Take action
Take action

Campaigns

Latest

View All

Toxic Sludge

View campaign

Up Your Standards

View campaign

Tag: Influencing Policy

River Action granted permission to proceed with legal challenge against Ofwat 

Posted on by Molly Allen
Download PDF

Ofwat has forced customers to pay twice for water industry failures – and we are calling for urgent regulatory reform

We are taking water regulator Ofwat to a full court hearing, to challenge the approach Ofwat took when it set the price that water companies like United Utilities can charge their customers.

Ofwat’s approach was unlawful and, as a result of regulatory failings, the financial burden of water industry infrastructure neglect has been pushed onto customers – rather than those responsible.

The case is proceeding amid intensified calls for an overhaul of Ofwat, with growing scrutiny from the Independent Water Commission, led by Sir Jon Cunliffe, into whether the regulator is fit for purpose. We are calling for a reform of the regulator and, in particular, for Ofwat to stop water companies passing the costs of failures on to the public.

Water bill hikes – with no guarantees for the future

At the heart of the case is Ofwat’s 2024 Price Review (PR24), which approved above-inflation water bill increases, including an average annual rise of £123 per household, without guaranteeing the money will be spent on new infrastructure rather than plugging the gaps left by decades of underinvestment.

The legal challenge follows investigations by campaigners Matt Staniek and Windrush Against Sewage Pollution (WASP), which exposed chronic sewage pollution in the Lake Windermere area and regulatory failings around PR24.

While the claim focuses on the PR24 determination for United Utilities in relation to water works in and around Lake Windermere, River Action thinks it exposes fundamental failures in Ofwat’s approach – with national implications.

Lake Windmere, Algea blooms | Matt Staniek ©

Customers are being forced to pay twice

The regulator’s decision allows water companies, such as United Utilities, to charge customers twice: first for water bills that should have covered infrastructure maintenance and then again through new hikes aimed at fixing the same problems.

In August 2024, United Utilities was granted “enhanced funding” to upgrade sewage treatment works around Windermere. This approval came despite evidence submitted to Ofwat showing over 6,000 hours of raw sewage discharges in the lake in a single year. Ofwat ignored this data in favour of hydraulic simulation modelling, which fails to reflect on-the-ground conditions.

Legal grounds: flawed modelling, weak enforcement

Permission has been granted for all of our three grounds. Represented by law firm Leigh Day, we will argue that:

  • Ground 1: Ofwat approach to its own “not paying twice” policy was unlawful because it relied on theoretical hydraulic simulation modelling instead of the reality on the ground as seen in evidence provided to Ofwat.
  • Ground 2: Ofwat lacks a meaningful clawback mechanism if water companies misuse funds.
  • Ground 3: Ofwat failed to conduct legally adequate investigations into whether its approach is adequate.

A broken system that needs reform

River Action’s Head of Legal Emma Dearnaley said,

Ricardo Gama, partner at Leigh Day, added:

Spending Review: Boost for farmers, blow for regulators

Posted on by Molly Allen
Download PDF

Spending Review: Good news for farm payments – but not for regulation as DEFRA budget reduced

We welcome the government’s commitment to significantly increase funding for Environmental Land Management Schemes (ELMS) – with the budget set to rise by 150% from £800 million in 2023/24 to £2 billion by 2028/29. This substantial investment offers a vital opportunity to support farmers in restoring nature, improving soil health, and reducing agricultural pollution in our rivers and streams. But is it enough?

In a difficult fiscal period, DEFRA needs all the support it can get to increase funding for the transition to nature-friendly farming. However, the Spending Review raises serious concerns about the Government’s ability to protect river health. DEFRA’s overall budget has been reduced by 2.3% in real terms – continuing over a decade-long decline in funding. As a result, it remains under-resourced to enforce environmental laws at scale, limiting regulators’ ability to hold polluters, including water companies, to account.

Water bill payers across the country expect their water companies to be held responsible for pollution – not rewarded for failure. Weakening the watchdogs that should be protecting the UK’s rivers and water supply is unwanted by the public.

Clean water in jeopardy: DEFRA cuts would sink Labour’s rivers, seas and lakes commitments

Posted on by Molly Allen
Download PDF

Ahead of the Government’s Spending Review, many of the UK’s most respected environmental organisations and campaigners, including the RSPB, GMB Union, The Wildlife Trusts, Good Law Project, Keep Britain Tidy, Surfers Against Sewage, WWF-UK, Wildlife and Countryside Link, British Rowing, The Rivers Trust, Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall, Chris Packham, Robert Plant, Jim Murray, Liz Bonnin, Robert Macfarlane, and Imogen Grant, have joined forces demanding the Government increase funding to DEFRA and fully resource the regulators tasked with cleaning up Britain’s rivers, lakes, and seas.

In a letter sent to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and Chancellor Rachel Reeves, the group, coordinated by River Action and in the wake of the March for Clean Water in November 2024, warns that Labour’s credibility on environmental protection is on the line. The letter follows widespread concern that any cuts to DEFRA’s budget in the Spending Review will severely undermine the Government’s ability to deliver on its clean water promises, made central to last summer’s general election campaign.

While the group acknowledges the introduction of the Water Special Measures Bill and the establishment of the Independent Water Commission led by Sir Jon Cunliffe, whose interim report was published on Tuesday this week, it stresses that without urgent and sufficient funding, these efforts risk being little more than symbolic.

The signatory organisations – including some of the UK’s largest environmental charities – represent millions of people across the country. Among them are groups that mobilised the 15,000-strong March for Clean Water in November 2024 – the largest-ever peaceful protest for clean water in British history.

 Key Facts:

  • Only 14% of rivers in England meet good ecological status.
  • In 2024, 3.6 million hours of untreated sewage was discharged into waterways across England and Wales.
  • Farm inspections remain so infrequent that each farm can expect to be checked once every 25 years.
  • Almost 50% of farms inspected in the last two years were non-compliant with environmental rules – but only 22% faced any form of enforcement.
  • The Environment Agency’s funding has been cut by 50% over the last decade, hollowing out its ability to monitor and prosecute polluters.
  • Water companies have racked up £64.4 billion in debt since privatisation and continue to pay out dividends while infrastructure fails.

The Coalition’s Core Asks:

  1. Fund the regulators – Restore and increase budgets for DEFRA, the Environment Agency, Ofwat and Natural England so they can enforce environmental law and hold polluters to account.
  2. Support nature-friendly farming – Expand and protect funding for the Environmental Land Management Schemes (ELMS) and Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) to enable farmers to play their part in river recovery.

Voices from Across the UK:

Growth for who?: The true cost of water pollution

Posted on by Molly Allen
Download PDF
By Henry Shepherd, Communities Coordinator, River Action

“Economic growth is the number one mission of this government” says Rachel Reeves.

Yet, as rivers fill with sewage and budgets for environmental protection are slashed, many small businesses and communities that rely on clean water are being left behind – or worse, shut down.

Across the UK, water pollution is no longer just an environmental and public health issue – it’s an economic one. Behind every brown plume, fish kill, or no-swim warning, there’s a person whose livelihood is taking a hit.

These aren’t abstract numbers or distant disasters, these are real people – watersports instructors, anglers, B&B hosts, event workers – who depend on rivers being clean, safe, and healthy. However, as the toxic cocktail of agricultural runoff, raw sewage, and chemicals continues to flood our waterways, and environmental oversight is gutted, many are finding themselves on the losing end of the government’s “growth” agenda.

“I’ve been shut down and unable to sell my product due to sewage spills upstream… I’m now effectively without a source of income”

Calvin, watercress farmer from Hampshire

The new Labour government has made no secret of its intention to turbocharge economic growth. This growth is achieved via cutting environmental budgets, and stripping regulators of the resources they need to hold polluters accountable. Those who end up winning are corporate shareholders – and the losers are small, local businesses that are being slowly drowned in polluted waterways. This has knock-on effects across entire local economies – the pint in the pub, the B&B, and the stop at the shop after your fishing trip hit local communities in ways we can’t always measure.

“Once a thriving business, I now haven’t taken on a customer in 12 months.”

Angela Jones, watersports business owner on the River Wye

It’s a bitter irony: the very communities that should be benefiting from Labour’s pursuit of ‘growth’ are being stifled by the fallout of short-term thinking and insufficient regulation. River-dependent businesses losing trade due to smell and stigma – cancelled sports events  and family holidays – river users unable to work after getting sick. Entire local economies are being dragged down by the stink of polluted rivers.

This is a symptom of a system that values profit margins over public health, investor returns over infrastructure, and “growth” over anything remotely sustainable. That’s why we’ve written to the Prime Minister and the Chancellor to urge them to end the era of cuts to Defra.

“We rely on membership subs for our Rowing club to survive … .if you don’t want to get sick, why would you pay to row on a nasty river?”

Tom, Club Captain at Durham University Rowing Club

Until water is protected like the public asset it is – not a dumping ground or a corporate cash cow – these stories will keep piling up. And so will the pollution. As the government finalises its spending plans on 11 June, we’re forced to ask:

Growth for who?

Interim Water Review falls short of real reform

Posted on by Molly Allen
Download PDF

River Action, alongside Surfers Against Sewage have responded to the publication of the Independent Water Commission’s interim report, welcoming signs that long-standing failures are finally being recognised and the regulators need a major overhaul – but warning that the report stops well short of real reform.

Despite a 15,000-strong March for Clean Water in London last year and surging public anger, the interim review still falls short of the Government’s manifesto commitments and speaks more about attracting investors than cleaning up pollution and serving the public.

Crucially, this report acts more as a progress report which tinkers at the edges of the problem – not the bold systemic action plan needed to end the crisis. While it contains some welcome analysis on regulatory failure, it offers few concrete solutions and avoids many of the most difficult but necessary decisions. The final report must give senior Labour figures, including Environment Secretary Steve Reed, the political capital needed to show this government is serious about fixing the water industry and cleaning up England and Wales’s polluted rivers and seas.

CEO of River Action James Wallace said, “This interim report signals some progress on regulation, but it reads more like a sales pitch to international investors and overpaid CEOs than the urgent restructuring of corrupted water companies. We ask the Commission to learn from other countries how to ensure water companies are owned, financed and operated for public benefit.

“The Government has a clear mandate to clean up our polluted waterways and deliver on its election promises. That means getting tough on polluters, using the full force of the law, reforming regulation, and ending the era of failed privatisation by prioritising people and nature over profit – not kicking the problem further downstream.

“And in the meantime, the Government shouldn’t wait: our biggest polluter Thames Water should be put in a Special Administration Regime to send a regulatory shockwave across the industry. Our water is our nation’s birth right and is not for private sale.”

CEO of Surfers Against Sewage Giles Bristow said: “The criminal behaviour, chronic lack of investment and woeful mismanagement which has led to sewage filled seas is a direct result of our profit driven system. This interim report begins to recognise this, but as yet does not spell out the need to end pollution for profit.

“The commission’s final recommendations must reshape the water industry to put public health and the environment first. Until we have this, we will continue to swim and surf in the deluge of sewage that pours into our waters whilst shareholders continue to cream of profits. The commission must make concrete recommendations to end pollution for profit otherwise it risks becoming part of the problem, not the solution.”

“The public will not stand for tinkering around the edges and the MPs that represent these angry communities know this.  We will continue to fight until we see the transformational change that is needed to end sewage pollution once and for all.”

River Action and SAS welcome the report’s recognition of:

  • Government failure to plan for long-term sewage treatment and drinking water needs
  • Weak, reactive regulation from Ofwat which allowed water companies to pile on debt and reward pollution with dividends and bonuses
  • An underfunded Environment Agency unable to monitor pollution and enforce environmental law
  • Water companies prioritising profits over people and planet, resulting in outdated infrastructure and pollution
  • Water companies poor environmental performance driven by profit hungry short term shareholders

We also support the call for stronger local and regional sewage and water planning, closer regulatory oversight of water companies, and long-term low-risk, low-return infrastructure investment.

However, the final report must go beyond diagnosis and deliver a clear plan for action. It should:

  • Restructure water companies to operate for the public good, not private profit. Where a company is failing, the Government must use powers like Special Administration Regime to intervene
  • Protect public and environmental health by securing benign sources of investment and linking performance with returns
  • Democratise decision-making with customers, environmentalists and local government balancing interests on water company boards
  • Strengthen independent regulators, cash-strapped by years of under-funding leaving them unable to prosecute polluters at scale
  • Mandate public oversight of local and regional water company planning, spending and performance, and integrate with a national urgent action plan

Next week’s Spending Review will be the first real test of whether the Government is serious. Without proper funding for enforcement agencies and the power to prosecute environmental crime, any reform risks being cosmetic.

We urge the final report to reflect Labour’s manifesto commitment to bring failing water companies into order and clean-up the mess from 15 years of privatised pollution.

“We only have one chance to get it right. The public mandate for change is overwhelming and so is the urgency. What comes next must be decisive, enforceable, and in the public interest. We urge Sir Jon Cunliffe to give us more, much more. Nothing short of a systemic overhaul of how water companies are owned, funded, operated and regulated will do.” – James Wallace, River Action CEO

From ballet box to river bank – How to get local leaders on board to rescue our rivers

Posted on by Molly Allen
Download PDF
By Erica Popplewell, Head of Communities

Last week saw 1,641 council seats across 24 local authorities up for election, along with six mayoral elections. I’m not here to talk about results but it’s fair to say there are lots of new councillors getting their heads around their new roles. As river campaigners this is an opportunity to start a conversation about what they can do to rescue our rivers.

Listening to ‘The rest is politics’ podcast with Rory Stewart and Alistair Campbell last week I was interested to hear their take on the local election results that the state of our rivers continues to be a big political issue.

How do we get the message to these new elected officials?

In short there is the direct route, talking to them ourselves and the indirect route, talking to the people they listen to such as local media, constituents or community groups. Both approaches let them know that the public and the media care and want to see action.  Using both these approaches creates a surround sound on the state of our rivers and urges action.

What help is available?

The River Rescue Kit from River Action is  an online resource designed to empower communities to take action against the growing crisis of river pollution. The section ‘Campaign for my River’ is packed with advice and resources to help local political campaigning.

The direct approach: engaging Councillors one-to-one

A letter (or email) to new and existing local councillors can be a powerful opening action to start an ongoing relationship.  We have produced guidance on writing a powerful letter within the River Rescue Kit which you can use and adapt as you see fit.  As an opening gambit, its a good idea to keep positive and passionate, reminding them of any commitments they’ve made on rivers and making sure the letter feels personal both to you (and your organisation/group if you are part of one).  Set out the nature of the issue in your area, which could be sewage pollution caused by water companies,  over abstraction in chalk stream areas, or agricultural pollution caused by intensive animal farms.

Having worked across a large range of environmental issues in my career, one thing that I find particularly powerful about working on rivers is that they are so tangible and so precious to local communities. You could invite local counsellors on a riverside walk so that you can introduce your group and talk about the issues and the solutions next to the river in question as you watch wildlife and river users enjoying the space. It never hurts to give an opportunity for a good picture for their website and social media as well!

The indirect approach: build public pressure and amplify voices 

There are lots of different ways to work to help amplify local voices so they are heard by our elected officials.  Campaigns draw attention from the media or elected officials by representing large numbers of people with a shared message, – see the River Rescue Kits guide for launching a petition or organising a demonstration.  You might even want to organise an event.  Local groups have held funerals for the river, ceremonies to bless the river, and ‘paddle outs’ with swimmers, kayakers and paddle boarders taking to the water together with placards so think outside the box. We also have a ‘I want to get media interest’ section you might find useful.

If you want to see who else is campaigning in your local area have a look on the  River Rescue Kit Community map, and add yourself so others can find you.  Working together can share the work and create a louder voice.

The elections may be over, but no matter what the results were in your local area, the real work for both new and returning Councillors starts now. Our rivers need champions in town halls and council chambers today. By reaching out to new councillors, building public momentum, and standing shoulder-to-shoulder with others who care, we can turn this political moment into a river rescue mission. Because when local voices rise together, even the most powerful tides of neglect can be turned. Let’s make sure our rivers have a future as alive and thriving as they deserve.

River Action Launches Legal Challenge Against Ofwat Over Water Bill Hikes

Posted on by Molly Allen
Download PDF

River Action has filed a landmark legal challenge against Ofwat, accusing the regulator of unlawfully allowing water companies to pass the cost of their own failures onto customers. The case comes as water bills rise by an average of £123 a year, forcing households to pay for decades of underinvestment by the water industry.

The challenge, filed with the support of Leigh Day law firm, targets Ofwat’s Price Review 2024 (PR24), which granted enhanced funding to water companies like United Utilities without sufficient safeguards to ensure the money is spent on new water and sewage projects. Instead, River Action warns that customers will be left footing the bill for past infrastructure neglect, paying twice for the same failing systems.

Lake Windmere, Algea blooms | Matt Staniek ©

Paying Twice for Polluted Water?

The legal action stems from investigations by environmental campaigners Matt Staniek and Windrush Against Sewage Pollution (WASP), which exposed severe regulatory failings.

In August 2024, United Utilities requested extra funding to upgrade treatment works and pumping stations in the Windermere area, following 6,000 hours of raw sewage discharges into the lake that year alone. Ofwat approved the request under PR24, but River Action argues that the regulator:

  • Relied on hydraulic simulation modelling rather than real-world pollution data, which failed to reflect the true environmental damage.
  • Ignored key evidence of widespread sewage discharges when assessing funding needs.
  • Lacked a clear mechanism to regain funds if companies misused the additional investment.

As a result, customers could be forced to pay twice: first through water bills that should have covered infrastructure maintenance, and again through new hikes aimed at fixing the same problems.

Lake Windermere in cleaner times | Image by Pete from Pixabay

A Call for Reform

River Action is demanding urgent regulatory reform to stop water companies from passing the cost of their mismanagement onto the public. The financial burden of repairing the UK’s crumbling water infrastructure must fall on the companies and their investors, not customers.

Emma Dearnalely, Head of Legal at River Action, said:

Holding Ofwat Accountable

River Action’s legal challenge also raises broader concerns about Ofwat’s oversight and accountability, questioning whether the regulator has the necessary powers or will to prevent water companies from profiting at the public’s expense.

Ricardo Gama, solicitor at Leigh Day, commented:

Fighting for Clean Water

River Action’s legal challenge is part of its broader mission to hold water companies and regulators accountable. The group continues to campaign for stronger enforcement, greater transparency, and a financial and governance model that prioritises people and the environment over profits.

River Action to sue Ofwat over water bill rises

Posted on by Molly Allen
Download PDF

River Action is to take legal action against Ofwat, the water regulator, accusing it of unlawfully making customers pay for decades of neglect by the water industry.

A legal claim will be filed this month, arguing that bill rises for customers that have been approved by Ofwat could be used to fix infrastructure failures that should have been addressed years ago.

We’re calling for immediate regulatory action to ensure water companies stop passing the cost of failure onto customers – and start taking responsibility for the environmental damage they have caused.

 

WHAT IS OUR LEGAL CHALLENGE AGAINST OFWAT?

Our legal challenge focuses on funding allocated for wastewater treatment works and pumping stations by United Utilities in and around Lake Windermere.

The case is being taken after detailed investigations were carried out by Save Windermere and Windrush Against Sewage Pollution, which revealed significant and systemic flaws in Ofwat’s approach.

We’re taking legal action to compel Ofwat to reassess its PR24 determination for United Utilities in relation to Windermere and to encourage Ofwat to reassess other water company schemes wherever there are concerns that customers are unfairly covering the cost of past failures.

 

WINDERMERE: A DAMNING EXAMPLE OF REGULATORY FAILURE

United Utilities, currently under fire after evidence obtained by Save Windermere, revealed 6,000 hours of raw sewage was discharged into Windermere last year, and is a case in point. We have commenced legal action claiming Ofwat has allowed the company to divert funds meant for future projects to deal with past failures—rather than investing in vital improvements to wastewater treatment and pumping stations around the lake.

 

A SYSTEM RIGGED AGAINST THE PUBLIC

We believe Ofwat has acted unlawfully by approving these funds without ensuring they are spent on genuine improvements to essential infrastructure. Instead, this so-called ‘enhanced funding’ is being allowed to be used to cover up years of failure.

Effectively, Ofwat has signed off on a broken system where customers are being charged again for services they have already funded—while water companies continue to mark their own homework and pollute for profit. This scandal must be addressed. The cost of fixing the UK’s crumbling water infrastructure should fall on the companies and their investors—not on the British public.

We are calling for immediate regulatory action to ensure water companies stop passing the cost of failure onto customers—and start taking responsibility for the environmental damage they have caused.

Ofwat ‘acted unlawfully’—forcing customers to pay twice for failures, say campaigners

Posted on by Molly Allen
Download PDF

Environmental group River Action has accused Ofwat of acting unlawfully by using recent, significant bill hikes to cover past infrastructure failures—forcing customers, rather than investors, to foot the bill for decades of neglect. This is despite Ofwat having committed to put in steps to prevent customers paying twice.

Instead of funding essential new water and sewage projects, these price rises—approved in last year’s Ofwat price review—could be being misused to fix long-standing issues that should have been addressed years ago. This means there is nothing to stop customers from being charged twice to clean up an environmental disaster in the nation’s rivers, seas and lakes caused by chronic underinvestment in Britain’s water infrastructure.

River Action’s legal challenge against Ofwat

River Action has taken the first step in a legal challenge against Ofwat, on the basis it acted unlawfully in its Price Review 2024 (PR24) determination for United Utilities. The challenge focuses on funding allocated for wastewater treatment works and pumping stations in and around Lake Windermere.

River Action argues that Ofwat unlawfully approved ‘enhanced funding’ from customers without a mechanism to ensure the money will be used solely to improve sewerage services; rather than bring services into compliance when that should have already happened under past schemes. This means there is nothing to stop customers paying twice for services that have not yet been delivered.

This follows detailed investigations by campaign groups Save Windermere and Windrush Against Sewage Pollution, which exposed significant and systemic flaws in Ofwat’s approach.

River Action is taking legal action to compel Ofwat to reassess its PR24 determination for United Utilities in relation to Windermere and to encourage Ofwat to reassess other water company schemes wherever there are concerns that customers are unfairly covering the cost of past failures. However, River Action is not calling for PR24 to be overturned or for investment levels to be reduced, recognising the urgency and importance of increased investment in Windermere and elsewhere.

Windermere: A damning example of regulatory failure

United Utilities, currently under fire after evidence obtained by the campaign group Save Windermere, revealed 6,000 hours of raw sewage was discharged into Windermere last year, and is a case in point. River Action has commenced legal action claiming Ofwat has allowed the company to divert funds meant for future projects to deal with past failures—rather than investing in vital improvements to wastewater treatment and pumping stations around the lake.

Campaigners warn that millions of pounds intended for infrastructure upgrades may be used to patch up outdated and crumbling water and waste systems—exacerbating the pollution crisis in England’s largest and best-known lake.

A system rigged against the public

River Action believes this problem extends far beyond a single water company. Under PR24 (Price Review 2024), Ofwat has likely permitted other firms to operate in a similar way—leaving billpayers to pick up the tab for failings that should have been fixed with previous funding.

Emma Dearnaley, Head of Legal at River Action, said:

“We believe Ofwat has acted unlawfully by approving these funds without ensuring they are spent on genuine improvements to essential infrastructure. Instead, this so-called ‘enhanced funding’ is being allowed to be used to cover up years of failure.

“Effectively, Ofwat has signed off on a broken system where customers are being charged again for services they have already funded—while water companies continue to mark their own homework and pollute for profit.

“This scandal must be addressed. The cost of fixing the UK’s crumbling water infrastructure should fall on the companies and their investors—not on the British public.”

Leigh Day solicitor Ricardo Gama said:

“Ofwat has said again and again in public that it won’t let price rises be spent on fixing historic issues which are leading water companies to breach their permits. They’ve said in black and white terms that customers won’t be expected to pay twice. But in documents seen by River Action it looks like Ofwat hasn’t done its homework in checking whether the money it’s letting United Utilities take from customers will actually be used for that purpose. River Action believes that this is reflective of a broader lack of due diligence by Ofwat over the decades, which has led to money not being spent on infrastructure improvements and instead being diverted to investors’ pockets.”

River Action is calling for immediate regulatory action to ensure water companies stop passing the cost of failure onto customers—and start taking responsibility for the environmental damage they have caused.

ENDS

Powered by  GDPR Cookie Compliance
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.