‘A wholesale betrayal of the people and our environment’
Campaigners say privatised water has failed the public and the environment
REGULATORS have fuelled soaring water bills by not encouraging private companies to spend “what they need to deliver the performance expected,” a damning public spending watchdog report concluded today.
The National Audit Office (NAO) highlighted “inconsistent responsibilities” and gaps in oversight within the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and the sector’s regulators.
The watchdog examined the effectiveness of sector regulators — Ofwat, the Environment Agency, and the Drinking Water Inspectorate — as well as Defra, which sets policies for the sector in England.
It found that complex and lengthy regulatory frameworks have contributed to “worsening investor perception of the sector” which will need to attract “investment and spend at a rate not seen before” to meet its “significant environmental and supply challenges.”
NAO head Gareth Davies said: “Given the unprecedented situation facing the sector, Defra and the regulators need to act urgently to address industry performance and resilience to ensure the sector can meet government targets and achieve value for money over the long term for bill payers.”
What makes Pope Francis and his 183-page encyclical so radical isn’t just his call to urgently tackle climate change. It’s the fact he openly and unashamedly goes against the grain of dominant social, economic and environment policies.
While the Argentina-born pope is a very humble person whose vision is of a “poor church for the poor”, he seems increasingly determined to play a central role on the world stage. Untainted by the realities of government and the greed of big business, he is perhaps the only major figure who can legitimately confront the world’s economic and political elites in the way he has.
However his radical message potentially puts him on a confrontation course with global powerbrokers and leaders of national governments, international institutions and multinational corporations.
The backlash has begun even before the encyclical has been officially published. US presidential candidate Jeb Bush, a Catholic, feels the pope should stay out of the climate debate, joining other Republicans, fossil fuel lobbyists and climate denier think-tanks in seeking to discredit Pope Francis’s intervention.
What makes the pope so radical?
There are several meanings of the word “radical” that can be applied to the Pope and in particular his forthcoming encyclical.
First, radical can be understood as going back to the roots (from Latin radix, root). The majority of Catholics live in the Global South; in Latin America and sub-Saharan Africa. Francis is the first pope from the Global South, and naming himself in honour of Saint Francis of Assisi, “a man of poverty and peace who loved nature and animals”, signalled to the world a commitment to going back to the roots of human existence.
The pope knows the plight of the majority world. Before he became Archbishop of Buenos Aires, he was a priest in the vast, poor neighbourhoods, the villas miserias or slums, of Argentina’s capital.
Improving the lives of slum dwellers and addressing climate change is, for Pope Francis, one and the same thing. Both require tackling the structural, root causes of inequality, injustice, poverty and environmental degradation.
Even as the quality of available water is constantly diminishing, in some places there is a growing tendency, despite its scarcity, to privatize this resource, turning it into a commodity subject to the laws of the market. Yet access to safe drink- able water is a basic and universal human right, since it is essential to human survival and, as such, is a condition for the exercise of other human rights. (p. 23)
This stands in stark contrast to, for example, Peter Brabeck-Letmathe, the chairman of Nestlé, the world’s largest food and bottled water company, who thinks water is a normal commodity with a market value, and not a human right. Nestlé is far from unusual. Its stance is backed up by the official water privatisation policies of the World Bank, IMF and other international institutions.
In fact, the encyclical is a radical – for a pope and international leader, unprecedented – attack on the logic of the market and consumerism, which has been expanded into all spheres of life.
The document states:
Since the market tends to promote extreme consumerism in an effort to sell its products, people can easily get caught up in a whirlwind of needless buying and spending. Compulsive consumerism … leads people to believe that they are free as long as they have the supposed freedom to consume. But those really free are the minority who wield economic and financial power. (p. 149-150)
The pope rejects market fundamentalism, instead arguing that “the market alone does not ensure human development and social inclusion.”
The strategy of buying and selling “carbon credits” can lead to a new form of speculation which would not help reduce the emission of polluting gases worldwide. This system seems to provide a quick and easy solution under the guise of a certain commitment to the environment, but in no way does it allow for the radical change which present circumstances require. Rather, it may simply become a ploy which permits maintaining the excessive consumption of some countries and sectors. (p. 126)
The pope’s right. The same criticisms of carbon markets have been made by myself and others.
Climate change is a global problem with grave implications: environmental, social, economic, political and for the distribution of goods. It represents one of the principal challenges facing humanity in our day. (p. 20)
While the pope is not a politician – or maybe precisely because he is not one – he commands high moral and ethical authority that goes beyond traditional partisan lines. His encyclical speaks truth to power, and he might be the only person with both the clout and the desire to meaningfully deliver a message like this:
Many of those who possess more resources and economic or political power seem mostly to be concerned with masking the problems or concealing their symptoms, simply making efforts to reduce some of the negative impacts of climate change. However, many of these symptoms indicate that such effects will continue to worsen if we continue with current models of production and consumption. There is an urgent need to develop policies so that, in the next few years, the emission of carbon dioxide and other highly polluting gases can be drastically reduced, for example, substituting for fossil fuels and developing sources of renewable energy. (p. 21)
The bosses of Shell, ExxonMobil and other fossil fuel companies will not like this message, as it threatens their fundamental business model, and it also stands in contrast to the underwhelming ambitions of the G7 leaders who recently pledged to phase out fossil fuels only by 2100.
The time for bold, radical action on the environment as well as poverty eradication has come. This seems to be Pope Francis’ message: “The same mindset which stands in the way of making radical decisions to reverse the trend of global warming also stands in the way of achieving the goal of eliminating poverty.” (p. 128)
We need to think beyond the current, taken-for-granted logic that believes only markets and consumerism can solve the world’s social and environmental problems. The pope himself believes the situation is so grave that only a new, “true world political authority” will be able to address these problems.
This article was updated on 18 June to include quotes from the final encyclical rather than the earlier draft leaked to L’Espresso magazine.
Sewage is only supposed to be discharged following extreme weather. Image: Jeff Buck (cc-by-sa/2.0)
Some 27% of English billpayers have considered withholding their bill payments due to water supplier failings, a survey shows.
The public don’t believe private companies can fix the worsening sewage crisis, a report has found – and at least a quarter are considering boycotting water bill payments.
Water bills will surge by an average of £31 per year over the next five years.
Suppliers have justified the increase – which will bring the average annual bill to £588 by the end of the decade – as the only way to fund fixes to Britain’s crumbling sewage infrastructure.
But according to a blistering new Surfers Against Sewage (SAS) report, just a third (33%) of English adults believe that their supplier will take the necessary action to end sewage pollution.
And around a quarter (27%) have considered withholding their bill payments due to the actions of their water supplier.
This disillusionment is little surprise. Pollution is surging: Water companies in England have collectively failed their targets to reduce pollution incidents, SAS’s 2024 Water Quality Report shows, with 2,487 incidents recorded in 2024.
Advertising helps fund Big Issue’s mission to end poverty
That’s more than double the target set by the Environment Agency – and it’s the tip of the iceberg. In 2024 alone, raw sewage was released into UK waterways 592,478 times, for a combined 4.7 million hours. That’s the equivalent of 535 years’ worth of waste, pouring into the lakes and rivers people swim in, kayak through and drink from.
April 2023 Surfers Against Sewage and Extinction Rebellion protests in St Agnes, Perranporth, Truro and Charlestown which unveiled spoof Blue Plaques to the MPs and Conservative Government who allowed raw sewage to be dumped in the sea (Image: Surfers Against Sewage)
The snow-covered peak of Beinn Eighe and the mountains of Torridon are reflected in Loch Droma near Ullapool, Wester Ross, December 3, 2023
RAW sewage could have been pumped into Scotland’s rivers, lochs, and seas every 90 seconds last year, according to a new report by campaign group Surfers Against Sewage (SAS).
While Scottish Water recorded 23,498 sewage discharges lasting a total of 208,377 hours in 2024, this accounts for only 6.7 per cent of the company’s total network, the research found.
Just 1,116 of Scottish Water’s 4,080 “combined sewage overflows” — where sewage is released directly into waterways or the sea — appear on its real-time sewage discharge map.
That 73 per cent data gap means SAS’s Safer Seas and Rivers Service providing sewage alerts across Britain is forced to leave Scotland blank, but their latest report estimates the public are being put at risk with as many as 364,629 effectively unreported discharges a year — amounting one every 90 seconds.
SAS chief executive Giles Bristow slammed “Scottish Water’s reckless approach to monitoring and public safety.”
He said: “Scotland’s coastline, lochs and rivers are some of the most stunning on the planet, with surfers, swimmers and paddle boarders wanting to make the most of these beautiful blue spaces.
“But these waters are far from pristine.
“With no legal requirement to issue sewage alerts in Scotland, water users have no idea whether or not it’s safe to enter the water.
AS FRUSTRATION grows over failure to tackle pollution, new research revealed yesterday that over a quarter of adults in England have considered withholding water bill payments.
A new report from Surfers Against Sewage (SAS) has accused the water industry of falling short of the Environment Agency’s target to reduce pollution incidents by 40 per cent.
Instead, they recorded a 30 per cent increase to 2,487 incidents, the highest in a decade.
Polling 2,000 adults, SAS found that 27 per cent of people in England have considered not paying their bill due to the actions of their water supplier.
Water bills surged by 47 per cent this month and are expected to keep rising, with customers projected to pay £160 more in 2030 compared with 2024.
April 2023 Surfers Against Sewage and Extinction Rebellion protests in St Agnes, Perranporth, Truro and Charlestown which unveiled spoof Blue Plaques to the MPs and Conservative Government who allowed raw sewage to be dumped in the sea (Image: Surfers Against Sewage)