I want to crack down on pollution of England's rivers,
seas, and lakes.
I suspect the bar to pass in these people to get then
convicted and put in jail is so high
that you'd have to be doing it for years and years and years
and have sort of evidence that these water posses sort
of turned on the tap themselves.
So the Water Special Measures Bill
introduced to Parliament on Wednesday
will hand new powers to Ofwat and the environment
agencies to take action on companies
damaging the environment and failing customers.
Well, what is the criteria for damaging the environment?
And what is the criteria for failing customers?
So with this will come lots of investment.
And this will fall solely on the shoulders of the people
paying the bills.
The other interesting thing to note
is that every single time I see a sewage outlet,
I do not see, like other countries,
a net which will actually trap plastics or other things that
shouldn't be going into the streams, oceans, and rivers.
So I think a fundamental review of how other people catch
the unintended item that gets put in the sewage
or gets contributed maybe through airborne or sort
of the wind blows it into the water.
So have a net around every single water slash sewage
outlet.
The government said that the current enforcement system
is insufficient to hold firms accountable.
Well, is this smoke and mirrors?
Let's read more.
For widespread illanguility in the sector,
citing that only three individuals have
been criminally prosecuted by the environmental agency
without appeal since privatization.
Now I've looked at a lot of these monitoring stations.
I think one of the ones I looked at was Stem's Water.
And you find, interestingly, that a lot of the monitors
have either R40 or, for some reason,
they haven't been implemented.
So I think a route and branch so that we
know exactly what is going on across all particular areas.
Because, I mean, on telly, we've actually
seen lots of pollution and no rainfall at all
in the past week's television output.
So there probably needs to be the monitoring
of these particular overflows.
Should be a hybrid.
They should be instantly given to the environmental agency.
And there probably needs to be more testing of the water
outside these overflows so that we can see that to tidy up
and not actually pollute our rivers,
because they're being polluted enough by microplastics,
hormones, and other things.
And I can only determine that this solid waste doesn't
want to go through conventional systems,
because either it's a cost saving exercise
or the current throughput is at breaking point
and other sewage works need to be installed.
So under the bill, harsher penalties.
Well, they've determined that harsh penalties are
happening at the moment.
But it was something like a bill of 1%.
So they would have saved a fortune
by not actually processing the sewage
and all the relevant chemicals.
So I think we need to determine what harsh penalties.
And the thing is that they'll probably
have the bar so high about law breaking
that we'll probably see no jail sentences.
And if there are any, there'll be weeks, not years.
And the executives will probably sidestep the issue
by changing the way that they are employed.
And the thing is, I wouldn't have thought
that they would obstruct.
They would probably supply too much information.
So it all depends on what your definition of obstruct is.
Environment agencies and drink water
inspirate investigations.
Now, the quality of water over time,
we've had massive issues with the water quality.
And there's also a problem of having sort of fluorine
and chlorine in the water.
I mean, it solves one problem, but it creates so many others
with the human condition.
So let's continue reading.
So what we've got here is sort of spillages in Lake Windermere.
I mean, on the one hand, you're saving the water companies
millions and millions.
And on the other hand, you're losing so much money
in regard to tourism.
So that isn't great.
So here it says, the burden of proof in civil cases
will be lowered so that the environment agency can bring
forward criminal charges against bosses more easily.
Well, if it's so high and it's lowered,
it probably won't ensnare too many.
Regulators will also be empowered
to ban bonus payments to water bosses
if they fail to meet high standards to protect
the environment, their consumers,
and their company's finances.
So bonus payments will be wrapped up in a different way.
So you'd probably get sort of car allowance,
this allowance, that allowance, the other allowance,
and they won't be related to performance
because that is the problem.
But we have regulators in other practices, the Royal Mail
scandal, we've got the blood scandal, the cladding scandal,
and all of these have taken 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60 years,
and we haven't come anywhere.
So we've got years of underinvestment
because it's just making do by the privately run firms
combined with aging water infrastructure.
Well, it's at least, some of it's at least 200 years.
And of course, we've got a growing population.
And we probably need to have a better method of doing
the analysis of the water to determine
the health of the nation in certain areas.
And of course, more extreme weather.
Well, this is probably a mixture of environment and manmade
issues, but not solely by climate change.
So I have seen the quality of English rivers, lakes,
and oceans plummet in recent years.
Sewage spills have, well, I wouldn't call them sewage
spills, they're sort of intended spills
to contribute to a situation in which no single river in England
is considered to be a good overall health.
And beauty spots, including Windermere in the late district,
have been looted.
Some water utilities are also creaking
under high levels of debt.
Well, they're under high levels of debt
because they pay out too much to the shareholders and employees
and directors, or face criticism over dividends
to shareholders and executive bosses.
And then it's the usual inevitable thing.
We've had months of rainfall, and then we
had to get a hosepipe ban.
The new Labour government have announced,
have already announced initial measures to tackle pollution.
But this is the first major move to deliver on a manifesto
pledges to reform the broken water system.
Well, it's more than the water system.
It's sort of tourism, healthy drinking water,
and trying to get enough water for future needs,
and potentially utilizing water to produce electricity, which
isn't managed or even really thought
about in a greater degree.
So it comes as part of a broader reset of the sector
over this parliament, including legislation
to speed up sewage infrastructure upgrades
and to address how the water industry is run
so that it can still attract investment and talent.
Officials indicated, well, you also
need to think about if these building quotas are
going to be met, you're going to have to do to admit.
Number two, where the wastewater is going to be treated
and where the runoff is going to go.
Because I think, what is it?
Are we looking at 1.7 million homes over this government?
I might be wrong.
Let me know.
So Environment Secretary Steve Reid
said, the public are furious there in the 21st century.
Britain, record levels of sewage being pumped out
into our rivers, lakes, and seas, well, everywhere.
Water executives will no longer line their own pockets
while pumping out this filth.
Well, I doubt that that will change.
There'll be just a redistribution of wealth
and a change to official documents
in regard how payments are made.
So if they refuse to comply, they
could end up in the dock and face prison time.
Bar to that is probably so high that if they agree,
how long is a reasonable time to achieve this?
5, 10, 15, 20 years?
And then you're just going to have a director in there
for three to five years.
And then the time resets.
Under the proposed laws, regulators
will be able to issue severe and automatic fines, which
will be paid by the public.
Without having to direct resources
to lengthy investigations, the government's fed.
So maybe this is just a way to gain income when they need to.
They could just say, well, you have met the standard, right?
Let's fine all of the water companies.
We can get a nice 5 billion with a stroke of the pen.
Currently, the regulators cannot impose fixed financial penalties
for most offenses.
And the current maximum fine is 300 pounds,
meaning if it is not cost effective for them
to penalize frequent, more minor offenses, which is just
absolutely crazy.
The legislation will require independent monitoring.
Well, the environment should monitor this,
but be paid to monitor it by the water companies
and then share the information of every sewage outlet
and the reporting of discharges within the hour
of the initial spill.
Well, I don't think it is a spill
or will be determined as a spill because they're
doing it so frequently.
Currently, some 14,000 storm overflows across England
are monitored so that any discharge of, well,
looking at Thames water, there are a lot of overflows
which aren't monitored.
So those will be needed to be put up to scratch.
And I think the information should
be reported on one website where anybody can gain
relevant access to determine how they're
doing in an area of interest locally
or if they're going on holiday or where they work.
So that any discharge of untreated sewage, well,
definition of sewage may be a little bit of interest.
I mean, what about if you just skim off the solids
and the rest of it will go in the overflows
that determine the sewage?
During periods of heavy rain can be reported.
Well, it's not during heavy rain.
It seems to be through periods where it hasn't rained,
maybe because they don't have the capacity or the chemicals
to process the sewage.
So however, water forms will now be
required to fully monitor the 7,000 emergency overflows.
Well, why not all of the overflows?
Because I think there's a hell of a lot more than 7,000.
And they could just dump it into one place
where it flows to somewhere else.
That's what water does.
So I think this number is a little bit on the tiny side.
The bills, I mean, I don't think this bill strengthens
their power because the barrier is just too high.
And help us drive transformative change in the water
industry so that it delivers better outcomes for customers.
And the environment.
So what will happen is any fines or improvements or changes
will be as part of higher cost to people that use the water.
I mean, there was a period where you didn't actually
have to pay for water at all.
It just came to your house, and effectively you
were paying for it through your rates.
So ensure regulators have properly funded the bill
will expand powers for the watchdogs
to cover costs from water companies for enforcement
action taken in response to their failings.
Well, I think that should go even further.
That the water companies should pay for any and all expenses
in regard to monitoring that will be needed by the regulator.
Off work will also be required to set rules.
They ensure companies appoint directors and chief executives
and allow them to remain in post only when they meet
the highest standards of fitness and propriety.
Well, you're going to see an element of directors
and chief executives probably rotating a lot more
than they do at the moment.
And they will probably have golden handshakes
and probably golden goodbyes.
Elsewhere there will be new statute requirement
for water companies to publish annual pollution incident
reduction plans that outline the steps they are taking
to address pollution incidents.
Well, I think annually is probably not the way to go.
I mean, it should be as the occurrence happens.
And then they have a week to actually do it.
The bill will give us as regulator more power
to protect our precious water, quality, and resources.
Hold water companies to account and ensure the polluters pays.
Well, what will happen is the polluter
will probably pay 1% and the consumer, i.e. us,
will pay the remaining 99%.
This bill strengthens our powers and will help us drive
transformative change in the water industry
so that it delivers better outcomes for customers
and the environment.
This looks to be a job half done by the government.
A water UK spokesman said, we agree to the government
that the water system is broken, fixing it requires the government
to deliver the two things which it promises,
has promised fundamental regulatory reform
and speeding up investment.
Well, having 105 billion investment,
which will come solely off the back of the consumers,
which is going to be a hefty price to pay with all
the other hefty prices to pay and no real guarantees
or potentials where you're going to get some money back.
So we welcome the measures laid out by the government
to ensure there are more serious consequences for water companies.
Not sure they are if they harm our rivers, lakes and seas.
These changes will complement the work we're already doing
to help transform the culture of water companies.
So they are focused on providing the best possible service
for their customers.
Well, that's a bit tricky because you can only join
one water company depending on where you're living.
So there's no real competition.
I mean, maybe there should be an element that people can,
like your electricity and gas, where you can say,
well, I'll join Scottish to actually provide it for me.
And that would encourage competition.
Because where you don't have competition, you have laxness.
And where you have laxness, you have a situation
where you get a bit lazy.
So maybe that is the outcome of this particular video,
is that we shouldn't have to have to pay for the water
for some particular water board.
We can actually choose the right water board that gives us
the best cost savings.
And then that would stabilize.
I mean, the thing is that to actually get in your gas,
you can have anybody supplying that gas, maybe.
And then that has made the gas a little bit cheaper.
But we're still paying a lot through government meddling.
So I think that should be something that is proposed.
And of course, it is down to those particular companies
to start with the relevant economies,
make everything as transparent as possible,
maybe the need to create particular lakes
and not just buy water from other locations.
You may have to work out sort of why a particular lake loses
an enormous amount of water before it is utilized
by the customer, or whether you should have massive underground
storage of water, which cannot be either lost through evaporation
or lost through leaks in the actual lake.
So let's finish on a nice picture of who are these?
They save our water, British waterways.
So what I would propose is that we have more competition.
That way, people can move with their feet
if the costs are too high.
We also need an element of clamping down on the leaks
directly from outside to the household.
But more importantly, the clear up of leaks
have sort of gone from 30% and screeched to 15% or 12%.
And hasn't really improved in a number of years from there.
So it is to get the level of leakage sorted out
in the best manner possible.
So thank you very much for your time.
Please can you subscribe, comment, and share this video
to other people so they potentially will subscribe
to this channel.
If you found this of interest and you
want me to create more video content,
I can do that.
But I need sponsorship and donations.
So in the show notes, I'll be putting that information
so that you either can potentially
sponsor me for an episode or the entire channel.
And if you donate, I can use that to continue
carrying on with the channel.
So thank you very much for your time.
And it's been a pleasure.
Lovely.
Thank you.
Bye.