This Council notes that

·       This summer Southern Water (SW) was fined a record £90m for deliberately dumping between 16 billion and 21 billion litres of raw sewage into the seas off North Kent and Hampshire over a 7 year period.

·       The judge in the case stated that these offences show a shocking and wholesale disregard for the environment for precious and delicate ecosystems and coastlines, for human health and for fisheries and other legitimate businesses that operate.  He also stated that the company had a history of criminal activity because of its previous and persistent pollution of the environment.

·       The dumping afforded the company considerable financial advantages at a time when infrastructure in the 17 wastewater treatment works (including 4 in Swale) investigated was crumbling and SW did not maintain, repair or replace vital machinery.

·       This criminal activity has put the health of residents and visitors to Swale at risk through the contamination of the seas of the North Kent coast and the contamination of local sea food, damaged the reputation of local beaches and the local environment and harmed local businesses involved with the harvesting of sea food.

·       The water industry has accumulated debts of £48billion since 1989 which cost £1.3billion in annual interest.  In that time the industry has paid £57billion in shareholder dividends, while customer bills have increased by 40% above inflation.

It further notes that

·       A number of incidents have taken place during the summer along the North Kent coast involving the release of raw sewage which emphasise the need for urgent investment in the area’s wastewater treatment facilities.

·       A series of heavy storms during the summer led to a number of flash flooding incidents in Swale towns during which sewage escaped onto local streets posing a potential health risk to local residents and illustrating the need to upgrade the waste water infrastructure servicing our local communities

·       SW has approved an additional investment programme of £230m and declared an ambition to cause no serious pollution incidents affecting local rivers, streams and beaches by 2025.

·       That the Council Leader is writing to the Chief Executive and Director of the Environment at SW insisting that they meet with the Council to account for the impact of SW’s criminal behaviour on local communities, to give a clear picture of the current inadequacies of the waste water infrastructure servicing in Swale and to lay out their plans for how they will remedy the situation.

The Council resolves to:

·       Support the administration in demanding that Southern Water make the  investment needed to:

-        ensure that local water treatment works are functioning legally and safely and that our rivers, streams and shoreline are not affected by serious pollution incidents in the future

-        improve the capacity and effectiveness of the local waste water infrastructure so that sewage is not discharged into local streets during periods of heavy rain.

·       Write to local MP’s and the Department of the Environment asking that

-        Fine income be used to support improvements in the regulatory arrangements for water companies and to provide compensation to local authorities and local businesses that have suffered from the criminal activities of SW.

-        the current management arrangements for the water industry are revised so that private companies like SW cannot secretly pursue criminal activities over many years in order to avoid financial penalties and the cost of upgrading infrastructure.

Proposed:  Councillor Julian Saunders

Seconded:  Councillor Tim Valentine

In proposing the motion as set out on the Agenda, Councillor Julian Saunders set out the recent court case of Southern Water (SW) being find £90million.  He said between 2010 and 2015, SW had dumped between 16 billion and 21 billion litres of raw sewage into the sea from 17 waste water treatment plants, 4 of which were in Swale at Eastchurch, Queenborough, Sittingbourne and Teynham. Councillor Saunders explained the impact and said that national statistics showed that Southern Water were responsible for 4 times as many pollution incidents per mile than the national average.  He added that the Environment Agency (EA) considered SW’s performance consistently unacceptable. Councillor Saunders highlighted several recent incidents including sewer overflows.

Councillor Saunders said that the Council would be writing to MP’s and the Department of the Environment seeking their investment in greater regulations and to revise management arrangements for the water industry.  He referred to the profits made by SW and said the motion sought to ensure that the company's future pledges of £230million of investment and accelerated spending for future years were carried out and that there would be no serious pollution incidents affecting local rivers, streams and beaches caused by their operations by 2025.

He referred to the proposed £2million investment by SW to the Faversham Wastewater Works but said there was still much to be done.

In seconding the motion, Councillor Tim Valentine said that SW had promised to improve its service since 2015 but matters had worsened and he outlined the increase in self-reported raw sewage spillage incidents in Thanet from 2017 – 2020 which had increased by 160%  He said that SW had said they were working to reduce the number of historic Combined Sewer Outfalls (CSO’s) with investment and nature based solutions but this did not appear in their Pollution Incident Reduction Plan. Councillor Valentine compared information collected on rainfall with SW’s spill data for 2020 and said that discharges occurred more frequently during periods of low and medium rainfall. Further data showed there had been an increase in the discharge of raw sewage in recent years.

During the discussion that followed, Members raised points which included:

·       SW had an appalling record and were criminally irresponsible;

·       was not in favour of basic human needs being put in the market place;

·       SW had not invested and infrastructure had suffered

·       needed to do more than just write a letter;

·       a Scrutiny committee meeting with attendance by SW was being pursued;

·       highlighted the reputational damage caused to coastal towns with beaches and the possible decrease in visitors;

·       the impact on marine life;

·       gave examples of where lack of investment had caused long term leaks;

·       SW had failed;

·       the Council should claim financial compensation for damage inflicted on the community;

·       spoke of the knock-on effect of not discharging correctly;

·       highlighted the impact on businesses;

·       encouraged working together to hold SW to account;

·       spoke of negative experiences when dealing with SW;

·       control of industry was inadequate - Ofwat and the EA should be pushed at a later stage; and

·       consider uniting organisations and authorities to invite SW to a meeting.

In summing up, Councillor Saunders thanks Members for their support.  He agreed there should be a coordinated approach and that sending a letter was the starting point.

On being put to the vote, Members unanimously agreed the motion.

Resolved:

That this Council:

(1)  Supports the administration in demanding that Southern Water make the investment needed to:

-        ensure that local water treatment works are functioning legally and safely and that our rivers, streams and shoreline are not affected by serious pollution incidents in the future;

-        improve the capacity and effectiveness of the local waste water infrastructure so that sewage is not discharged into local streets during periods of heavy rain.

(2) Write to local MP’s and the Department of the Environment asking that:

-        Fine income be used to support improvements in the regulatory arrangements for water companies and to provide compensation to local authorities and local businesses that have suffered from the criminal activities of SW;

-        the current management arrangements for the water industry are revised so that private companies like SW cannot secretly pursue criminal activities over many years in order to avoid financial penalties and the cost of upgrading infrastructure.