MP hits out over water bills charge

OXFORD East MP Andrew Smith has hit out at plans to make Thames Water customers in Oxfordshire pay an £80 hike in their bills to pay for a “super sewer” in London.

The levy will be introduced in 2015 to fund the Thames Tideway Tunnel designed to stop millions of tonnes of Londoners’ untreated sewage flowing straight into the river’s tidal estuary.

Labour MP Mr Smith said: “It’s very unfair that, outside London, only Thames Water customers are being forced to pay for this.

“The tunnel is certainly necessary to stop raw sewage going into the Thames in London, and Thames Water are pointing to the environmental, tourism and business benefits.

“As those benefits materialise in London should pay for it. If London can’t afford to pay for it, then the cost should be spread across UK taxpayers, not just loaded onto Thames Water customers, especially those outside the capital. It is going to be a struggle for a lot of people to find £80 extra.”

Water firm spokesman Simon Evans said: “Customers outside London have seen significant improvements from investment in sewage treatment locally, while paying the lowest bills in the country for most of the past 20 years.

Related links

“It is only fair that the costs of our investment are spread evenly across our customers.”

Comments(5)

Andrew:Oxford says...
10:26am Sat 27 Oct 12

I suppose it will make up for all the years that London had to embrace the raw sewage that entered the Thames upstream in Oxordshire.

King Joke says...
7:53pm Sat 27 Oct 12

Well said Andrew. Anyone living in the Thames catchment area sends their sewage into the Thames. Handling that sewage is everyone's responsibility.

Darkforbid says...
1:08am Sun 28 Oct 12

“As those benefits materialise in London should pay for it. If London can’t afford to pay for it, then the cost should be spread across UK taxpayers, not just loaded onto Thames Water customers, especially those outside the capital. It is going to be a struggle for a lot of people to find £80 extra.”

Why should the taxpayer, pay anything? Or is that the way you think privatisation should work, shareholders milking the profits while the taxpayer pays for new infrastructure?

And why the pretty finance package? Macquarie Bank? So now we are lending money to the bank that owns it...

King Joke says...
2:13pm Tue 30 Oct 12

Darkforbid wrote:
“As those benefits materialise in London should pay for it. If London can’t afford to pay for it, then the cost should be spread across UK taxpayers, not just loaded onto Thames Water customers, especially those outside the capital. It is going to be a struggle for a lot of people to find £80 extra.” Why should the taxpayer, pay anything? Or is that the way you think privatisation should work, shareholders milking the profits while the taxpayer pays for new infrastructure? And why the pretty finance package? Macquarie Bank? So now we are lending money to the bank that owns it...
So Londoners should pay for the facilities to deal with our siht? How is that fair?

I reiterate, we all discharge into the Thames, so we all share the responsibility to pay for dealing with the discharge properly.

peachandbetty2 says...
11:12am Thu 15 Nov 12

I agree that this sewer is necessary and that all those along the river Thames should pay for it/ £80 a year extra equates to £6.50 ish a month, the equivalent of a two pints (and perhaps a packet of crisps). I find it hard to believe that "most people" are going to find it hard to put aside and extra £6.50, and I'm on minimum wage.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree