Southern Water fines should be reinvested for improvements to stop sewage getting into rivers and the sea to benefit Hastings, Bexhill and Rother

I was intrigued by the views recently expressed by East Sussex County Council’s Conservative member for Bexhill South regarding the ongoing debate surrounding the dumping of raw sewage into our local shorelines and inland waterways (“Soundbites and blame”, Observer, Friday September 16).

The councillor states that he “… immediately asked Southern Water to hold a public meeting in Bexhill…”, following the recent discharge of 3,000,000 litres of untreated foul water at Galley Hill, but does not confirm whether such a meeting took place.

I should like to add a few “soundbites” of my own to the continuing controversy.

Since October 2007, Southern Water Services Limited (SW) has been owned by Greensands Holdings Limited (GH), a consortium of investors registered in Jersey, which reported revenue of £823.5 million in its most recent Annual Report and Financial Statements.

SEE ALSO: Southern Water responds following sewage dumps along Sussex coast

In recent years, SW has chalked up an impressive record of fines, with costs, from UK courts and regulatory authorities, including: £3,000 in 2010 for polluting 2 km of a stream in East Grinstead; £25,000 in 2011 after sewage flooded into Southampton water; £10,000 in 2011 after sewage seeped into a stream in Beltinge, Kent; £7,200 following a leak of sewage at Hurstpierpoint, West Sussex; £50,000 in 2011 for unscreened discharges into Langstone Harbour, Hampshire; £520,000 in 2014 after untreated sewage was discharged into Swalecliffe Brook, Kent; a record £2,000,000 in 2016, for flooding beaches in Kent with raw sewage; £3,000,000 in 2019 for misreporting performance data to Ofwat; £90,000,000 in 2020 for 8,400 illegal discharges of raw sewage into the coastal waters of Kent and Sussex, and for allowing storm tanks to be kept full and turn septic; £28,000,000 this month for pollution incidents and other issues.

In summary, quite a history of “previous form”.

Surely it must be the proverbial “no-brainer” that the above referenced £124,000,000 could have been invested in infrastructure improvements that would have mitigated much of the catalogue of environmental insults.

Have you read....: Sewage released into three sites across Sussex in the last 72 hours

Finally, I would venture to suggest that the earnest concerns expressed by our local MPs, councillors and tax payers do not address questions of “blame”, but questions of corporate and political responsibility.

Heaven forfend that some whom we elect, remunerate and empower to defend our local environment should close ranks with those who are content to sacrifice it to their twin gods of director’s bonuses and shareholder dividends.

For the latest breaking news where you live in Sussex, follow us on Twitter @Sussex_Worldand like us on Facebook @SussexWorldUK