Members of the panel are invited to ask questions
Minutes:
After hearing evidence from the witnesses, the following discussion took place and questions asked:
· John Bryden, Head of Improving Rivers at Thames 21, raised some points related to the misconnection of surface water and sewage pipes. Whilst these are fixed by Thames Water because of pollution investigations there is no record of the fixes. Without a history of fixes a business case for more proactive solutions in relation to these issues can’t be developed.
· A point was noted about The Big Event, a project which Sarah Thornley, Catchment Partnership Development Officer at Thames 21 alongside Bracknell Forest Councillors was involved with, which deals with waterways across the borough. As this project was still in development and required agreement form the Climate Change Board further details were not shared but the Chair of the Environment and Communities panel was invited to the next meeting.
· A question about planning policies was asked, specifically if any of the witnesses in attendance were involved in developing policies that could be implemented at the planning level. In response:
o Cllr Virgo agreed and commented that there was no control over developers right to connect to the sewage system and not enough checks were in place to control or check connections.
o John Bryden, Head of Improving Rivers at Thames 21, responded with the point that development can be positive if implemented correctly and noted that having policies in place were critical to ensuring effectiveness. Retrofitting an area with sustainable drainage systems will help address issues but this needs to be done at scale across the whole urban infrastructure. Therefore, policy and practice around retrofitting and financing in addition to planning and development, was deemed necessary to ensure delivery of healthy neighbourhoods. It was also noted that it would be beneficial if Thames water provided better integration and communication of risks and solutions.
· It was acknowledged that the Cut is one of the most polluted rivers in the Lower Thames Region and this could be made worse by climate change. A question was asked regarding what proportion of pollution was due to treatment work discharges rather than from surface water drainage and how much of this pollution was Thames Water able to influence. Whilst unable to provide quantitative data in response to the question it was acknowledged that most of the pollution would come from treated wastewater. In the Cut there was less dilution from surface water and low flow which contributed to the high concentration of pollutants. Misconnected households were also cited as an issue which was significant in low flow rivers or during drought times.
· A question was asked about whether the volume Thames Water can discharge into the cut could be controlled through licensing or other regulatory means. The response was that as this was an existing licence they would have the right to discharge. If they were to apply for funding to upgrade the treatment works, then this would need to be approved by the Environment Agency and Ofwat so upgrades to enhance treatment processes could be made.
· Dr Michael Hutchins, from the UK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, was asked if there was any funding available or further research planned within Bracknell Forest. In response it was confirmed that the main focus was at a national level and they would be applying for European coordinated funding programmes with a focus on green infrastructure which was relevant for Bracknell. There was also confirmation that as an organisation the UK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology would be working with Thames Water to develop understanding of the problems of pollution.
· In response to a question to Dr Michael Hutchins, from the UK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology regarding sharing research finding it was acknowledged that the research was publicly available, links would be shared.
· Thames 21 were asked to elaborate on a centralised pollution logging system that they were working on. The River Ranger tool was developed to create a data set that would provide historic references of any times that pollution was spotted and logged, this was noted as something that Thames Waters current tool doesn’t provide. Whilst the tool was live there were ongoing conversations around how to successfully streamline it to avoid duplication of efforts. The main aims of the tool were to provide transparency of data and information. The link to the tool was provided.
· A point was made that a question to Thames Water should be asked around how they encourage the public to report issues. A further question was raised regarding whether there were any consultations with affected parties, such as local boroughs, where decisions could be influenced. In response to these questions, it was noted that Thames Water were holding a ‘your water your say’ event on 30 November 2023 which would allow the public to hear about plans and ask questions.
· It was asked whether Thames water can make investment decisions independently within a regulatory framework. In response it was noted that business cases developed required the approval of the Environment Agency and OFWAT. It was noted that OFWAT don’t always consider the environment or take local considerations into account. An example given to illustrate this was the Evenlode Catchment Partnership where Thames Water were prepared to upgrade around fifteen sewage treatment works but the funding was refused by OFWAT. This highlighted an issue where the governance framework was not open and transparent.
A question was asked about citizen science in relation to water quality sampling, specifically costs and time involved and whether it was something that local groups could undertake. It was confirmed that yes this was something community members could undertake and there were a range of citizen science initiatives available. A common programme for monitoring water quality was available through Thames 21 and they would provide in situ tools which gave instant measurement results. They also ran river fly training courses to monitor river health and this had recently taken place in the Bracknell Forest Council area.