Steve Reed, the environment secretary in the United Kingdom, is facing backlash from protestors after failing to adequately address river pollution by privatized water companies.
What's happening?
According to the Guardian, Reed wrote a letter to activists from 130 campaign groups ahead of the March for Clean Water protest in London earlier in November. In the letter, Reed said he "shared their anger" about high concentrations of sewage from storm overflows and livestock farms in nearby lakes, rivers, and seas, and was committed to tackling problems within the water industry.
Campaigners argued that water privatization was the major reason behind the excess pollution and called for reforms — specifically, the move to publicly owned water companies.
Since the Labour Party returned to power, Reed announced that a public water system was out of the question. However, many have accused him of using a biased analysis by water companies to come to that conclusion. In Reed's letter, he said he'd organized an independent commission and proposed a special water bill to help clean up the industry.
However, campaigners said that doesn't address the root of the problem since it would still result in citizens paying higher water bills to corrupt water companies. In fact, Becky Malby from Ilkley Clean River Group told the Guardian that the Environment Agency is investigating several companies for alleged illegal sewage disposal.
Matt Staniek, the founder of the environmental nonprofit Save Windermere, told the Guardian: "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. They are proposing measures that fail to address the core issue — that privatisation has failed."
Why is this important?
Currently, ownership of water companies in the UK is mostly in the hands of foreign investment, private equity, and pension funds, as the Guardian explained. If these private companies are allowed to continue raking in record profits without any environmental regulations holding them accountable, it will drive up bills for citizens and cause more harm to the area's rivers.
"But there is massive public support to end the scandal that privatisation has brought," Ash Smith of the volunteer group Windrush Against Sewage Pollution told the Guardian. "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."
What's being done about it?
According to a spokesperson from the Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs, the new water bill moving through Parliament would strengthen regulations to hold companies legally responsible for polluting waterways. In addition, water regulators could withhold bonuses from water industry executives if they fail to meet environmental standards.
🗣️ Should the government be allowed to restrict how much water we use?
🔘 Definitely 💯
🔘 Only during major droughts 🏜️
🔘 No way 🙅
🔘 I'm not sure 🤷
🗳️ Click your choice to see results and speak your mind
Lawmakers in the European Union are taking steps to remove pollutants from urban wastewater by drafting a deal requiring companies to cover 80% of cleanup costs. In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency finalized a rule protecting thousands of smaller waterways from toxic pollution in the United States.
Learning more about critical climate issues such as water pollution and voting for pro-climate candidates are some of the best ways to advocate for a cleaner planet.
Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Cool Picks
