English water firms want to draw a line under the past. It won’t wash

theguardian.com:

“W e want to be held to account …” said Ruth Kelly, the new public face of the English water companies, last week, briefly raising hopes of a moment of reckoning for the industry’s past (and current) sewage spills. Then the chair of Water UK clarified what her version of accountability covers. The companies wish to be held to account “… for putting it right”.

The past 30 years, we were invited to think, should be considered an unfortunate chapter in which the industry, terribly unfortunately, didn’t give sewage spills enough attention while other investments were prioritised. That was the gist of her apology. “By and large, the water companies were carrying out their legal responsibilities but … what’s legal is not necessarily the right answer or what people expect,” she argued on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

One trusts this “by and large” claim provoked spluttering among officials at the Environment Agency and Ofwat. As Kelly must know, both regulatory bodies have been engaged for the past 18 months in an inquiry to determine whether the industry was, in essence, not treating as much sewage as it should have been at 2,000-plus treatment plants. Whether legal duties were met is very much a live question.

Ofwat and the EA are understandably tight-lipped on details until any enforcement action is decided – the EA has powers of criminal prosecution and Ofwat can impose penalties worth 10% of turnover.

But here’s what David Black, Ofwat’s chief executive, said last June when South West Water was added to the list of companies under specific investigation. “From what we have seen so far, the scale of the issue here is shocking.” The rest of list comprises Anglian Water, Northumbrian Water, Thames Water, Wessex Water and