plans are a good idea, but they do not have statutory force and could be changed.

“There should be a primary legislative duty on water companies, to persuade them to treat this issue with sufficient seriousness.”

Commenting on the frequency of sewage discharges, shadow environment secretary Luke Pollard said: “This is a daily, regular, continual occurrence, and it is unacceptable.”

“It will be impossible to have clean rivers with the pedestrian approach that ministers are currently taking.”

He said that the government’s amendment on sewage outflows was “a step in the right direction, but not an “acceptable” compromise.

During the debate, Southern Water was widely criticised over its record on sewage disposal, which Caroline Lucas, the Green MP for Brighton and Hove described as “abysmal”.

She said: “Essentially, the system is not working properly. We need to have the legal duty that was in the Duke of Wellington’s amendment.

“Without that, there is essentially nothing to compel water companies to take immediate action to tackle sewage and pollution. That legal duty is in line with the government’s stated ambition, and I do not understand why they will not put it in the Bill.”

Following its third and final reading in the House of Commons, the heavily delayed bill has now been sent back to the House of Lords to consider the latest amendments, setting up a potential stand-off between peers and government over the sewage discharge issue.