Challenge to Commission on Thames pollution

Question Ludford:

Will the Commission now reach a speedy decision on infringement proceedings against the UK for breach of the Urban Waste Water Directive due to overflows of raw sewage into the River Thames? Is it aware that the UK regulator the Environment Agency 'believes that most of the combined sewer overflows do not meet the requirements of the UWWTD'? What view does the Commission take of the fact that the UK Department for Environment (DEFRA) refuses to release the legal advice given to the Thames Tideway Strategic Study which brings together the various agencies? Will the Commission help London avoid the embarrassment that this pollution scandal if not resolved will cause to the 2012 Olympics both to water sports and because the proposed athletes' village will overlook the overflow at Abbey Mills with its associated smells and unsightly mess

Answer Dimas:

Stavros Dimas, Member of the Commission. - The Commission is aware of the concerns raised by the honourable Member with regard to sewer overflows into the River Thames. A number of complaints were registered following events in August 2004, which saw large quantities of untreated raw sewage entering the Thames.

The Commission has drawn the attention of the United Kingdom authorities to these concerns in a letter of formal notice issued under Article 226 of the European Community Treaty, which was sent in March 2005.

The letter of formal notice stressed the need for Member States to ensure the adequacy of their collecting and treatment systems under the Council Directive concerning urban waste water treatment. A reply has been received from the United Kingdom, and this is currently being assessed. That assessment is being carried out together with that of cases raising similar concerns about excessive storm water overflows in other parts of the United Kingdom. If I remember correctly, two are in England and one is in Scotland.

The Commission hopes to be in a position to decide what steps to take next in this matter before the end of the year.

The Commission is unable to comment on the legal advice given by the UK Department for Environment referred to by the honourable Member, as it was not aware that such advice existed or that access to it had been refused.

Supplementary question Ludford:

Sarah Ludford (ALDE). - The last comment was very interesting and one that I should like to follow up. The Environment Agency, which is the UK regulator, believes that there is a breach of the directive. Could I just say to the Commissioner that it is not just a matter of storm overflows: it does not need unusually heavy rainfall to have these outflows; they happen on average once a week. Only one of the 57 outflows is screened and so I have to leave to your imagination the sewage solids that go into the river.

I am particularly worried about the run-up to the 2012 Olympics. For water sports and for the image of London, this is a terrible situation, and the athletes' village will overlook one of these overflows. I am amazed that the UK Government, as well as the Mayor of London, is content to put up with that situation.

Answer Dimas:

Stavros Dimas, Member of the Commission. - I shall do whatever I can within my remit, which is to see that the requirements of the directive are met. Of course, I shall work with you in order to help London, as you stressed in your question, avoid the embarrassment that this pollution from overflows of raw sewage would cause to the 2012 Olympics. It is interesting to know that, if the problem is not resolved by then, the site of the proposed athletes' village will overlook the overflow at Abbey Mills, with its associated smells and unsightly mess.

It cannot be ruled out that athletes may be allowed to practise on the Thames or that events may take place on the river itself. The Commission is unable to take a position on the arrangements being made in London for the 2012 Olympics. I must repeat that our only involvement is to ensure that the requirements of the directive concerning urban waste water treatment are met.

You are right to say that these spills occurred not only during the very heavy rainfall in August 2004. According to an Environment Agency press release, these spills occur about 50 to 60 times a year. The Environment Agency, which is an adviser to the UK Government, has also reached the conclusion that the system of collection and treatment is inadequate. There were some suggestions on how to solve this problem. One was an interceptor tunnel underneath the river Thames, which would be about 20 miles long and would take about ten years to construct.

The Directive on Urban Waste Water Treatment is a results-based directive and so it is not my business to suggest what method the British Government should choose to solve the problem. That is a matter for the Government. But there is a problem and we have therefore started infringement proceedings against the United Kingdom. In December we will see whether we should proceed with the reasoned opinion in order to persuade the United Kingdom authorities to take the appropriate measures to carry out the infrastructure works necessary in order to treat the water in an acceptable way.

My final point is that, if untreated sewage is discharged into the river, then the Thames estuary, which is an important wetland, will be endangered.