Water Quality in Rivers

Improving the quality of the water in rivers in England should be considered a principal objective through which the Government and public bodies can deliver on the legally binding duty, established in the Environment Act 2021, to halt the decline in domestic species by 2030.

A ‘chemical cocktail’ of sewage, agricultural waste, plastic and persistent chemicals is polluting rivers. River water quality has improved by some measures in recent decades, but in others it appears to be getting worse. The establishment of a complete overview of the health of rivers in England and the pollution affecting them is hampered by outdated, underfunded and inadequate monitoring regimes. Many harmful pollutants are not routinely monitored, and the Environment Agency has reduced the number of monitoring sites.

Poor monitoring arrangements mean that river users cannot currently make informed decisions about when it is safe or not to use rivers. The prevalence of plastic pollution, the presence of persistent chemicals and spread of antimicrobial resistant pathogens in rivers in England are all issues of grave concern. Not a single river in England has received a clean bill of health for chemical contamination.

The current range of pollutants being monitored is too narrow. The Environment Agency must begin work to extend the number of substances it is regularly monitoring in rivers. Existing datasets do not provide a comprehensive picture of risks to human health, aquatic life nor microplastic contamination in rivers.

We recommend that the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs commission, in conjunction with the devolved administrations, a UK-wide survey of emerging pollutants and microplastic pollution of river environments, including an assessment of their potential impact on aquatic ecology.

Wild salmon are iconic and important species. It should ring alarm bells that wild salmon are classed as ‘at risk’ or ‘probably at risk’ in almost every river in England they traverse. Protecting rivers where important species such as the North Atlantic salmon are known to be in danger must be a priority for the Environment Agency. Pollution levels in these rivers must be reduced as a matter of urgency. (Paragraph 43) Rivers fit to swim in

We have heard disturbing evidence that sewage treatment works and the rivers that they discharge into are becoming breeding grounds for antimicrobial resistance. There will need to be cross-sector collaboration to reduce the growth of antimicrobial resistance genes in rivers. Following the work streams of the Pathogen Surveillance in Agriculture, Food and the Environment programme on antimicrobial resistance, we 120 Water quality in rivers recommend that the Government bring together farming groups and water companies to decide on a programme of action to reduce opportunities for resistance to develop in the water environment.

We welcome the Environment Act’s inclusion of a requirement on water companies to reduce the impact on public health of sewage discharges. We recommend that this includes consideration of antimicrobial resistance.

Every community in the country should have access to waters—whether coastal or inland—that are safe for people to swim in without running the risk of falling ill. Regulators and water companies have made a great deal of progress since the 1990s in cleaning up and monitoring our coastal waters so that they are fit for bathing. This progress must now be extended to rivers. We welcome the efforts made by those water companies that are already working towards designation of river stretches.

We recommend that the Government actively encourage the designation of at least one widely used stretch of river for bathing in each water company area by 2025 at the latest. In their Business Plans for Ofwat’s Price Review 24, each water and sewerage company should set out how they intend to work with stakeholders to support further applications for the designation of river bathing waters in their area, and to continue the process in subsequent Price Reviews.

Most river users cannot currently make informed decisions about when it is safe or not to use rivers downstream of storm overflows and wastewater treatment works. We recommend as a matter of urgency that the Environment Agency work with water companies to ensure that easily accessible information on sewage discharges in waterways in as near to real time as possible is made available to the public, as now required under the Environment Act 2021. Signage should also be provided at commonly frequented bathing sites downstream from wastewater treatment works with information about how to access the data on recent discharges.

When deciding on areas for designation, the costs and benefits for local stakeholders should be carefully assessed, with consideration given to the potential impact on land adjacent to bathing waters. We recommend that DEFRA ensure its Environmental Land Management Scheme supports action by farmers with land adjacent to designated waters to minimise the risk of any faecal contamination from livestock which might pose a risk to bathing water quality.

Designation of stretches of river as bathing waters will help to drive coordinated action to improve water quality: but achieving rivers safe to swim in is only one aspect of securing an overall improvement in water quality. Designation of bathing waters must therefore go hand in hand with further measures to preserve and improve riverine biodiversity. (Paragraph 72) Agricultural pollution

Intensive livestock and poultry farming appears to be putting enormous pressure on particular catchments, such as those feeding the river Wye running through Wales and the south-west Midlands. The number of chickens being reared there appears Water quality in rivers 121 to have increased significantly, and pollution from their waste appears to be finding its way into river waters. The potential impact of intensive agricultural practices on river water quality must be fully acknowledged and the risks mitigated. One means of doing this is through farming which is as sensitive as possible to its effect on water quality in catchments.

Development of catchment sensitive farming will require calculations of the overall nitrogen and phosphorous load for farmland and river catchments. We therefore recommend that DEFRA commission a periodic (five yearly) appraisal of catchment-wide nutrient flows across each of the major river catchments in England. Such appraisals should then be used by local authorities and planning authorities to inform decisions on new housing developments and intensive livestock units, taking into account the cumulative impact of such developments on river catchments.

We further recommend that planning authorities in England establish a presumption against granting planning permission for new intensive poultry or other intensive livestock units in catchments where the proposed development would exceed the catchment’s nutrient budget, unless evidence is presented of robust mitigation plans in place that are demonstrably effective in reducing the accumulation of phosphate and nitrate loads in soils and river sediments within sensitive areas in the catchment.

The agricultural sector has a responsibility for improving water quality in rivers, just as the water industry and other stakeholders do. The Farming Rules for Water ought to be amended over time so as to reduce phosphorus surpluses in land and water and thereby improve water quality. This must be done in a way that promotes cooperation from farmers. The Environment Agency must recognise the impact on the sector of rule changes made with insufficient notice or options for mitigation.

In order to drive down further the excess levels of phosphate and nitrates on agricultural land, annual chemical assessments will be required. Where appropriate, farmers ought to be supported to assess the existing phosphorus and nitrogen status of their land before spreading either farmyard manure or sewage sludge from water companies. The new Environmental Land Management Scheme provides an opportunity to provide financial help to farmers for measures to reduce progressively the input of phosphates and nitrates that cannot be taken up by crops.

We recommend that the Environment Agency work with DEFRA to intensify its work in the inspection and, where necessary, remediation of large animal slurry stores. Where remediation is required, funding from the Slurry Investment Fund should be made available to support the work.

The sewage sludge currently spread on agricultural land contains microplastics which have been caught in the wastewater treatment process. It may also contain e-coli, antibiotics, biocides, persistent chemical pollutants and pharmaceuticals. This practice appears to be the principal means of disposal of biosolids from such processes. If it is to continue, a means must be found to ensure that the microplastics 122 Water quality in rivers which find their way in to waste water are disposed of safely and not spread over food-growing farmland thereby polluting productive soils. The Government should commission an independent evaluation of the potential risks to human health and the environment of spreading sewage sludge, with all the pollutants it contains, on farmland.

We recommend that the water industry work urgently with the Environment Agency and the farming sector to assess and mitigate the clear risk of microplastic pollution from this practice, and to develop a comprehensive plan for the separation of microplastics from biosolids at wastewater treatment works. (Paragraph 129) Sewage pollution

The public are rightly shocked when they discover that untreated or partially treated sewage is regularly dumped into rivers and streams in England. We have heard that the rainwater washing into storm sewers can contain microplastics, industrial chemicals and hydrocarbons. It will then mix with human waste from homes and businesses containing harmful bacteria. In some cases, the only ‘treatment’ that such discharges will have received will have been to pass through a mesh grill.

We therefore found the claim made by the chief executive of Severn Trent that its sewer overflow discharges were ‘pretty much already rainwater’ to be disingenuous. As water companies do not routinely test the quality of the discharges from storm overflows, they are in no position to make this claim. Discharges from overflows can be highly contaminated with raw sewage and other pollutants. To claim otherwise shows a disregard for the public’s concern about water quality in rivers.

Independent analysis of publicly available monitoring data, using machine learning techniques, has produced insights into the performance of the sewerage network which appears to have been beyond the current capacity of the Environment Agency to achieve, let alone water companies. The Environment Agency must improve its capacity to handle the very large volumes of data which will be provided in the course of automated monitoring of water quality and of storm overflows.

We recommend that the Environment Agency either develop the in-house capacity or tender for external assistance necessary for the analysis of the volume of data generated by EDMs and for the establishment of techniques to identify discharges which are likely to breach permit conditions.

The technology for continuous monitoring of water quality is evolving rapidly. We recommend that the Environment Agency invite manufacturers to submit products for evaluation so that the Agency can rapidly introduce cost-efficient and effective sensors at an increased number of locations.

We note with concern the evidence we have received which suggests that Environment Agency sampling practice at wastewater treatment works may not adequately take into account regular variations in the composition of effluent. (Paragraph 171) Water quality in rivers 123

We welcome the statutory provisions in the Environment Act 2021 to monitor water quality upstream and downstream of sewer outflows, and for annual reporting on storm overflow discharges. We also welcome the requirement for water companies to report on the volume where information is available, but we regret that there is as yet no timetable for the roll-out of volume monitors across wastewater treatment works, especially to those works which have a history of spills.

We recommend that water companies take immediate steps to install volume monitors at all points where overflows may discharge from their sewerage networks, so as to provide continuous real-time monitoring of the volume of discharges consistent with the provisions of the Environment Act 2021. Drainage and sewerage management plans should include a clear plan for volume monitoring and a clear timetable for its implementation, and water companies should publish regular reports on progress towards full implementation.

We were dismayed to learn that some water companies have been slow to respond to formal requests by campaigners and citizen scientists under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 to secure information about EDM use and permit conditions on the sewerage network. Given the overwhelming public concern about water quality in rivers in England, greater transparency in this respect should become the norm. We welcome the commitments on improved transparency which we received directly from the chief executives of several water companies.

The statutory requirements on monitoring and transparency introduced by the Environment Act 2021 establish a welcome baseline. There is nevertheless scope to improve the nature of data which water companies collect about the operation of their sewerage networks, and to make it available to regulators and to the public. We recommend that Ofwat and the Environment Agency require each water and sewerage company in England to publish on its website, by the end of 2022, details of its discharge permits, its permit compliance, and full granular 15-minute data on spill duration, volume and water quality, to a standard format which facilitates easy capture and analysis by members of the public.

The water industry has failed to achieve the target, set by the Environment Agency, of a 50% reduction in serious pollution incidents from their 2012 level by 2020. This is not an acceptable position.

We recommend that Ofwat require water companies, as a condition of their continued licensing, to deliver year-on-year reductions in the number of pollution incidents, with a target of zero serious incidents by 2030.

We nevertheless welcome the reductions in serious pollution incidents which water companies have achieved and which the Environment Agency has acknowledged.

We note that the Environment Agency does not consider any use of storm overflows to be a pollution incident: discharges from overflows are classed as permitted discharges as long as they comply with the terms of the relevant permit. This is unlikely to incentivise overall reductions in discharges. We recommend that the 124 Water quality in rivers Environment Agency reclassify significant sewage spills from storm overflows into watercourses in dry weather as pollution incidents, irrespective of permit compliance.

Public confidence in the regulatory structures currently in force is understandably low. It is vital that the public can trust regulators to ensure that high levels of water quality in rivers are achieved and maintained.

We have identified multiple potential points of failure in the regulatory arrangements for monitoring, governance and enforcement of water quality. The Southern Water case has given rise to obvious and urgent questions about the system of operator self- monitoring and Environment Agency compliance monitoring. Given the duration of time when misreporting and large spills were routine at Southern Water, we cannot discount the possibility that similar practices have been occurring undetected at other water companies in England.

We welcome the investigation recently launched by the Environment Agency and Ofwat into permit compliance at sewage treatment works, following evidence presented to us indicating that the numbers of permit breaches may be far higher than disclosed by water companies under self-reporting arrangements. We look forward to examining the findings of the investigation.

We recommend that the Environment Agency urgently review its practices in auditing the self-monitoring of wastewater treatment works by water companies. The Agency should also review its approach to enforcement and seek to reduce the interval between detection of permit breaches and prosecution.

We further recommend that, in the interests of promoting public confidence in the criminal justice system and reducing the likelihood of reoffending, the Sentencing Council review the sentencing guidelines for water pollution offences. In our view, penalties for such offences should be set at a level that will ensure that the relevant risk assessments are routinely on the agenda of the boards of each water company.

We recommend that Ofwat examine the scope of its existing powers in respect of water company remuneration, with a view to limiting the awards of significant annual bonuses to water company senior executives in the event of major or persistent breaches in permit conditions.

It is clear that there are no quick fixes to decades of under-investment in the sewerage network in England. Successive administrations, water companies and regulators have grown complacent and have sometimes appeared resigned to maintaining the antiquated practice of dumping sewage in rivers.

Ofwat’s regulatory approach to date appears to have placed insufficient emphasis on facilitating the investment necessary to ensure that the sewerage system in England is fit for the challenges of the 21st century, and able to cope with housing growth and the impact of climate change while restoring good ecological health to rivers. Investment must be accelerated so that damaging discharges from wastewater treatment assets, including storm overflows, cease and that any spills occur only in genuinely exceptional circumstances. (Paragraph 232) Water quality in rivers 125

The Secretary of State has the opportunity to set strategic direction for Ofwat. Now is the time for the Government to act in encouraging Ofwat to increase materially the proportion of each company’s capital investment devoted to improving water quality.

We recommend that Ofwat prioritise the long-term investment in wastewater assets as an essential outcome of its price review process. We further recommend that Ofwat incentivise the use of nature-based solutions in wastewater management, including ongoing funding for maintenance and operation.

We intend to invite the regulator to appear before this Committee routinely to discuss Ofwat’s progress against the objectives of the new Strategic Policy Statement for the regulator which is shortly to be published by Ministers.

The Government acknowledges that reductions in discharges from the sewerage network will require significant investment across the water estate. The price estimate made by the Storm Overflows Taskforce of the cost of full separation of the entire sewerage network should be carefully scrutinised by the Government as it produces its plan, required by September 2022 under the Environment Act, on the actions required to reduce discharges from storm overflows in England.

There is nevertheless no reason not to seek rapid and sustained action towards achieving the Act’s requirement for progressive reductions in discharges, through incorporating capital projects into a whole-systems approach which seeks to reduce the overall pressures being placed on aging infrastructure. The Thames Tideway demonstrates that substantial capital projects can be secured without unaffordable bill increases. We recommend that Ministers publish their assessment of every possible option to reduce system pressures on existing infrastructure, while also examining the case for significant capital works, when preparing the statutory report on elimination of storm overflows due by September 2022.

We welcome the duty which the Environment Act 2021 places on water companies in England to secure a progressive reduction in the adverse impact of discharges from their storm overflows. This is a positive first step towards cleaning up the sewage discharges blighting rivers in England.

We recommend that Ministers and the Environment Agency should set challenging improvement targets and timetables for this progressive reduction to inform the drainage and sewage management plans to be drawn up by each water company. The first round of these plans should clearly indicate significant ambition, by setting a stretching timetable for progressive reductions in the use of overflows. (Paragraph 243) Surface drainage and urban pollution

Fats, oils and greases and cleaning and hygiene products containing plastic are causing huge problems for drainage systems when they are poured away in sinks or flushed down the toilet. The disposal of FOG by takeaways and other food service establishments is currently unregulated. Grease management solutions exist, but awareness appears to be low. The food service industry needs clear guidance and standards to be established, failing which firmer regulation is likely to be 126 Water quality in rivers required, to ensure it begins to take responsibility for addressing an issue which is costly for water company customers and detrimental to sewerage systems and the environment. There could be potential circular economy benefits for businesses that can utilise these harmful waste products as biofuels.

The water and grease management industry must develop standards for the sectors which use FOG routinely to collect and dispose of such responsibly without it entering the drainage network. We further recommend that Ministers work with the water industry to consider whether fats, oils and greases should be classed as a trade effluent and all takeaways and food outlets required to install grease management systems.

Wet wipes and other ‘unflushables’ are a major constituent of sewer blockages. Many householders are unaware that flushing anything other than the ‘3Ps’ (‘pee, poo and paper’) risks blocking sewers and could lead to a pollution incident. Better product labelling, introducing producer responsibility schemes and the use of behavioural science by water companies all have the potential to reduce blockages and the costs of clearing them.

The use of plastic in single use sanitary products should be prohibited, with exemptions only provided for medical requirements. We urge the Government to adopt the measures outlined in the Plastics (Wet Wipes) Bill to prohibit the manufacture and sale of single use cleaning and hygiene products containing plastic. The Government should further incentivise the reduction of waste and recoup costs by using new powers in the Environment Act to extend Extended Producer Responsibility schemes to cover single use cleaning and hygiene products that cause blockages.

Tyre, motor vehicle and fashion manufacturers, among many others, must take greater responsibility for the contribution their products make to microplastic pollution in waterways. We recommend that Ministers examine how the proposed Extended Producer Responsibility scheme for tyre manufacturers could contribute to the swifter implementation of mitigation measures across the road network. We repeat our call for the Textiles 2030 scheme to incorporate the reduction of microplastic pollution in its targets.

Highways authorities at the national and local level must place a greater priority on preventing pollution from the strategic road network and from major roads maintained by local authorities in England. Solutions are available. These need to be rolled out as rapidly as possible.

National Highways mitigated risks of pollution from 23 drainage points in 2020/21. At this rate it will take over 55 years to address the 1,326 outfalls and soakaways it has identified as high risk, not to mention the thousands of other potentially polluting drains on the strategic road network. This is unacceptably slow progress. We are sceptical that the company will be able to achieve its target of no net loss of biodiversity without working at a much faster rate to neutralise the direct risks to water quality from those outfalls it manages. (Paragraph 287) Water quality in rivers 127

We recommend that National Highways accelerate its programme of installation of improvements to highways drainage in England, particularly at the 1,326 outfalls and soakaways considered to be high risk, to capture and filter polluting run-off before it enters watercourses and groundwater.

We recommend that National Highways devote a greater proportion of its environmental budget to the mitigation of outfalls and set a target of eliminating pollution from those outfalls most at risk by 2030, in line with the Government’s commitments to halt species decline. It should set out, by the end of 2022, a timetable for eliminating the risks from the outfalls and soakaways it manages.

We are disappointed by the apparent lack of regulatory oversight of the risks of water pollution from road run-off. We therefore recommend that the Environment Agency require discharge permits for all outfalls on roads with annual average daily traffic above 15,000 vehicles, establishing strict conditions for their management, so as to minimise pollution from run-off.

We welcome the announcement that Ministers are to review whether Schedule 3 to the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 is to be implemented in England. Implementation would end the current automatic right to connect to sewerage systems, and mitigate the accompanying risks of overloading sewer capacity.

We recommend that the review consider the optimum arrangements for maintenance and adoption of sustainable drainage systems, and that it should propose an end to the automatic right to connect to the sewer in new developments as soon as possible and by the end of 2023 at the latest.

We further recommend that the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities update its planning practice guidance on sustainable drainage to ensure that sustainable drainage schemes are considered in all developments, including improvements under permitted development rights, and that it takes steps to address existing loopholes concerning the cost and practicality of such schemes.

We further recommend that Non-Statutory SuDS Standards should be improved, taking into account the findings of the DEFRA review, so as to include water quality alongside other wider benefits, and should be made mandatory.

New housing developments must be used to set the standard for the sustainable sewerage networks required in the 21st century. It is unacceptable for developers to increase the pressure on overloaded combined sewerage systems and not to contribute to improvements. We recommend that, in the process of approval of any new development in England, water companies ought to be empowered to require that any Community Infrastructure Levy payable by developers is used to enable separate surface water and foul sewers, in cases where provision has not already been made for such arrangements. (Paragraph 314) Restoring rivers to good ecological status

The new Office for Environmental Protection, established under the Environment Act 2021, is empowered to make highly significant contributions to the achievement 128 Water quality in rivers of the Government’s environmental objectives in general, and to the improvement of water quality in rivers in particular. We encourage the Office for Environmental Protection to take account of the relevant conclusions and recommendations of this report when planning the Office’s work on water quality, and to use the powers granted by Parliament to drive improvement of the regulation and enforcement regimes which govern the state of England’s rivers.

In the Committee’s recent report on biodiversity in the UK we argued that action to protect biodiversity needed to be stepped up in scale, ambition, pace, and detail. Our conclusions from this inquiry show that this step change in approach is vital to protect freshwater biodiversity.

Changes in regulatory action, cross-catchment collaboration and water company investment are urgently required to restore rivers to good ecological health, protect biodiversity and adapt to a changing climate. We expect to see far more assertive regulation and enforcement from Ofwat and the Environment Agency, with the provision of funding and resources to match.

The value of biodiversity in rivers in England does not appear to have been priced adequately into the economic decisions made by companies and by regulatory agencies. If it is to meet the Environment Act’s legally binding target to halt the decline in the abundance of species in England by 2030, the Government must make it clear, in strategic guidance to Ofwat and to National Highways, that from now on natural capital needs to be taken into account in all economic decision making, and priced at a level that preserves and enhances it.

The biodiversity crisis requires public agencies, regulators and water companies to adopt new decision-making methodologies. The idea, for instance, that pollution can be tolerated in areas with low ‘amenity value’ belongs to a different era. Pollution of rivers must be addressed wherever it occurs because of the impact of such pollution has on freshwater ecosystems and ultimately the health of the oceans.

Ofwat’s economic regulation of the sector through previous price reviews does not appear to have given sufficient priority to the preservation of natural capital. We recommend that, when it publishes its review methodology in 2022, Ofwat set out how it intends to reflect natural capital fully in its economic regulatory decisions for Price Review 24. PR24 must encourage water companies to make a substantial increase in their investment in nature-based solutions, so as to improve the quality of effluent being discharged from sewage treatment plants.

Delivering the step change in action on water quality that is demanded will require DEFRA to set a strong strategic direction and clear targets. Regulators must be empowered and funded adequately to implement and enforce the relevant provisions of the amended Water Industry Act and the new Environment Act. We note that in 2020 the annual grant support from central government to the Environment Agency was £80 million less than the funding provided in 2009.

We recommend that the level of financial support provided to the Environment Agency be reviewed as a matter of urgency in the light of its new statutory responsibilities and the scale of the regulatory task it faces, recognising its continued need for efficiency. Water quality in rivers 129 We further recommend that the Environment Agency, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Treasury review the relevant provisions of the Agency’s environmental permitting charging scheme so as to ensure that charges for discharge permits and related activities properly reflect the cost to the Agency for these activities

Responsibility for improving water quality in rivers cannot be laid solely at the door of the water industry. The project to restore all rivers in England to good health will require the engagement and collaboration of a wide range of stakeholders—from farmers to local authorities, and from product manufacturers to food outlets. At the riverside, it will require concerted action from a range of stakeholders collaborating across each catchment, including farmers, the water industry, housing developers, local authorities and citizen groups. The Catchment Based Approach partnerships provide a useful forum for this coordination: we consider that Ministers should examine means to increase the funding and resources available to them so as to achieve more effective coordination of all stakeholders across each river catchment in measures to improve water quality.

Local authorities have a key role to play in restoring rivers to good ecological status across the country. Their engagement in Catchment Based Approach partnerships is crucial, while their work on Local Nature Recovery Strategies must engage with the development of drainage and sewerage management plans. It is essential that they be given powers sufficient to enable them to retrofit sustainable drainage systems on outfalls from major roads and housing estates.

Pollution across river catchments must be progressively reduced from all sources in the catchment until it does not exceed the capacity of the land and the rivers to handle the nutrients. We therefore recommend that DEFRA direct the Environment Agency and Natural England to calculate nutrient budgets for each river catchment in England.

Adequate support needs to be made available for farmers to achieve progressive reductions in those nutrient inputs which risk negatively affecting water quality in a catchment, or to mitigate the risk. We recommend that DEFRA examine how the Environmental Land Management scheme can best be used to achieve this outcome.

Policymakers across Government should aim to cultivate a culture of water citizenship to foster greater awareness and change behaviour that risks causing blockages in the sewer network and increasing levels of water pollution. Awareness of what should not be disposed of down toilets and drains appears to be low. Many householders are still unaware that flushing anything other than the ‘three Ps’ (‘pee, poo and paper’) can create a risk of blocking sewers leading to a pollution incident.

Citizen science should not be seen as an alternative to adequately funded environmental monitoring by regulators but it should be encouraged and recognised. We recommend that the Environment Agency explore how best to support the contribution of citizen science to environmental regulation and to incorporate citizen science analysis in its work wherever possible and appropriate. The Environment 130 Water quality in rivers Agency should, for instance, consider how best to provide a publicly-available platform for citizen scientists to enter water quality readings in a way that would allow results to be verified by other users, regulators or companies.

It is important that communities who engage in citizen science receive a meaningful response to their work. We recommend that the Government consider whether a requirement should be placed on water companies to respond to citizen science research undertaken by CaBA partnerships, where that research demonstrates water quality issues in a specific area, with an action plan to address the issues identified.

Drainage and sewerage management plans, as currently conceived, appear to be the preserve of the water industry. For these plans to be successful they must be designed so as to ensure active and continued engagement with the full range of stakeholders, including local authorities, highways agencies and developers. These plans must be backed up by measures to prohibit use of the products and chemicals at greatest risk of blocking drainage systems and degrading water quality.

Retrofitting urban areas with sustainable drainage systems can deliver multiple benefits in terms of nature recovery, air quality and flooding prevention. We recommend that Ministers review and, where appropriate, revise the criteria for the award of funds intended for flooding prevention and nature recovery so as to ensure that they support projects to retrofit sustainable drainage systems. We further recommend that, through its price review process and asset management plans, Ofwat allow adequate funding for water companies to identify areas for the retrofit of sustainable drainage systems. (Paragraph 378) Water quality in rivers 131