United Utilities' Latest "Proposal" for Windermere: A Step in the Right Direction, But Let's Not Get Too Excited

Today, United Utilities (UU) announced an additional ‘proposed’ £150 million investment in Windermere. Now, if you’re feeling a sense of déjà vu, you’re not alone. We've been campaigning on this issue for three years, and it’s been quite the rollercoaster. First, UU told us they'd done their "fair share" to achieve an ecologically good status for the lake. Then, they ‘proposed’ £41 million last year, and now, they’re back with a more than quadrupled offer. Coincidence? We think not. Clearly, our campaign has got them scrambling.

It seems our efforts have brought attention and action to begin to rectify decades of underinvestment to protect Windermere. Today marks a significant success for our campaign.

But hold on to your hats—it’s not time to celebrate just yet. Sure, £150 million sounds like a lot, especially compared to what they’ve grudgingly offered before. But is it enough to truly safeguard Windermere for the future? Not quite. Let’s break this down.

They’re talking about reducing spills at all six storm overflows around Windermere. Sounds good, right? Well, not so fast. Research from Professor Peter Hammond at Windrush Against Sewage Pollution (WASP) shows that illegal spilling has been happening at all these sites for years. According to OFWAT, the water industry regulator, any investment to fix these illegal spills should not come from the bill-payer’s pocket—especially when UU has already been funded to keep things compliant in the first place.

And let's not forget, UU has been quite generous…to its shareholders. Last year, they dished out £454 million in dividends instead of putting that money towards actually protecting places like Windermere. So, why should customers pay again for a service that hasn’t been delivered?

Then there's the fine print. Reducing the number of spills sounds nice, but what about the volume of untreated sewage being dumped into the lake? That’s the real measure of success here. Hypothetically, they could reduce the number of spills while increasing the volume per spill—and call it a win. Other European countries manage to do more with less, so why should we settle for vague promises? We need transparency: UU, show us the money—where is this £150 million actually going?

Fundamentally, this isn't the comprehensive solution Windermere desperately needs. We've seen this play before: a little money, some fancy modelling, and suddenly it’s a ‘success’—without truly solving the problem. We need a long-term infrastructure plan to end sewage pollution in Windermere, not a flashy one-off that merely mitigates the problem. If this investment is the start of that plan, great! If not, it’s just smoke and mirrors designed to calm the storm of public outrage.

Let’s be clear—today’s announcement proves our campaign is working. We’ve forced UU to take action despite their foot-dragging, a failing regulator, and government inaction. But we’re not here for half-measures. This isn't about mitigation by reduction; it’s about ending sewage dumping into Windermere, once and for all. That’s how we protect our lake, our economy, and our environment for future generations.

So, stay tuned. Save Windermere isn't going anywhere, and we've got plenty more in store.