Water firms have been accused of an “environmental cover up” as fresh figures revealed one in seven sewage monitors – meant to record spills – were faulty.
This rose to a third of devices for embattled Thames Water, which is facing the risk of emergency nationalisation as it wrestles with a deepening funding crisis.
The number of monitors not working properly has fuelled concerns the scale of the sewage scandal is far bigger than previously thought, further ramping up pressure on the utility firms and government.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:35
Why is sewage flooding streets?
It comes after separate figures showed dumping of raw sewage into England’s rivers and seas was the worst on record last year.
Discharges of untreated effluent by water companies doubled from 1.8 million hours in 2022 to 3.6 million in 2023, according to Environment Agency data.
The number of individual spills also soared by 54% – from 301,000 incidents in 2022 to 464,000 in 2023, which was blamed in part on the wet weather.
Campaigners argue the pumping of sewage into waterways is the symptom of chronic underinvestment by water companies.
In the face of public anger at widespread pollution, firms recently fast-tracked £180m of investment.
They also plan to invest £10bn by the end of this decade, which they say would lead to 150,000 fewer spills a year.
Advertisement
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:44
Gove: Thames Water leadership a ‘disgrace’
But analysis by the Liberal Democrats found that 15% of all sewage monitors were faulty, prompting the party to demand a national environmental emergency to be declared.
The number and length of sewage dumps from storm overflows, which act as safety valves during heavy rain to stop sewage from backing up into people’s homes, is measured by event duration monitors (EDMs).
However, Lib Dem research has revealed water companies have installed monitors which do not work at least 90% of the time, or have not even installed devices at all.
Across England, there are 2,221 monitors not operating properly.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
The water company with the worst record on faulty sewage monitors was Thames Water, with 33% of its equipment not functioning as it should, according to the Lib Dem research.
The next highest were Southern Water and Yorkshire Water, which both recorded 18.5% of their monitors as faulty.
Liberal Democrat environment spokesperson Tim Farron said: “Water companies could be complicit in an environmental cover up. Why on earth would a firm install these monitors if they don’t even work?
“The scale of the sewage scandal could be even larger than originally feared and Conservative ministers are not interested in understanding the true extent of the damage our rivers and beaches are being put through.
“They have let water companies off the hook at every turn and are now letting them get away with not even monitoring the amount of filthy sewage that is being dumped.”
He added: “This scandal requires a national environmental emergency to be declared and for this Conservative government to start treating this issue with the focus that it needs.
“Their inaction has failed our environment and failed communities across the country.”
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
A spokesperson for industry body Water UK said: “Water companies are committed to robust monitoring of storm overflows across England with all now monitored – the most comprehensive and extensive monitoring system in the world.
“Due in part to their operating outdoors and in all weather conditions, some monitors will occasionally be temporarily out of action while maintenance is under way.
“This has improved, and the regulator has taken tough new powers to ensure the highest standards.
“We are seeking regulatory approval to invest over £10bn over the next five years – three times the current rate – to increase the capacity of our sewers and remove more than 150,000 annual sewage spills by the end of the decade.”
The issue has become a political battleground, with Labour pledging to ban bonuses for water company bosses and the Greens wanting to renationalise the firms.
While Michael Gove, the former environment secretary-turned-housing secretary, said the leadership of Thames Water was a “disgrace” this week and insisted those responsible for failings must “carry the can”.
The idea of a wealth tax has raised its head – yet again – as the government attempts to balance its books.
Downing Street refused to rule out a wealth tax after former Labour leader Lord Kinnock told Sky News he thinks the government should introduce one.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:19
Lord Kinnock calls for ‘wealth tax’
Sir Keir Starmer’s spokesman said: “The prime minister has repeatedly said those with the broadest shoulders should carry the largest burden.”
While there has never been a wealth tax in the UK, the notion was raised under Rishi Sunak after the COVID years – and rejected – and both Harold Wilson’s and James Callaghan’s Labour governments in the 1970s seriously considered implementing one.
Sky News looks at what a wealth tax is, how it could work in the UK, and which countries already have one.
Image: Will Chancellor Rachel Reeves and Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer impose a wealth tax? Pic: PA
What is a wealth tax?
A wealth tax is aimed at reducing economic inequality to redistribute wealth and to raise revenue.
It is a direct levy on all, or most of, an individual’s, household’s or business’s total net wealth, rather than their income.
The tax typically includes the total market value of assets, including savings, investments, property and other forms of wealth – minus a person’s debts.
Unlike capital gains tax, which is paid when an asset is sold at a profit, a wealth tax is normally an annual charge based on the value of assets owned, even if they are not sold.
A one-off wealth tax, often used after major crises, could also be an option to raise a substantial amount of revenue in one go.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:51
Wealth tax would be a ‘mistake’
How could it work in the UK?
Advocates of a UK wealth tax, including Lord Kinnock, have proposed an annual 2% tax on wealth above £10m.
Wealth tax campaign group Tax Justice UK has calculated this would affect about 20,000 people – fewer than 0.04% of the population – and raise £24bn a year.
Because of how few people would pay it, Tax Justice says that would make it easy for HMRC to collect the tax.
The group proposes people self-declare asset values, backed up by a compliance team at HMRC who could have a register of assets.
Which countries have or have had a wealth tax?
In 1990, 12 OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries had a net wealth tax, but just four have one now: Colombia, Norway, Spain and Switzerland.
France and Italy levy wealth taxes on selected assets.
Colombia
Since 2023, residents in the South American country are subject to tax on their worldwide wealth, but can exclude the value of their household up to 509m pesos (£92,500).
The tax is progressive, ranging from a 0.5% rate to 1.5% for the most wealthy until next year, then 1% for the wealthiest from 2027.
Image: Bogota in Colombia, which has a wealth tax
Norway
There is a 0.525% municipal wealth tax for individuals with net wealth exceeding 1.7m kroner (about £125,000) or 3.52m kroner (£256,000) for spouses.
Norway also has a state wealth tax of 0.475% based on assets exceeding a net capital tax basis of 1.7m kroner (£125,000) or 3.52m kroner (£256,000) for spouses, and 0.575% for net wealth in excess of 20.7m kroner (£1.5m).
Image: Norway has both a municipal and state wealth tax. Pic: Reuters
The maximum combined wealth tax rate is 1.1%.
The Norwegian Labour coalition government also increased dividend tax to 20% in 2023, and with the wealth tax, it prompted about 80 affluent business owners, with an estimated net worth of £40bn, to leave Norway.
Spain
Residents in Spain have to pay a progressive wealth tax on worldwide assets, with a €700,000 (£600,000) tax free allowance per person in most areas and homes up to €300,000 (£250,000) tax exempt.
Image: Madrid in Spain. More than 12,000 multimillionaires have left the country since a wealth tax was increased in 2022. Pic: Reuters
The progressive rate goes from 0.2% for taxable income for assets of €167,129 (£144,000) up to 3.5% for taxable income of €10.6m (£9.146m) and above.
It has been reported that more than 12,000 multimillionaires have left Spain since the government introduced the higher levy at the end of 2022.
Switzerland
All of the country’s cantons (districts) have a net wealth tax based on a person’s taxable net worth – different to total net worth.
Image: Zurich is Switzerland’s wealthiest city, and has its own wealth tax, as do other Swiss cantons. Pic: Reuters
It takes into account the balance of an individual’s worldwide gross assets, including bank account balances, bonds, shares, life insurances, cars, boats, properties, paintings, jewellery – minus debts.
Switzerland also works on a progressive rate, ranging from 0.3% to 0.5%, with a relatively low starting point at which people are taxed on their wealth, such as 50,000 CHF (£46,200) in several cantons.
The Chinese owner of British Steel has held fresh talks with government officials in a bid to break the impasse over ministers’ determination not to compensate it for seizing control of the company.
Sky News has learnt that executives from Jingye Group met senior civil servants from the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) late last week to discuss ways to resolve the standoff.
Whitehall sources said the talks had been cordial, but that no meaningful progress had been made towards a resolution.
Jingye wants the government to agree to pay it hundreds of millions of pounds for taking control of British Steel in April – a move triggered by the Chinese group’s preparations for the permanent closure of its blast furnaces in Scunthorpe.
Such a move would have cost thousands of jobs and ended Britain’s centuries-old ability to produce virgin steel.
Jingye had been in talks for months to seek £1bn in state aid to facilitate the Scunthorpe plant’s transition to greener steelmaking, but was offered just half that sum by ministers.
More on British Steel
Related Topics:
British Steel has not yet been formally nationalised, although that remains a probable outcome.
Jonathan Reynolds, the business secretary, has previously dismissed the idea of compensating Jingye, saying British Steel’s equity was essentially worthless.
Last month, he met his Chinese counterpart, where the issue of British Steel was discussed between the two governments in person for the first time.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:31
Inside the UK’s last blast furnaces
Jingye has hired the leading City law firm Linklaters to explore the recovery of hundreds of millions of pounds it invested in the Scunthorpe-based company before the government seized control of it.
News of last week’s meeting comes as British steelmakers face an anxious wait to learn whether their exports to the US face swingeing tariffs as part of US President Donald Trump’s trade war.
Sky News’s economics and data editor, Ed Conway, revealed this week that the UK would miss a White House-imposed deadline to agree a trade deal on steel and aluminium this week.
Jingye declined to comment, while a spokesman for the Department for Business and Trade said: “We acted quickly to ensure the continued operations of the blast furnaces but recognise that securing British Steel’s long-term future requires private sector investment.
“We have not nationalised British Steel and are working closely with Jingye on options for the future, and we will continue work on determining the best long-term sustainable future for the site.”