Explaining why the fine was so large, Judge Bright said: “The time has now come for the courts to make clear that very large organisations such as really must bring about the reforms and improvements for which they say they are striving, because if they do not the sentences passed upon them for environmental offences will be sufficiently severe to have a significant impact on their finances.”
Increasingly the way fines are set are determined by the ability of the company to pay and, with water and sewerage companies all considered large firms, they are more likely to be hit with bigger penalties. South West Water, Severn Trent and Southern Water, for example, have received six-figure fines in the last six months alone.
Following the most recent court case, Thames Water insisted it takes its responsibilities to the environment “extremely seriously” and “very much regrets the incident”. “We have since invested heavily in Tring sewage works to further improve resilience and protect the Grand Union Canal,” it said in a statement at the time. “We have also reviewed our procedures to reduce the chance of anything like this happening again, including upgrades to the inlet screens which were the cause of the pollution when they became blocked with wipes and other non-flushable items.”
But is this enough?
Only last year the Court of Appeal ruled against Thames and upheld a £250,000 fine against the company for polluting a nature reserve.
The Environment Agency’s deputy director of legal services Anne Brosnan – chief prosecutor in the case – said the Court of Appeal’s decision to uphold the prosecution demonstrates that businesses “need to prevent pollution or their profits could take a hit”. She said Thames had “not acted swiftly enough” to stop sewage damaging the nature reserve and a significant clean-up operation was needed, adding that the sentence should act as a deterrent.
Environmental groups have long been calling for tougher penalties for those who pollute the environment and, in 2014, the Sentencing Court obliged, introducing stricter guidelines, setting out a step-by-step process on how the level of a fine was worked out, in the hope that this would make the penalties for environmental offences – which have been consistently condemned as mere “token gestures” – tougher and more consistent.
The Court of Appeal warned last year of a “substantial increase” in the size of fines awarded to larger companies for breaching environmental laws, with the Financial Times reporting that Judge Mitting said this would result in fines measured in millions of pounds, and hoped this would “bring home the appropriate message to the directors and shareholders”.
Getting bigger? Some of the water company fines seen over the past year
In January 2016, Thames Water was fined a record-breaking £1 million by St Albans Crown Court for polluting the Grand Union Canal in Hertfordshire with sewage.
The Environment Agency (EA) brought the prosecution after sewage from Thames Water’s Tring treatment plant leaked into the canal’s Wendover Arm in Hertfordshire on several occasions between July 2012 and April 2013.
The court heard that poorly performing inlet screens caused equipment at the works to block, leading to sewage debris and sewage sludge being discharged into the canal.
Also in January, Yorkshire Water was hit with a £600,000 fine after an ageing sewage pipe burst, polluting a fishing lake in Wakefield.
The company was sentenced at Leeds Crown Court after pleading guilty to one charge of causing a water discharge that was not authorised by an environmental permit.
The court heard that in October 2013 a rising main sewage pipe from the company’s Shay Lane pumping station burst, and raw sewage flowed into a fishing lake in Walton Park, which flows into the Barnsley Canal.
In September last year, Severn Trent Water was slapped with the then third largest pollution fine handed out to a UK water company, following a pollution incident at Kingsforth Brook near Rotherham in February 2014.
The incident stemmed from a rupture in a Severn Trent raw sewage pipeline in Wickersley, which allowed raw sewage to spill into a farmer’s field, a pond in a private fishery, and into Kingsforth Brook.
Severn Trent had previously been issued with two formal warnings from the Environment Agency for similar incidents at the same location.
South West Water was fined £214,000 by Plymouth Crown Court in November last year, for breaching environmental controls at the Camels Head sewage treatment works in Plymouth and failing to stop sewage pouring into the River Tamar.
At the time, this was the highest fine handed out to South West Water for a case brought by the Environment Agency.
The court heard that between March and September 2013, South West Water failed to operate and maintain the works in accordance with good operational practice and to treat effluent so as to minimise the risk of pollution.
Just weeks later, SWW was ordered by Plymouth Crown Court to pay a £300,000 fine and costs of £14,421 after polluting a Devon watercourse.
The Environment Agency (EA) said it found pollution in the stream in September 2013 and again in December 2013, which affected a 400 metre stretch of water and impacted on river life.
The court heard equipment failure and poor management on the part of SWW led to poorly treated sewage entering the Craddock stream near its Ashill Sewage Treatment Works.
In September last year, Southern Water was labelled “negligent” and ordered to pay £187,000 in fines and costs by a judge in relation to a major pollution incident at its East Worthing treatment works.
The failure of three pumps at the wastewater treatment works resulted in 40 million litres of untreated sewage to be discharged into the sea over a period of two days in September 2012, resulting in the closure of beaches in East Sussex for six days.
Judge Christopher Parker handed down the fine to the water company yesterday at Chichester Crown Court following a previous court hearing in August in which Southern Water pleaded guilty to the offence.