Water companies have been warned that they will face “consequences” if they do not intend to prevent the discharge of untreated sewage into English rivers and oceans.
On Monday, members of Congress voted to impose stricter legal restrictions on the discharge of untreated waste into waterways through storm overflows. government The concession was approved by a majority of 283 votes to 162—120 votes.
The result of the House of Commons was charged labor When Conservative MPs voted against tightening controls last month, ministers faced a public outcry, and their attitudes towards handling sewage discharges were “a sharp turn.”
Before the vote, Environment Minister Rebecca Pow stated that she met with the water company to “reiterate the actions they must take to deal with storm overflow”.
Speaking to members of Congress in Parliament, Ms. Pow stated that the frequency of emissions is “absolutely unacceptable” and the water company must control this practice or “face the consequences”.
She said that the government’s amendment-aimed at “re-drafting” the amendment proposed by the Duke Wellington – “Direct legal responsibility” will be imposed on the water company to ensure “gradual reduction of the adverse effects of storm overflow emissions”.
“If we don’t see the water company making enough progress, Ofwat and the government will be able to take enforcement action, and we will do so without hesitation,” Ms. Bao said.
Sewage can be drawn from the sewer system and discharged into the river through a combined sewer overflow-also called a storm overflow or release valve.
Overflow is designed to release excess water after heavy rains or storms to prevent sewage from returning to the home.
To prevent this from happening, the water company is allowed to discharge rainwater and a small amount of untreated sewage into the country’s waterways.
The Environment Agency reported that in the past year, untreated sewage was discharged into England’s coastal waters and rivers more than 400,000 times, which Defra called “unacceptable”.
Environment minister George Eustis It has previously been stated that the government amendment approved by members of Congress on Monday “reflects” what colleagues have voted in the upper house.
The Duke of Wellington’s amendment to the Environmental Act will give water companies a new legal obligation to “take all reasonable measures” to prevent sewage discharge.
The Duke’s amendment was passed by a majority of 153 votes, and the bill was sent back to the House of Commons for further consideration. This allowed the government to propose its alternative concessions after the public strongly opposed the initial blockade of similar actions on the green bench.
The shadow environment minister, Luke Pollard, said that ministers had “humiliated” the turning around of the sewage problem, but added that the amendments were not enough.
The Labour MP said: “The amendment cited by the Minister to replace the Duke of Wellington’s amendment is limited to storm overflows, not the entire sewage system.
“Ofwat or the Environmental Agency have no specific responsibility to ensure compliance-and there should be-we need to focus on reducing harm rather than adverse effects.
“It looks like it’s busy, but it hasn’t really changed.”
Former Liberal Democratic Party leader Tim Fallon Said that the change was intended to “freeze Conservative backbenchers out of trouble” because many people faced public outrage for voting to veto stronger water control.
He said: “There are no targets in terms of quantity or time scale. In this case, the water company has the ability to continue their current work.
“This is to get the Conservative backbenchers out of trouble, not to give the water company the direction they need.”
