If water industry bosses think they are having a stinking time of it, they should cast their minds back to when Trevor Newton was head of Yorkshire Water. Urging customers to reduce consumption in balmy 1995, he confessed he had “not had a bath or shower in three months”.
As a bout of sweltering weather grips Britain, with forecasts of a baking summer, there are concerns that a widespread drought and a repeat of last year’s heatwave could force water suppliers to ban certain companies from using large quantities. It promises to be a fresh headache for an industry already under fire over sewage dumping, leakage rates, large dividends, a £10bn customer-funded investment plan and “flimsy” pledges to give up bonuses.
In April, the National Drought Group – a collection of business and government leaders – urged water companies and the public to preserve water before future dry spells.
And last week, South East Water announced a hosepipe ban would come into effect across Kent and Sussex from 26 June, after shortages forced schools to shut and residents to rely on emergency bottled water stations.
Water levels in English reservoirs fell to a low of 49% last September, according to the Environment Agency. However, the driest February in England for 30 years was followed by a very wet March, and by last month they had recovered to at least 82%.
However, the burst of recent hot weather has put businesses in the areas seen as most vulnerable, the south-west and East Anglia, on alert. In Cornwall, Colliford Lake, a reservoir on Bodmin Moor, is at about 65% of capacity, down on nearly 77% a year earlier, while Anglian Water has warned that areas of Norfolk remain in the drought conditions that began last summer.
South West Water (SWW) enforced its first hosepipe ban in 26 years in Cornwall and north Devon last autumn. Unusually, the ban remained in place through the winter as reserves remained low, and was extended further into Devon in late April.
For local residents, this has prevented them from watering gardens, refilling ponds and cleaning private boats. However, if dry conditions continue, SWW may be forced to apply to Ofwat, the water regulator for England and Wales, to implement a “non-essential use ban”. These bans mean that for businesses, a host of practices would be outlawed, including operating mechanical car washes, and cleaning boats, aircraft and trains, as well as industrial plants.
SWW admitted in last year’s drought plan that such a move would only deliver a 2.5% reduction in demand on top of the domestic hosepipe ban and even delivering that figure was highly dependent on whether it coincided with “peak tourist and holiday periods”.
If there are still shortages, an emergency drought order can be called, limiting supplies and making alternative water supply arrangements such as a stand pipe in the street. The orders last for three months and can be extended by a further two months.
Any ban could prove politically toxic for SWW, owned by the listed Pennon Group, which is being investigated by the industry regulator over whether it accurately reported leaks and figures showing how much water was used by its customers during 2021 and 2022. Meanwhile, a £112m dividend payout to investors by the Pennon Group was this month labelled a “slap in the face” for communities hit by sewage dumping.
At Anglian Water, a business ban would prevent cleaning of industrial facilities and the windows of office blocks, car washes, filling non-public pools and watering plants on commercial premises. Dust suppression – often used on industrial sites to reduce airborne dust to improve visibility and prevent diseases such as “farmer’s lung” – would also be prohibited.
In East Anglia, farmers have already begun cutting back on high-risk irrigated crops such as potatoes, onions and carrots. The Environment Agency has said it will use satellite data to compare the moisture of crops and soil with irrigation restrictions, to study whether water abstractors – those taking large amounts of water from underground or surface sources such as streams, for example, farmers – are acting within their licence conditions.
Companies are required to pay households £10 a day if their water supply is cut off, up to a maximum of last year’s entire bill. For businesses, it is £50 a day and a maximum of their annual bill.However, suppliers are off the hook if Ofwat deems the circumstances “exceptional”, such as a non-essential use ban, leaving companies facing thousands in lost business and delayed bills.
In an emergency, the suppliers are required to provide 10 litres of water for each person within a day, distributing bottled water or parking up a mobile water tank, known as a bowser, near a home or premises.
There are also concerns over water companies’ long-term plans to secure reliable resources over the coming decades. Each supplier is required to draft water resource management plans – updated every five years – to show how they intend to meet needs and simultaneously protect the environment for the following 25 years. The plans set out how to increase supply, including by cutting leakage, developing new reservoirs and promoting water recycling. Draft proposals were submitted over the spring and their final versions are due this autumn.
Ofwat has said that competing pressures of population growth and a push to reduce water abstraction means demand needs to be cut while supply is increased. The regulator has expressed concerns over the “level of detail and accuracy” in the documents and said that there was “missing, incomplete and resubmitted data”.
Last week, a group of 37 environmental groups, including the WWF and the Angling Trust, wrote to the environment secretary, Thérèse Coffey, to condemn the draft plans as “woefully inadequate” and deliberately opaque.
“Water companies are hiding the truth to avoid criticism and accountability for the state of our nation’s water resources. These plans also rely on large reductions in personal water use,” said James Overington, water policy officer at campaign group WildFish. “We question if people will change their water use if they are being misled about the scale of the problem.”
