Water company bosses could face up to two years in prison and be banned from taking bonuses under the new government’s first major proposals to crack down on England’s sewage, chemical and manure infested waterways.
The new Water (Special Measures) Bill is designed to beef up feeble regulators so they can take on water companies releasing sewage into rivers, lakes and seas and appease public fury.
Although many topline measures had already been announced, the new details have been cautiously welcomed by green groups as an “important first step” towards cleaning up the country’s filthy rivers, lakes and seas.
But they say there is a long way to go given many other problems with the waterways, and the government acknowledged the need for “wider reform”.
What would the new water bill do?
The bill, which could come into effect in the new year, would increase fines and could see water executives who fail to cooperate or obstruct investigations, such as being slow to provide data, thrown in jail for up to two years.
Existing legislation does already allow bosses to face prison for other offences, but none have been successfully prosecuted despite “widespread illegality”, according to the government.
More on Climate Change
Related Topics:
The Environment Secretary Steve Reed said: “The public are furious that in 21st century Britain, record levels of sewage are being pumped into our rivers, lakes and seas. After years of neglect, our waterways are now in an unacceptable state.”
He added: “Under this government, water executives will no longer line their own pockets whilst pumping out this filth.”
Advertisement
Ofwat will also be allowed to ban water bosses’ bonuses if they breach standards on the environment, their consumers and company finances – although the system is yet to be designed.
Severn Trent chief Liz Garfield this year won a £584,000 bonus, despite the company being fined £2m for “reckless” sewage spills in the River Trent.
The bill will also see monitoring of every sewage overflow and the reporting of discharges in real time, with data made available to the public who might want to swim or surf in that water.
Although virtually all of England’s 14,000 storm overflows are monitored for discharges of sewage into waterways often due to heavy rain, most of the additional 7,000 emergency overflows, which release sewage due to system failures like power outages, are currently not checked.
The Environment Agency will be allowed to recover the costs of investigations from water firms, in a bid to restore the resourcing and expertise to the regulator that has been hollowed out in the last decade.
As funding was cut by half between 2009-2019, enforcement actions plummeted and thousands of staff left, along with their expertise tackling water problems, though the previous prime minister, Rishi Sunak, did restore some resources in February.
Decades of underinvestment and water companies are only part of the problem.
A growing population, more extreme weather caused by climate change, farming pollution and cuts to the watchdogs have combined to leave waterways in a dire state.
Just 14% of England’s rivers and lakes are in good ecological health.
How have green groups and industry reacted?
Shaun Spiers, executive director of thintank Green Alliance, said: “This is a useful first step and will address the public’s concerns about inadequate regulation of polluting water companies.”
But working out how to pay for all the upgrades, changes, and climate and nature measures is a “more profound challenge”, he said.
Ofwat recently blocked water companies from hiking bills by any more than £94 over the next five years, a third less than they had proposed.
This is money they say they need to fix the problems, and which Labour could really do with, given the limited public finances to pay for infrastructure and nature and climate commitments.
James Wallace, chief executive of River Action UK, said he is pleased the new government is “taking seriously this dreadful blight on our rivers caused by pollution, and this is an important first step”.
But he called for an “urgent review” of the regulators.
“Talking about CEO bonuses is not going to sort things out. What we really need to see is a regulator, the Environment Agency, with its teeth given back and its funding given back,” he said.
“You can’t enforce these laws without effective regulators.”
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
The environment department hinted at further action on the regulators – but would not commit to timeframes.
The government is aiming for a “wider reform to fix the broken water system” over this parliament, Steve Reed said, including boosting infrastructure upgrades and ensuring the water industry is still attractive to investors.
A Water UK spokesperson said: “We agree with the government that the water system is not working. Fixing it requires the government to deliver the two things which it has promised: fundamental regulatory reform and speeding up investment.
“Ofwat needs to back our £105bn investment plan in full to secure our water supplies, enable economic growth and end sewage spilling into our rivers and seas.”
The rugged mountains, limestone caves and spectacular waterfalls of Bannau Brycheiniog – the Brecon Beacons – attract visitors from all over the world.
Tourism is a vital part of the local economy. But local attractions say the industry would be devastated by the Welsh government’s plans for a nightly visitor tax.
“In an area like this all we’ve got is tourism and farming – there is nothing else,” says Ashford Price from the National Showcaves Centre, a visitor complex of cathedral sized caverns, winding tunnels, a dry ski slope, shire horse centre, self-catering accommodation and campsite.
“If they go on like this the future for Welsh tourism is really, really bleak. It will be an absolute catastrophe.”
The proposed fee would be £1.25 for those staying at hotels, bed and breakfasts and self-catering accommodation – and 75p for campsites, caravan sites, and hostels.
Ashford is secretary of the Welsh Association of Visitor Attractions. In protest against the plans, its more than one hundred members closed their attractions for a day.
“Even Welsh people who live in Wales will be clobbered by this tourism tax,” he said.
“It’s quite high, there’s no reduction for children. For a family that will add roughly £35, £40 a week. If you’re staying two weeks, as many people do, it’s £70 on top of your bill. At a time when everybody’s earnings are really struggling, it’s utter insanity to put Wales at such a disadvantage.
“There will be no more big developments. We already cancelled a development for £1.5m and I know other attractions are doing the same. I don’t think the Welsh government really understands how demoralised people feel.”
‘It’s a disaster’
In the nearby village, Anthony Christopher, landlord of the Penycae Inn, is deeply frustrated.
“I just feel like calling this government a bunch of weasels,” he said.
“We’re a small family business and all these extra taxes are taking away the will to do anything else.
“We have national insurance already – contributions are very high. VAT is very high. Now this tax is coming – it’s a disaster. We have to put this extra charge on the customers – how much more can we put on the customers? It’s terrible.”
Anthony has just converted an old school building into a 14-bedroom hotel – due to open in January.
“If I knew this was going to happen I may not have built my hotel. It’s very worrying.”
Many areas in Wales have struggled with the impact of tourism in recent years, with complaints about overflowing car parks, traffic jams, litter and even human faeces on Mount Snowdon.
The Welsh government argues giving councils the power to charge a tourism tax would help pay for better local services.
“During a period of sustained austerity of the sort we’ve seen over the last 14 years, local authorities inevitably end up focusing their spend on those things for which they’ve got statutory obligations – social care, education and so on,” said Finance Secretary Mark Drakeford.
“That has meant there’s been a reduction in the amount of money available for local authorities to invest in infrastructure that makes them successful places for tourists to visit. This is a way of collecting a very small contribution from every one of us who makes a visit to be reinvested in the conditions that make for that visit to be a success.
“It’s money that would be reinvested in the tourism industry, for example, clean beaches and safe footpaths and car parks and public toilets.”
‘People simply absorb it’
The tourism industry accounts for 11% of all jobs in Wales. But an impact assessment commissioned by the Welsh government predicted that in a worst case scenario, 730 jobs could be lost in the sector if a visitor tax was introduced across the country, with an economic cost of £47.5 million. It also predicted 340 local authority jobs would be created.
Mr Drakeford insists the tax will boost tourism – not damage it.
“For those who have fears that the very modest visitor levy will put visitors off, the experience of around the world is that simply isn’t the case. There is a great deal now of empirical evidence for many places that have introduced visitor levies of this sort, not just abroad, but in Manchester, for example,” he said.
“The evidence is not just from big places like Venice, but from rural France, where there’s a levy of this sort. People simply absorb it as part of the costs of their holiday.”
Tourism taxes in cities across Europe range from around 50p to £5 a night, although businesses generally benefit from lower rates of VAT than the 20% paid in the UK.
The idea is becoming increasingly popular across the UK.
While some regional mayors like Andy Burnham have been calling for equivalent powers to be introduced in England, the Westminster government has no plans to do so.
But local areas can work around this through businesses coming together to set up their own schemes. Manchester’s £1 a night charge raised £2.8m in its first year and hoteliers in Liverpool are about to vote on a similar idea.
Other cities, including York and London, are also considering the option – though a plan for Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole has been put on hold after objections from hotel owners about the ballot held there.
An Oxford University spinout which is developing a new generation of weed-resistant herbicides has begun planting a $40m (£32m) fundraising with prospective backers.
Sky News understands that Moa Technology, which was co-founded by the world-leading university’s head of plant sciences Professor Liam Dolan, is kicking off a Series C funding round.
Moa has already raised $59m (£47m) from prominent investors including Oxford Science Enterprises (OSE), BGF and Lansdowne Partners, the Mayfair-based hedge fund.
Its existing shareholders are understood to be supportive of the new fundraising plans, although potential new investors will also be approached.
Moa is developing active ingredients which can break weeds’ resistance to herbicides – a key challenge for the global agricultural sector – with the aim of securing approval from regulators.
Similar to the growth of antibiotic resistance in humans, resistant ‘superweeds’ are able to kill a farmer’s entire crop, ultimately endangering food security.
Industry data suggests that farmers spend up to $40bn (£31.2bn) annually on herbicides, and a further $25bn (£19.9bn) on weed-resistant seeds.
More on Oxfordshire
Related Topics:
However, a number of leading weedkillers, including Bayer-owned Roundup, have sparked multibillion dollar lawsuits over their alleged implications for human health.
Moa has developed more than 70 so-called ‘modes of action’, with several of the company’s products in advanced field trials in six countries, including the UK, US and France.
According to Moa, these could, assuming they gain regulatory approval, be commercially available by the end of the decade.
The OSE-backed spinout has a commercial agreement with Nufarm, an Australian agrichemicals company, to further develop one of its products.
A Moa spokesman said it intended to operate a royalties model similar to that of ARM Holdings, the chip designer, in semiconductors, meaning it will focus on research and development, and license its products to global manufacturers and distributors.
The company is run by chief executive Dr Virginia Corless, who has had extensive experience commercialising sustainable solutions in the energy, water and agriculture sectors.
An update on Moa’s fundraising progress is likely in the first half of next year.
The cost of living crisis has “boosted” the secondhand industry, Sky News has been told, as more than £2bn is spent on pre-loved gifts this Christmas.
Adam Jay, CEO of Vinted Marketplace, said the “trend” in buying pre-loved was “happening anyway” but described rising costs elsewhere as a possible “accelerator”.
“I’m sure the cost of living crisis has been a boost,” he told Sky News, adding that it had supported “the secondhand industry and trading of secondhand”.
“But I do think this trend was happening anyway because of people’s consciousness around overconsumption, around sustainable buying and sustainable consumption.
“I think all of these have I think these are deep trends and I think they’re trends that are here to stay. I really think secondhand can become the first choice ultimately,” he said.
Vinted, an online marketplace for buying and selling pre-owned items, made its first annual net profit last year of €18m (£15m).
The company’s revenue also rose by 61% year on year amid a rise in demand for secondhand goods.
More on Christmas
Related Topics:
The Vinted boss’s comments come as more than £2bn is expected to have been spent buying pre-loved gifts this Christmas.
A report by Vinted and Retail Economics found that secondhand shopping will account for just over 10% of all gift spending.
More than four in five people also said they might spend some of their budget on pre-loved gifts this year.
Vicky Saynor, from Hertfordshire, has bought all of her Christmas gifts secondhand, with a total budget of £150.
“This year I said, that’s it – it’s only secondhand or they’re not getting anything,” she said.
She has spent £20 on each of her children and believes she will have saved possibly over £1,000.
“We have so much stuff in this world we just don’t need to keep buying more of it. One person’s rubbish is another person gold,” she continued, “I love old things – they have a life, they have a history.
“And secondhand clothing – why not? When I was young I would reuse or pass on and that all changed in the 90s and 00s when it really focused on consumerism. But we have to change our ways – we have to change our habits.”
According to the Vinted report, shoppers are also selling their own belongings to fund Christmas gifts, with 43% selling online.
More are planning to increase how much they buy secondhand too with over a third (35%) expected to buy more in the next five years.
In his interview with Sky News, Vinted’s Adam Jay has also highlighted the “confusion” around new reporting rules on tax in the new year.
Regulations from HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) mean that if someone sells above a certain threshold Vinted must ask the seller for their national insurance number and share it with HMRC.
Mr Jay explained, however, that it is “a relatively small proportion of the overall sellers” on the platform and most will “already know” if they have to provide details.
“Vinted is obligated to collect the national insurance number for any seller who sold more than 30 items or more than £1,700 worth of product in the previous 12 months,” he said.
“But here’s the really important thing,” he added, “the obligation to give your national insurance number does not mean there is any obligation to actually pay tax… there is no tax to pay on the private sale of secondhand items.”
He also described the new rules as “a little challenging” for Vinted, as many members already sell at least 30 items.
“Hopefully they’ll [HMRC] rethink whether those thresholds are set in exactly the right way to make sure that ultimately the right people are paying the tax.”
While “supportive” of HMRC decision to change regulations, Mr Jay added: “I wish the thresholds had been set a bit differently. They’re actually set consistently across all OECD countries.
“I would hope even across all of Vinted markets in which we operate, that the tax authorities will consider changing those thresholds or making them more appropriate for business models like Vinted.”