Water, water everywhere and not a drop to drink. Or to wash in. Or to flush the loo.
Well, well, well – looks like our water bills are going to float down the same river as our energy bills judging by the recent slew of tabloid headlines relating to price increases by water companies. The Government’s latest idea is to introduce surge pricing for water consumption next time we have a drought. Use more, be charged more when supply is scarce is their thinking.
No mention of setting targets for new reservoirs to be built or incentives for greater rainwater capture by farmers, the public or anyone else using water. Nope. Even with my dodgy eyesight, I saw ZERO mention of those things. Doing something that might actually fix the underlying problem thrown out with the bathwater (ha ha), just more punitive charging of the masses.
It also seems that we are now going to be forced to pay for stuff that is not even directly related to our own personal water consumption. But every time new houses get built or data centres come online then kerrching! Those costs will be sneakily added onto our bills thanks to the efforts of OFWAT, the water regulator. Cheers OFTWAT. Thanks a bunch mate!
As I and most of the country have said until we’re blue in the face - water companies have been allowed to get away with blue murder since Thatcher allowed them to be sold off to the highest bidder, rinsing both the public purse after nationalisation and our wallets ever since. Now it looks like we’re expected to fund all those improvements to infrastructure that should have been paid for decades ago and some.
Mad cow I may be but a water squanderer I am not. Every drop of the precious stuff in this house is never wasted. And with 3 water butts already in the garden, I’m re-visiting all my outside spaces to see where I might cram in a few more.
This recent article on the Beeb just takes the biscuit. Here’s the intro paragraph to give you a flavour of what’s heading your way:
Water companies have been given the green light to increase bills for customers by an extra £3.4bn in coming years to meet increased pressures on infrastructure and the environment.
Nearly a third of the extra funding provisionally approved for 13 water companies in England and Wales is earmarked for making sure water services are maintained.
Some of the rest will be used to meet rising demand from housebuilding and data centres and to address pollutants known as "forever chemicals".
When I read stuff like this, my brain does not simply accept it with an ‘oh, ay’ then go back to whatever innocuous thing I was doing beforehand. If only! Instead, I find myself playing devil’s advocate, picking apart each statement like a vulture picks a zebra bone cleaner than a new pin.
So, looking at these journalistic statements then what I want to know is this – if only a third of the extra funding is for making sure water services are maintained then what’s going to happen to the other two thirds of the dosh? Two thirds of an extra £3.4 billion comes to just over £2 billion quid. That’s a lotta wonga to be unaccounted for.
Why is some of the rest being used to meet demand from housebuilding and data centres? Presumably, that means part of the £2 billion is going to be spent on these areas. Surely, these industries both of which trouser a handsome profit from their activities should be paying their own water bills and not expecting the public to do so. I didn’t ask for extra houses to be built and I don’t remember signing up for data centres either.
Why am I now expected to find money I don’t really have to bankroll developers and tech companies so they have enough water to make handsome profits whilst I have to wash in a bucket and watch my garden frazzle as the UK burns? There’s something not quite right here.
Lastly ‘forever chemicals’ – what exactly are these? According to the Government’s own blog these things also known as PFAS (per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances) are a family of thousands of man-made chemicals. They're brilliant at resisting heat, water and oil - which is why manufacturers have used them.
And which is why manufacturers who use them should pay to mitigate the effects of these unwanted and potentially dangerous toxins polluting our environment out of their profits. Having purchased an item containing PFAS, it should not be down to every water user in the land to pay again for the consequences of their environmental impact. The answer is to stop producing or using items that contain PFAS, find alternatives to these chemicals or to impose a PFAS levy on manufacturers.
The Government has no money but clearly thinks we all have far too much of the stuff even after taxes and this cost-of-living squeeze. To avoid any form of direct taxation increases then no doubt it’s come up with the same cunning plan to include ‘green/environmental levies’ in water bills in the same way it does for energy bills. Next thing you know, they’ll be bumping up our broadband bills to pay for the environmental costs of all those invisible radio-waves frying our brains.
Unfortunately for us, whilst we may be able to cut down on gas and electricity or phone use, it is much harder to cut back on water. Even if we didn’t wash our cars or water gardens, there are basic needs such as drinking, cooking and using the loo that require water. Cutting back on those activities might lead to longer term health or hygiene issues. I am certainly not going to wait for multiple poops to accumulate in the pan before flushing. Eeeeugh! Can you imagine anything more gross?
Come on Burnham. You promised us action and change yet you’re going down the same ‘fleece ‘em’ route as every other prime minister before you.
Either privatise these water buggers or harness the building capability of the armed forces to quickly build pipelines connecting rainy Scotland to UK water systems or better still, ask Rayner to fast-track all applications to build reservoirs. Use your power on the basis of a national water security strategy to quash the Nimbys and increase rainwater capture – don’t just keep bleeding all of us dry!
.JPG)
