Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

‘It won’t wash’: Environment secretary’s bid to cosy up to water pollution protesters backfires

News Feed
Thursday, October 31, 2024

The environment secretary has caused a backlash among groups demanding an end to the pollution of rivers by water companies, after a direct appeal ahead of a demonstration backfired. The intervention by Steve Reed, who wrote to activists saying they could trust him with forging change within the water industry, was met with anger by campaigners who said he was avoiding the key issue – that water privatisation has failed.In his letter to members from the 130 groups taking part in the March for Clean Water on Sunday, who include Surfers Against Sewage, the GMB union, the Wildlife Trusts and the RSPB, Reed said he shared their anger about record levels of sewage pollution. He wished them a well-attended march and said he looked forward to working with them towards a shared ambition of cleaning up rivers, lakes and seas for good.But since Labour took power, Reed has ruled out what many who will take to the streets are calling for: the return of the water industry to some kind of public ownership. In making the decision, using powers available to him under the special administration regime, he was accused of relying on flawed analysis paid for by water companies.The environment secretary, Steve Reed. Photograph: Wiktor Szymanowicz/Future Publishing/Getty ImagesIn the letter, distributed by the march organisers River Action, Reed said the independent commission he set up, along with the water (special measures) bill going through parliament, would start the change needed in the sector.Some campaigners criticised Reed’s attempt to claim allegiance, saying he had failed to address deep-rooted problems in the privatised water industry in England, where ownership has become concentrated in a web of private equity, foreign investment and pension funds.Becky Malby, of Ilkley Clean River Group, said Reed should use his existing powers to take failing water companies into special administration. She said the public would not tolerate paying increasingly large bills to companies which remain under criminal investigation by the Environment Agency for suspected illegal sewage dumping and the financial regulator Ofwat.Ash Smith, of Windrush against Sewage pollution, who is scheduled to speak on Sunday, said attempts to win over the marchers would not wash. “Steve Reed is trying to own the march by supporting clean water,” said Smith. “But there is massive public support to end the scandal that privatisation has brought. His refusal to face the facts and to rely on water company-funded fiction about costs is setting captive bill payers up to bail out private equity and keep the unforgivable exploitation going on for another five years.”River Action said it had concerns about Reed’s repeated references to the need to promote economic growth within the sector. “Our polluted water bodies do not need economic growth,” a spokesperson said. “They need effective and uncompromising environmental protection and regulation. As we can see with recent developments at Thames Water, the financial model of the water industry is unravelling fast and in some cases broken beyond repair.”Matt Staniek, of Save Windermere, said Reed’s intervention was a weak attempt to pacify public anger. “The government is clearly failing to enforce existing laws and continues to allow private equity to profit at the expense of bill payers and the environment,” he said. “They are proposing measures that fail to address the core issue – that privatisation has failed.”A Defra spokesperson said: “We share the public’s concern about the health of our waterways, and it is encouraging to see so many people actively engaged in this important cause. This government is committed to cleaning up our rivers, lakes and seas and has wasted no time in acting.”The spokesperson added that the new bill would hold companies to account and ensure they met the high standards the public rightfully expected. “This includes strengthening regulation to ensure water bosses face personal criminal liability for lawbreaking, and giving the water regulator new powers to ban the payment of bonuses if environmental standards are not met,” they said.

Steve Reed’s letter to campaign groups ahead of demonstration met with anger from those who say he has ignored the key issue of privatisation The environment secretary has caused a backlash among groups demanding an end to the pollution of rivers by water companies, after a direct appeal ahead of a demonstration backfired. The intervention by Steve Reed, who wrote to activists saying they could trust him with forging change within the water industry, was met with anger by campaigners who said he was avoiding the key issue – that water privatisation has failed.In his letter to members from the 130 groups taking part in the March for Clean Water on Sunday, who include Surfers Against Sewage, the GMB union, the Wildlife Trusts and the RSPB, Reed said he shared their anger about record levels of sewage pollution. He wished them a well-attended march and said he looked forward to working with them towards a shared ambition of cleaning up rivers, lakes and seas for good. Continue reading...

The environment secretary has caused a backlash among groups demanding an end to the pollution of rivers by water companies, after a direct appeal ahead of a demonstration backfired. The intervention by Steve Reed, who wrote to activists saying they could trust him with forging change within the water industry, was met with anger by campaigners who said he was avoiding the key issue – that water privatisation has failed.

In his letter to members from the 130 groups taking part in the March for Clean Water on Sunday, who include Surfers Against Sewage, the GMB union, the Wildlife Trusts and the RSPB, Reed said he shared their anger about record levels of sewage pollution. He wished them a well-attended march and said he looked forward to working with them towards a shared ambition of cleaning up rivers, lakes and seas for good.

But since Labour took power, Reed has ruled out what many who will take to the streets are calling for: the return of the water industry to some kind of public ownership. In making the decision, using powers available to him under the special administration regime, he was accused of relying on flawed analysis paid for by water companies.

The environment secretary, Steve Reed. Photograph: Wiktor Szymanowicz/Future Publishing/Getty Images

In the letter, distributed by the march organisers River Action, Reed said the independent commission he set up, along with the water (special measures) bill going through parliament, would start the change needed in the sector.

Some campaigners criticised Reed’s attempt to claim allegiance, saying he had failed to address deep-rooted problems in the privatised water industry in England, where ownership has become concentrated in a web of private equity, foreign investment and pension funds.

Becky Malby, of Ilkley Clean River Group, said Reed should use his existing powers to take failing water companies into special administration. She said the public would not tolerate paying increasingly large bills to companies which remain under criminal investigation by the Environment Agency for suspected illegal sewage dumping and the financial regulator Ofwat.

Ash Smith, of Windrush against Sewage pollution, who is scheduled to speak on Sunday, said attempts to win over the marchers would not wash. “Steve Reed is trying to own the march by supporting clean water,” said Smith. “But there is massive public support to end the scandal that privatisation has brought. His refusal to face the facts and to rely on water company-funded fiction about costs is setting captive bill payers up to bail out private equity and keep the unforgivable exploitation going on for another five years.”

River Action said it had concerns about Reed’s repeated references to the need to promote economic growth within the sector. “Our polluted water bodies do not need economic growth,” a spokesperson said. “They need effective and uncompromising environmental protection and regulation. As we can see with recent developments at Thames Water, the financial model of the water industry is unravelling fast and in some cases broken beyond repair.”

Matt Staniek, of Save Windermere, said Reed’s intervention was a weak attempt to pacify public anger. “The government is clearly failing to enforce existing laws and continues to allow private equity to profit at the expense of bill payers and the environment,” he said. “They are proposing measures that fail to address the core issue – that privatisation has failed.”

A Defra spokesperson said: “We share the public’s concern about the health of our waterways, and it is encouraging to see so many people actively engaged in this important cause. This government is committed to cleaning up our rivers, lakes and seas and has wasted no time in acting.”

The spokesperson added that the new bill would hold companies to account and ensure they met the high standards the public rightfully expected. “This includes strengthening regulation to ensure water bosses face personal criminal liability for lawbreaking, and giving the water regulator new powers to ban the payment of bonuses if environmental standards are not met,” they said.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Lawsuit says PGE, Tillamook Creamery add to nitrate pollution in eastern Oregon

The lawsuit, filed on behalf of residents in Morrow and Umatilla counties, says nitrate pollution from a PGE power generation plant and from a Tillamook cheese production facility has seeped into groundwater, affecting thousands of residents in the area.

A new lawsuit claims Portland General Electric and the Tillamook County Creamery Association contribute significantly to the nitrate pollution that has plagued eastern Oregon for over three decades. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of residents in Morrow and Umatilla counties, says nitrate pollution has seeped into groundwater, affecting thousands of residents in the area known as the Lower Umatilla Basin Groundwater Management Area who can’t use tap water from private wells at their homes.PGE operates a power generation plant at the Port of Morrow in Boardman and the Tillamook County Creamery Association, a farmer-owned cooperative known for the Tillamook Creamery at the coast, operates a cheese production plant in Boardman. The two plants send their wastewater to the port, which then sprays it through irrigation systems directly onto land in Morrow and Umatilla counties, according to the complaint filed Friday in the U.S. District Court in Oregon.PGE and Tillamook transfer their wastewater to the port despite knowing that the port doesn’t remove the nitrates before applying the water onto fields, the suit contends.PGE’s spokesperson Drew Hanson said the company would not provide comment on pending legal matters. Tillamook Creamery did not respond to a request for comment.The new complaint follows a 2024 lawsuit by several Boardman residents that accused the Port of Morrow, along with several farms and food processors of contaminating the basin’s groundwater. The others named are: Lamb Weston, Madison Ranches, Threemile Canyon Farms and Beef Northwest.A state analysis released earlier this year shows nitrate pollution has worsened significantly in eastern Oregon over the past decade. Much of the nitrate contamination in the region comes from farm fertilizer, animal manure and wastewater that are constantly and abundantly applied to farm fields by the owners of food processing facilities, confined animal feeding operations, irrigated farmland and animal feedlots, according to the analysis by the state and local nonprofits. Those polluters are also the main employers in eastern Oregon. Steve Berman, the attorney in the newest case, said PGE and the farmer cooperative were not included in the previous lawsuit because their impact wasn’t previously clear. “We keep drilling down into new records we are obtaining from the regulatory authorities and activists and analyzing how groundwater moves in the area. Our experts now tell us these two entities are contributing as well,” Berman said. According to the complaint, PGE’s power generation plant at the Port of Morrow, called Coyote Springs, generates an estimated 900 million gallons of nitrate-laced wastewater each year from a combination of cooling tower wastewater, wash water and the water discharged from boilers to remove built-up impurities.From 2019 to 2022, PGE’s wastewater had an average nitrate concentration of 38.9 milligrams per liter – almost four times higher than the Environmental Protection Agency’s maximum contaminant level, the complaint claims. PGE’s plant is not producing nitrates, Berman said, but rather is using groundwater with pre-existing nitrates and then concentrating the chemicals through its industrial processes. PGE’s plant is not producing nitrates, Berman said, but rather is using groundwater with pre-existing nitrates and then concentrating the chemicals through its industrial processes. and then spread pre-existing nitrates from groundwater and don’t add their own but concentrate the nitrates through their industrial processes, such as xxx.Columbia River Processing, the Tillamook Creamery Association’s cheese production plant, generates an estimated 360 gallons of wastewater each year from a combination of cheese byproducts and tank wash water, according to the complaint. From 2019 to 2022, Tillamook’s wastewater had an average nitrate concentration of 24 milligrams per liter – more than twice the EPA’s maximum contaminant level, the complaint claims. In addition, the association also sources its milk from Threemile Canyon Farms, a “megadairy” in Boardman that houses 70,000 cows and was named in the previous nitrate lawsuit. The dairy constantly applies high-nitrogen waste from its operation to its farmland, the earlier suit says. The lawsuit seeks to force remediation or halt the practices. It also demands that the companies cover the costs of drilling deeper wells for private well users who currently face nitrate contamination – an estimated $40,000 cost per well – as well as the costs of connecting households to municipal water systems and compensation for higher water bills paid by residents due to nitrate treatment in public systems. People who can’t use their contaminated tap water now must rely on bottled water for cooking, bathing and other needs. While there are plans to extend municipal water service to some of those homes, many residents oppose the idea because they’ve invested heavily in their wells and fear paying steep water rates.Critics say state agencies have not done enough to crack down on the pollution, with much of the focus on voluntary measures that have failed to rein in the nitrate contamination.Research has linked high nitrate consumption over long periods to cancers, miscarriages, as well as thyroid issues. It is especially dangerous to infants who can quickly develop “blue baby syndrome,” a fatal illness.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.