Forum Topic

A contributor to the Putney forum has alerted me to the House of Lords question on how well the expanded Mogden has been coping (not).The wrong kind of rain ?It doesn't give one confidence that the money to go on the Tideway Tunnel will be well spent (and I've never heard of the river at Isleworth being referred to as the Estuary before).http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201314/ldhansrd/text/140514w0002.htm#wa_st_198" Lord Berkeley :To ask Her Majesty’s Government for how many spills a year the Environment Agency has licensed the upgraded Mogden sewage works; and how many were achieved in the first year of operation.[HL6961]The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord De Mauley) (Con): Mogden Sewage Treatment Works has an Environmental Permit issued by the Environment Agency to discharge treated and storm effluent to the Thames Estuary at Isleworth. The discharge of storm effluent is permissible only when the capacity of onsite facilities for treatment and containment are exceeded. This includes a 77,000m³ storm tank.The permit does not specify a number of spills per year. It requires the works to provide secondary treatment for a specific flow rate of incoming sewage.The current version of the permit came into effect on 31 March 2013. During the subsequent 12 months, Thames Water reported 54 occasions when the works discharged storm sewage to the Thames. Thirty-four of these were during the wet weather in January and February."

Tim Henderson ● 4093d

Out of us, yes.Needless to say if LBH can do what it has signally failed to do over many years and actually persuade Thames Water that it has a duty of care to its neighbours then that is to be applauded.  However, as they say on the Guinness adverts things aren't always how they seem.The simple fact is that the only meaningful action taken against Thames Water over Mogden has come from the residents in the form of the successful High Court claim through the Modgen Residents' Action Group (MRAG) which resulted in thousands of local people receiving compensation.  Their bid for an injunction against Thames Water was frustrated by the London Borough of Hounslow when it granted planning permission to Thames to increase capacity at the site, an act supported by both Labour and Conservative councillors.The MRAG action was made possible through its painstaking work in gathering and logging complaints, publishing a contact address which local people could use to build up a profile of the plant's activities over a long period of time.The recent propaganda output by the local authority, including Labour Party leaflets circulated in Isleworth, has assiduously avoided any mention of MRAG and its long-standing campaign, instead urging complainants to contact only the hitherto useless LBH complaints line.  It is clear the local authority believes that, with its superior resources, it will in time be able to freeze out the residents' campaign and to replace it with its own controlled campaign which, if the evidence of the past is anything to go by, will lead complainants precisely nowhere.The question one must ask is why the London Borough of Hounslow would wish to undermine a successful residents' initiative and whose interests it doing so will ultimately serve.The clue, if one is needed, lies in the co-operation that Hounslow is evidently receiving from the famously unco-operative management at Thames Water.

Phil Andrews ● 4257d

It is pleasing to note in the Guardian that the historically toothless OFWAT has finally found its teeth and has again this week rejected Thames Water's request to raise water bills by 8%."Thames Water's request to raise customers' bills by 8% in 2014 has been rejected by the regulator Ofwat.The regulator had already suggested it would block the rise, but gave Thames Water time to submit new evidence to back its case. Despite this it today confirmed it would not allow the rise. Its chief regulation officer, Sonia Brown, said: "We said we would challenge Thames' application in the interests of customers. We did just that and on the evidence provided we are not convinced an extra bill increase is justified." The regulator said it was unconvinced by the company's calculations on bad debts, slashing Thames Water's assessment of £75 million of extra costs due to "additional deprivation" to just £13 million.Ofwat's chief regulation officer Sonia Brown said: "We have looked at the details and do not believe the current evidence justifies an increase in bills." Thames  said the biggest item was £273 million spent acquiring land for the Thames Tideway Tunnel, a major new sewer development.” Ofwat's decision means the maximum that Thames can add to customers' bills for 2014-15 is 1.4% above inflation, as set in a 2009 price review.Thames Water had asked for this limit to be increased, arguing that it had experienced changes in costs since the price review. The terms of its licence state that it can do this where costs can be shown to have increased by an amount equal to more than 10% of appointed business turnover, although this contention was rejected by the regulator."I hope that this ruling will finally convince the Hounslow Conservative Group and our MP that it is foolish to continually back this Company and cow-tow to its every whim. It seems clear to me that this Company just cannot be trusted to present accurate data. I hope too that Labour's PPC, Ruth Cadbury, can finally accept that the expansion of Mogden which was rushed through without proper consultation, so that Thames did not have to pay massive fines under the EU Directive, was a big mistake for which residents of Hounslow & Richmond Boroughs are paying dearly while the fat cats at Thames walk away with 'fat cat' bonuses.Residents expect their MP to show some strong  leadership on Environmental issues on not sit on the fence whilst others pollute. The Environmental Protection Act is there for the Local Authority to enforce and it is high time our Local Authority was made to enforce it.

Steve Taylor ● 4289d

“I have always been puzzled why the local Conservatives have always been so defensive of Thames WaterIs there a link or relationship somewhere we are unaware of perhaps with shares or pension schemes?”Well if there is they should start looking at other pension pots because even the historically toothless regulator is not happy with the manner in which Thames conducts its business and has rejected Thames Water’s price increase to be inflicted upon customers.“Thames Water applied in August for a one-off price increase next year that would raise average bills by 8% from £354, blaming customers struggling to pay their bills and the cost of a super sewer under London. But in a draft ruling the regulator said it was unconvinced by the company's calculations on bad debts, slashing Thames Water's assessment of £75 million of extra costs due to "additional deprivation" to just £13 million. Ofwat's chief regulation officer Sonia Brown said: "We have looked at the details and do not believe the current evidence justifies an increase in bills." Thames  said the biggest item was £273 million spent acquiring land for the Thames Tideway Tunnel, a major new sewer development.” And what a surprise that Brad Fisher and his cronies on the Scrutiny panel heard from Thames Water last week that the expansion was not sufficient  do the job when MRAG’s environmental scientist and expert witness explained to the Hounslow SDC in detail  that expansion of the site,  as per the planning application,  was not an option because it  had not factored in correctly the population growth forecasts. The cheapest method of ensuring no sewage overflow diverted to the river was to link the Super Sewer directly to Mogden instead of starting it in Chiswick or Barnes..This is exactly why residents and their legal team wanted the planning application to be passed to the Secretary of State at the time, Hilary Benn. It was blatantly obvious that the Director of Environment and the Asst Director at Hounslow  at the time were presented with issues far  too complex and beyond their pay grades. This coupled with the fact that the Councillors on the SDC  were clueless.So now they have wasted £142million to expand Mogden – it won’t be  able to cope in a few years but they are crying to Ofwat for more money from stakeholders.And in the meantime the Tories have allowed Thames Water to create the biggest cesspool in Europe in the middle of our densely populated Borough.

Steve Taylor ● 4309d

I find it astounding, if not quite disgusting, that Cllr Brad Fisher, on behalf of the Conservative Group, undermines, if not attacks, the victims of the ill-fated expansion of the site in a quite pathetic and futile attempt to gain political points. And if the Chronicle report is correct,  that he told Thames Water and the Scrutiny panel that the odour has reduced since the expansion, he is simply out of touch with what is going on in Hounslow South or incompetent or dishonest. Not only did the Chronicle poll demonstrate that the public voted overwhelmingly that odour has increased since the expansion, Cllr Brad Fisher is well aware from the weekly site inspections and the daily odour monitor readings that odour has increased substantially since the expansion completed. The expansion which was of course approved by his Group whilst in control of the Council. Perhaps Cllr Fisher has trouble reading or understanding these graphs and H2S data? I can understand that many Councillors would find it difficult to understand or analyse this data so to make it very simple for them we provided them all (Cllr Fisher included) with a snapshot of odour data recorded during just one week when a resident complained that a wedding reception in Twickenham  was ruined due to the stench of raw sewage.We asked Cllrs to demand of  Thames Water to explain the extremely high levels of odour recorded at Mogden on the day of the wedding as well as the days prior to the wedding and after. You may not be aware but the maximum peak permitted before Thames Water is legally bound to trigger an alert to the Council is 0.015ppm H2S. On the days in question the odour readings were on occasions more than 3 times the legal limit!27/8  0.05 +++28/8  0.0229/8  0.04230/8 0.02631/8  0.0221/9    0.02Cllr Fisher was aware of all this correspondence yet he chose to do nothing! How dare he now tell the chronicle that complaints are not serious.A few months ago I would have suggested that residents hold the Conservative Group accountable for the environmental mess they left in this Borough after just one term in office. Having now read Cllr Fisher's unsubstantiated  outburst I believe it is futile to even attempt to hold these people accountable as they simply have no shame and they don't care about the misery they have inflicted upon residents. They were useless in office and even more useless in opposition. They don't count!

Steve Taylor ● 4310d