True Extent of United Utilities’ Illegal Sewage Discharges in Windermere Exposed

We are here once again to discuss more United Utilities’ (UU) illegal sewage discharging in and around Windermere. This time, we’re not talking about volume, as we did a few weeks ago, but rather about the sheer number of illegal spill days across all six of UU’s untreated discharge sites around Windermere. This isn’t only about the illegality demonstrated by Professor Peter Hammond of Windrush Against Sewage Pollution (WASP); it’s also about OFWAT preparing to raise your bills to fund these operations, despite the water companies failing to comply with their statutory obligation. This blatant exploitation affects everyone in the UK who pays a water company. We’re here to let Windermere tell the story of this national scandal. It has taken months, even years, to obtain the necessary data, so let's dive into it.

Today’s piece in The Observer highlights a key role that Save Windermere plays: fighting United Utilities to release environmental information. Save Windermere and WASP have spent years trying to obtain complete data from UU to assess this illegality and expose these issues, yet the data remains incomplete as UU continues to withhold critical information. This refusal persists even after they recently reiterated their 'committment to being more transparent' after Save Windermere's involvement led to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) issuing an enforcement notice against them. The data they withhold often provides crucial insights into the extent of the damage being inflicted on Windermere. We are the only organisation around Windermere actively trying to access this information, which is vital for understanding the lake’s condition. As you will read in today’s Observer piece, not only has United Utilities refused to provide information, but they are now appearing before a judge to challenge the Information Commissioner’s decision and attempt to have it overturned. This is an ongoing battle, and we will continue to fight it.

Compounding the problem, the Environment Agency (EA) has repeatedly failed in both requesting the necessary data and in detecting these illegal spills. Without reliability from either the water companies or regulators, we must turn to independent experts.

Algal bloom on Windermere, November 2024

This week, as before, our focus is on 'early spilling'—the illegal dumping of sewage in breach of the EA’s discharge permits. Sites are mandated to process a specified flow rate (litres per second) to sewage treatment plants before overflow can occur. If a site spills at a time when this pass forward rate isn’t being met, it’s an illegal discharge. Through cross-referencing flow data (the amount of sewage directed to treatment works) with EDM logs (which track discharge duration into the lake), WASP has uncovered the shocking extent of illegal spills around Windermere.

From 2018-2023, Professor Hammond's analysis has shown over 500 days with illegal spilling in and around Windermere and Coniston. All six sites discharging untreated sewage around Windermere have illegally spilled, reflecting a lack of capacity due to inadequate investment. This demonstrates a complete failure to protect England's largest and culturally significant lake, revealing the pitfalls of privatisation in stark terms.

However, the issue goes beyond illegal discharges in Windermere. OFWAT is nearing the end of its draft determinations, where it will decide how much water companies can increase bills over the next five years. Evidence of illegality is critical, as OFWAT’s CEO David Black has stated that customers should not be charged to bring sites into compliance:

"We do not expect customers to pay to regain compliance with existing permit conditions... companies must evidence that the additional funding is to enhance the functioning of the asset beyond existing permit compliance. This includes demonstrating that: the company is operating the assets in compliance with its permits, the funding is for enhancing functioning beyond the current permit level or to treat increased flows and loads due to population growth, and relevant outcomes should not have been already delivered through funding for previous enhancement schemes."

But if OFWAT relies on the EA to identify non-compliance at sites nationwide, what happens if the EA won’t or can’t detect illegality? The EA received a portion of Professor Hammond's report in January but has neither acted on it nor launched an investigation. While UU’s motive is clear—maximise dividends—why is the EA failing to hold them accountable? This isn’t just a matter of resource constraints; we believe deliberate decisions within the EA are preventing UU from being held accountable for its exploitation of England's largest lake. To support this, consider recent BBC coverage on illegal spills in Windermere, where the EA claimed to possess 2023 data for Glebe Road pumping station. Yet, as of Wednesday, 6th November, we have confirmation from the EA that they hold no flow data for Glebe Road or any other site, apart from small samples of data from Ambleside, for 2023. This means they are either misleading Save Windermere or the BBC.

"The BBC has learned that, in the first eight months of the investigation, the EA failed to secure the necessary data to uncover illegal pollution in 2023... The EA now confirms they have this data. Following the BBC's analysis, showing illegal pollution for over two years, the EA says it will review the evidence and expand its investigation."

OFWAT, the EA, the Environmental Audit Committee, and the government have all acknowledged the validity of Professor Hammond’s analysis. Given the EA’s failure to address the extent of illegality, particularly around Windermere, his work is the most reliable indicator of non-compliance. Alongside WASP, we’ve presented this evidence to OFWAT, and today’s analysis provides even more comprehensive and conclusive data than before.

Solutions

For years, Save Windermere has led the conversation on the long-term protection of Windermere. As we bring more attention to this ongoing issue, we also want to emphasise the solutions needed to ensure the lake’s protection, which now only needs political will to implement.

Long Term: Complete Sewage Removal

There is only one long-term way to protect Windermere for future generations: complete sewage removal. Sewage is the main source of nutrients driving harmful algal blooms in the lake. In a 2013 report, obtained by Save Windermere under Environmental Information Regulations, United Utilities stated:

"By removing all United Utilities discharges, algal blooms would still occur, but their severity would be significantly reduced, potentially to an invisible level."

Despite this, ten years ago, UU chose not to invest in discharge removal, prioritising short-term cost savings over long-term protection.

We know that this solution works and the French have demonstrated what is possible for the long-term protection of oligotrophic lakes. Lake Annecy is the cleanest lake in Europe, thanks to measures taken decades ago. Dr. Paul Louis Servettaz, who led the campaign to save Annecy, advocated for a comprehensive sewage solution:

“Either we could proceed, as the Department of Bridges and Roads had already suggested, with the total purification of all wastewater before discharge into the lake. A difficult solution—at the very least, very incomplete, uncertain, costly, and of dubious effectiveness. The numerous wastewater treatment plants required would be small, precarious, and difficult to monitor and maintain, and we would miss the opportunity for a complete solution, leaving the future of the water uncertain. Or we could collect all the wastewater in a sewer encircling both shores of the lake and transport it downstream to be treated in one large wastewater treatment plant before being discharged into the River Fier. The construction costs for both projects were similar, but the security provided by this second project (with fewer, bigger, stronger pieces of equipment) meant that it could be operated more cheaply.”

Saving Windermere is a clear political choice. So far, the decision has been made to repeat past actions, leaving us with incomplete solutions and uncertainty about their results and effectiveness. 

We the people could now change this by demanding the protection of England's largest and most iconic lake for the people of this nation for now and forever. This is Save Windermere’s mission, and we urge you all to champion this complete and final solution for our lake. 

Short Term

Halt Dividend Payments: This illegal spilling is a clear violation of the Water Industry Act 1991 (WIA). As such, the government should halt UU’s dividend payments until a full investigation is complete. One way to enforce this would be to take UU into Special Administration—something the government has the power to do under the WIA.

Removal of EA Board: The Secretary of State, Steve Reed, must act now and remove the Environment Agency’s board. The EA’s repeated failure to scrutinise UU and enforce regulations points to institutional corruption and poor leadership from the top. Assessing non-complaint spilling is well within the organisation's remit and funding, yet they have systemically failed to ensure the stringent regulation of the water industry.

Mandatory Flow Monitoring: All sewage outfalls must have flow monitoring to accurately measure the volume of discharges, as outlined in our 10-point plan for a sewage-free Windermere. Currently, this isn’t a requirement and data on spill volumes is either not collected or withheld. The scale of UU’s discharges and their environmental impact can only be understood if flow data is made a statutory requirement.

Investment Based on Impact, Not Spills: OFWAT currently bases investment decisions on the number of spills, which does not accurately reflect environmental damage or the effectiveness of interventions. Research by Professor Peter Hammond has shown that the current method—using Event Duration Monitors (EDMs)—is highly unreliable and prone to producing false positives or negatives. This undermines previous government claims that all overflows are now effectively monitored, as up to 50% of this data may be inaccurate. Investment criteria must shift from focusing on spill frequency to measuring total discharge volumes as it’s entirely possible to reduce the number of spill events while maintaining or even increasing the overall volume of untreated sewage being released into the environment.

Claw Back Misused Investments: The ongoing illegality at these sites raises serious questions about the effectiveness of past investments and who should foot the bill for future spending. Between 2015-2020 (AMP 6), and with the upcoming 2025-2030 cycle (AMP 8), investments have clearly failed to ensure compliance with permits or meet the spill frequency targets suggested publicly by UU. OFWAT should reclaim funding for these projects as ongoing breaches have been exposed. If a site cannot meet basic legal requirements, this investment should never have fallen on the bill-payer. OFWAT has confirmed:

"We are including a condition to claw back funding in PR29 if these conditions cannot be demonstrated."

Further investment cannot be funded by the bill-payer while these violations persist.

Prosecute UU Directors: Labour is calling for water company bosses to be held ‘criminally accountable’ for their actions, but the reality is that the Environment Agency (EA) already has the power to do so. By September 2022, the EA had successfully used these powers 72 times to recover profits from illegal land-based waste activities and had even seized assets under the Proceeds of Crime Act (POCA) 2002 for waste companies. Yet, despite the striking similarity of the offences—and at least two Crown Court judges highlighting the role of senior management in serious water pollution cases—no water company executive has ever been prosecuted, and not a single POCA order has been issued against water companies (as confirmed in a 2022 FOI). This double standard is unacceptable. We think Labour should leverage the powers already in place to hold UU executives accountable for corporate decisions that damage our environment.

If the government fails to act again we will have to use the law to take a stand and protect Windermere.

We now want to revisit this evidence with Steve Reed, Keir Starmer, and Emma Hardy, urging them to take action for Windermere’s protection.