Residents First

Thames Water hosepipe ban threatens jobs

Thames Water’s hosepipe ban is confusing, unnecessary and threatens local jobs.

This is the stark warning from Hammersmith & Fulham Council’s Deputy Leader, Cllr Nick Botterill, who says the ban would not be needed if Thames Water managed the capital’s water supply more
effectively.

The south-east of England still gets a significant amount of rain, when compared to parts of the world that are not facing a hosepipe ban, with more than 25 inches of rainfall recorded in 2011, according to the Met Office. But despite this, from tomorrow residents face £1,000 fines for cleaning the patio or washing a car with a hosepipe. Even cleaning windows is breaking the rules.

Thames Water also has one of the highest leakage rates from its water mains of all the privatised water companies in the UK and in a sinister move is encouraging neighbours to report violations - with fines likely to follow.

Residents asked for views on Fulham Riverside

A reinvigorated riverside with thousands of new homes and jobs could be on the way in South Fulham and once again the council wants residents to have their say.

The second and final round of public consultation on proposals to transform disused industrial land on a riverside stretch of Sands End, from Carnwath Road to Imperial Wharf, is now taking place. Residents have until Friday May 11 to make their views known.

Known as the South Fulham Supplementary Planning Document (SPD), the council first consulted on the draft proposals last spring and has now incorporated a series of changes after listening to residents’ feedback. The SPD is important as it provides guidance for regeneration in the area over the next 20 years.

The latest consultation comes despite Thames Water’s controversial ‘super sewer’ plans which threaten to derail one part of the SPD – a possible residential led mixed-use scheme on Carnwath Road – for up to 10 years.

Hosepipe ban confirmed despite greener alternatives

Thames Water will enforce a hosepipe ban from April 5 to deal with slightly reduced rainfall over recent months, it was announced today.

The news has angered many and Professor Richard Ashley, who is the respected Professor of Urban Water at Sheffield University, says that decades of failed water management are responsible for the unnecessary emergency measures.

14 million Thames Water customers, from Essex to Swindon and all Londoners, now face a double-whammy of a hosepipe ban from next month in addition to coughing up an extra £80 per year for life on top of current bills to pay for the controversial Thames Tunnel 'super sewer'.

Boris attacks Super Sewer

Speaking at the Hammersmith Town Hall on Wednesday evening the Mayor of London Boris Johnson attacked the self serving proposal from Thames Water for a gold plated £4.1 billion Super Sewer. If the scheme goes ahead it threatens terrible environmental damage and pushing many households into water poverty with higher bills.

Here is what was said:

DAVE McGINTY: My name is Dave McGinty.  I live on Carnwath Road and our committee is community is about to be totally destroyed by the works for the Thames super sewer. Basically, they will bulldoze our whole community. 

Now, my main concern is that we have 7,000 school children in this area and on the point of the pollution, on transport as well, it is 28,000 lorry movements and all for a massive white elephant that is a cash cow for bankers. There is a project in Germany that they are doing the 20-mile relief of sewage works in the river; less than a quarter of a billion pounds. This is £4.1 billion.  All of us, £100 each forever; and it is costing us another half billion to move it from Barn Elms to Fulham. My question is: can you justify that, in this day and age?  

BORIS JOHNSON:   Mr McGinty; your point about Carnwath Road.  Let me tell you that I will not accept this. It is not just Carnwath Road, by the way.  The problem is this scheme, in my view, could unnecessarily whack up the water bills of everybody in the city.  I am extremely worried about the cost.  I am extremely worried about the engineering that is proposed; and on. So far as Carnwath Road is concerned, I will not tolerate anything that disrupts and destroys the lives of London communities.

New legal challenge likely to Thames Water Super Sewer

Cllr Nick Botterill writes:

Many H&F Conservatives will be aware by now that last week the council received a direction from Eric Pickles’ department (CLG) effectively ordering H&F not to grant planning permission on the Carnwath Road site in south Fulham. This direction is of course to do with the fact that this site could potentially be used as a main tunnelling drive site for Thames Water’s Super Sewer.

It is no secret that H&F Council and local Conservatives believe the Thames Water scheme as currently envisaged is deeply flawed in concept. Experts, one of whom (Chris Binnie) was instrumental in helping to formulate the original scheme, are now lining up to oppose the Super Sewer and there are several less costly potential alternatives available to clean up the river.

The Secretary of State’s direction begs two questions to us as Conservatives:

• Is it indicative that the government intends to push this scheme through come what may and irrespective of whether there is any sound logic behind it?
• Where do we all go from here and where does this leave local residents’ and the council’s aspirations for regeneration of this site?

Fulham residents say NO to super sewer

Fulham residents delivered more than 2,500 consultation responses to Thames Water today making it clear that the community is united in its opposition to Carnwath Road being used as the main west London super sewer construction site.

Local residents and school children joined senior Hammersmith & Fulham (H&F) councillors to hand over the questionnaires to Thames Water’s Phil Stride on Friday morning.

Local community groups, working together under the Stop them Shafting Fulham (SSF) banner, have campaigned tirelessly since November to alert other local residents to the danger of letting Thames Water’s plans go ahead unchecked.

Thames Water’s own consultation response document was unintelligible and deterred people from responding according to the campaigners but SSF designed a new simplified form – which was approved by Thames Water – and has resulted in hundreds of responses flooding in.

Super sewer may not be needed after all

Thames Water’s controversial Thames Tunnel ‘super sewer’ may not now be needed after all, according to the industry expert who originally proposed the scheme.

On the same day that Thames Water’s consultation on the 20 mile long super sewer closes  Chris Binnie - who was the independent Chairman of the Thames Tideway Strategic Study Group from 2000 to 2006 - rocked the water utility company by releasing a detailed cost benefit analysis proving the business case is fundamentally flawed and likely to be in breach of EU rules.

Binnie’s intervention is hugely significant as the super sewer is set to cost hard-pressed water bill payers at least £4.1 billion while delivering just £300million benefits.

Alternatives for Thames clean-up emerge

There is more than one way to clean up the River Thames and the excessive cost of Thames Water’s super sewer could be halved according to an industry expert.

Chris Binnie, who was the original architect of Thames Water’s controversial £4.1 billion super sewer, now says that the benefits of the scheme no longer justify the colossal costs and that there is another solution that might well be compliant with EU rules to limit pollution to the river at half the cost.

In a separate development local authority engineers say that the sewer construction site that Thames Water has earmarked for Kirtling Street, in Wandsworth, could be expanded instead of using Carnwath Road in south Fulham.

Hammersmith & Fulham (H&F) Council is calling on Thames Water to review their tunnelling strategy to enable the sewer to be driven directly from Kirtling Street to Acton Storm tanks – bypassing south Fulham’s tight-knit residential neighbourhood in the process and minimising disruption to residents.

Kirtling Street could save Fulham riverside

 Pressure is building on Thames Water to extend their super sewer consultation as an alternative and less disruptive construction site emerges.

The Mayor of London has written to the Water Minister, Richard Benyon MP, asking him to ‘instruct Thames Water to extend the consultation period to the end of March 2012’.

Hammersmith & Fulham (H&F) Council is backing the Mayor’s calls as local authority engineers say that the sewer construction site that Thames Water has earmarked for Kirtling Street, in Wandsworth, could be expanded.

Kirtling Street is already one of three main construction sites needed for the 20 mile long concrete tunnel and council engineers say that by expanding it slightly the threat to Carnwath Road and Barn Elms could be minimised – or even removed completely.

Letter to Boris concerning the Super Sewer

Fulham resident Anthony Jelley has sent the following letter to the Mayor of London:

Dear Mr Johnson,

With regards to Thames Water's plans, backed by the Government and the GLA, for a super sewer for London, which I understand you are pushing vigorously, I am concerned that you have missed several points at issue:

1. Thames Water decided from the outset that a deep tunnel solution was favourable because it would generate vast extra revenues for the company. It therefore spent 500 times more money researching this option over green infrastructure solutions (£200,000 against £100million)

2. Other cities around the world that have used a deep tunnel solution have found it was inadequate and they have subsequently had to return to green infrastructure solutions after spending a fortune on the wrong solution.

3. Rainwater capture from roofs in London and local use would reduce significantly the quanity of rainfall entering the sewage system.

4. The new Lee Tunnel alone will remove the major of the problem, without the need to spend many billions on a white elephant project with no public health benefits.

5. Smaller green infrastructure projects all around London are far less disruptive to residents and will provide more local jobs, and being incremental are far more affordable at a time everyone is suffering economic hardship.

6. The Thames Tunnel will lead to massive burning of fossil fuels that will only worsen climate change.

7. Increased water rates will push many pensioners and those on fixed incomes into water poverty, and the electorate will no doubt correctly blame this inflation on the government, diminishing your electoral chances. The government and the GLA will be seen as representing the financial interests of an Australian Bank and working against the interests of its own electorate.

8. The Prince of Wales has indirectly got involved in this issue and he is sending out a subtle (or not so subtle) message that he opposes this monstrous tunnel, which flies in the face of everything he has been working to achieve by encouraging the country to work with nature, and not against it. At Prince's Foundation projects around the country, green infrastructure is used as a feature that makes a place more attractive and ecologically superior.

9. The siting of the main drive shaft in Carnwath Road, a densely packed residential area, is likely to lead to physical and mental health problems in the population, despite Thames Waters assurances that nobody will be effected. People have been already expressing suicidal ideas. Since Thames Water is so certain that nobody will be adversely affected, this hypothesis needs to be rigorously tested, using an independent prospective controlled study, adequately and appropriately funded by Thames Water or central government.

Additionally, if it is shown that physical or mental disorders are emerging in the local population, there needs to be a mechanism to halt the work immediately and funding available for those affected to seek redress and damages through the courts, backed by the objective evidence collected. In cases of death or suicide, the statutory corporate manslaughter route needs to be followed, and the decision makers should be dealt with through the criminal justice system. Any study should be peer reviewed and available for publication in journals such as the BMJ and BJPsych. An independent group of medical academics needs to be set up to design such a study to avoid design bias, and the design needs to be put out to consultation.

10. Richard Aylard, chief spokesman at Thames Water admitted on camera on Wednesday 7th December that environmental groups that support a deep tunnel solution have been paid money by Thames Water. There are also likely to be other payments in kind that have taken place between the parties, apart from financial transactions.

Please would you respond to these points individually?

Your sincerely,

Dr Anthony Jelley