Skip to main content

Data and Facts - Gaps

Not Just Sewage Infrastructure Holes To Act On!

Knowing what we don’t or cannot know is just as important as the data that is available to us. There are limits to what government departments or private industry are willing to be transparent about. Knowing these limits means that anyone campaigning in these areas will be able to inform others of the limits of their ability to help Tell the Truth. Knowing what we need to know more about can provide opportunities to campaign to get the responsible bodies to do the right thing.

We cannot Act Now on what we do not or cannot know. Understanding our limitations as active and concerned citizens is important because this can point the way to building connections between those organisations that have pieces of the jigsaw. Where there are data and knkowledge gaps, it is important for NGO's, reporters, legal professionals, whistleblowers, influencers and other conscientious protectors to collaborate to help us act on the environmental destruction happening.

Surprise, surprise, there are lots of gaps in data; information can be inaccessible due to how laws protect the powerful, or finding information you need means wading through bureaucratic systems, or persisting against stonewalling, obfuscation and resource short-comings.

Here's just a few of the sink holes and eddy pools to watch out for and begin to think about who else might help...

The Law: Makers and Breakers

  • Environmental Protection Act Part II is almost unenforceable and unfit for conservation and restoration purposes, which explains some of the campaigns now happening to strengthen regulatory powers against the polluters. The Environment Agency (England) can downgrade pollution events from Category 2 or 3 to Cat. 4’s, which involve no enforcement actions. Minimising the significance of a pollution incident is a disturbingly commonplace practice and often happens without the public understanding how the benchmarking process works (or doesn't).

  • The Water Resources Act, 1991 may mean that your local river has been designated as a Water Protection Zone. It is worth checking this out with your local authority, because this legislation obliges companies in the locality to apply for consent where certain substances are used or stored at specific sites anywhere within the designated area, such as local industrial estates. Water regulators will also have responsibilities here. However, sadly, such protective designations do not guarantee business best practices in pollution prevention. It is down to the public knowing these protections exist, being the eyes and nose on the ground and knowing where to take their concerns.

  • Is it enough for people to have to go online when they witness potentially serious pollution incidents, or to form 'river watch' groups? Do you have any idea about any legal protections for your local watercourses? Chances are you do not know, because the regulators do not see it as their role to pro-actively engage the very people who are likely to blow the whistle when businesses systems fail, resulting in catastrophes. In the words of one regulatory officer, Elizabeth Felton, NRW Environment Team Leader for Wrexham: “Pollution incidents from industrial estates can happen every day because of spills, accidents, negligence, or vandalism....Such incidents can then put human health at risk and devastate wildlife habitats on rivers..."

  • In terms of the Freedom of Information Act, letters from the public, seeking information from local authorities responsible for remediation of pollution sources can result in only partial information sharing, buck passing, legal loopholes or downright misrepresentation. Being aware of what the organisational pitfalls you might face can all feel demotivating, but it's helpful to know what holes in the system you are navigating to keep records for any subsequent legal proceedings your campaign group might take up. Forewarned is forearmed. Here are some of the common pitfalls:

    • Lack of funding for thorough investigation by NGOs, local authorities or regulators.
    • deprioritisation of environmental obligations,
    • limits to Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIR)
    • poor oversight of engineering contractors,
    • lack of adequate staff training and incompetence,
    • scientific illiteracy,
    • lost records,
    • historical memory loss as staff retire and leave.

  • Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIR) contain exemptions to the public's rights to access information held by some public bodies, including local authorities. For example: [1]Exception 12(5)(d) of the Environmental Information Regulations states: “Confidentiality of proceedings where confidentiality is provided by law”. One particular FoI rejection the Dirty Water team were made aware of went on to elaborate on the legal constraints as follows: Regulation 12(5)(d) states:

    "(5) a public authority may refuse to disclose information to the extent that its disclosure would adversely affect –

    (d) the confidentiality of the proceedings of that or any other public authority where such confidentiality is provided by law;" This legalese was deployed by Spelthorne Council in response to a 2024 FoI request. In this case, the confidentiality obligation cited here was outcomes of a Coroner's Court, which by law can impose confidentiality instructions on a local authority impacted by their proceedings.

  • A further constraint imposed by local authorities on sharing information to the public comes under another set of regulations. A local authority may say that information shared with you under your FoI request is "for your personal use". It is important, therefore when asking for information from a local authority that you also seek permission to share with interested parties. The following response has been seen by one person making a FoI request: "Any re-use of this information will be subject to the Re-Use of Public Sector Information Regulations (2015) and authorisation from the Council will be required. In the event of any re-use, the information must be reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading manner. This is a difficult pill to swallow if someone dies through contamination. If anyone can share effective rebuttals the Dirty Water team would love to hear from you.

  • Regulatory bodies can be toothless. For example, data suggests the Environment Agency is failing to monitor water firms in England. Similar criticisms are made of Natural Resources Wales and other regulatory bodies and departments of government.

  • Scotland's water is not privatised, but pollution management, accountability and transparency still persist. Find out more at Scotland Sewage Dumps 2023

  • Defra's designated 'bathing water' status is an opaque application process. While the designation does require closer monitoring by the authorities when achieved, the idea is deeply flawed. See:

    • 'The Great Washout: The Futility of Bathing Water Status'
    • Public applications generally result in a rejection.
    • You cannot trust a Blue Flag bathing beach safety categorisation, even those beaches with apparent 'excellent' rating. Raw sewage contamination is still a risk, especially after heavy rain.
    • The government refused to provide the Guardian newspaper with a list of the rivers and coastal areas where bathing water status had been turned down since January 2022. Campaigners have attacked the lack of transparency around this process. Freedom of Information requests to find out why an application for a local river has been turned down have been refused by DEFRA.
    • The bathing water application process also minimises the number of local people who may use local waters, because the application asks for number of bathers using the water, but does not include boaters such as paddleboarders & kayakers, let alone dog walkers and paddlers.
    • Signs on-site, warning bathers of hazards can be risible at best, and virtually invisible at worst! Be sure to share the worst 'box-ticking' examples on our live content

Corporate Scum

  • Water companies currently have too much power, and are unwilling to act responsibly. One example of this is selective water testing by water companies, local and national authorities, which means water samples are only taken from mid-depth of rivers, excluding silt deposits, where most toxic industrial legacy cocktails lie.

  • Water companies can selectively dispense with water testing results, which can suit their purposes. In sewage overflow incidents, they may fail to provide representative data to regulators on licence breaches. More recently, most water companies now have monitoring devices at combined sewage overflow outlets, but the efficacy of the technology and the interpretation of the data flowing from these needs scrutiny.

  • Water companies can also stop sewage outflow at treatment plants to avoid Environment Agency monitoring effectively during site checks. Having advance notice of checks, rather than spot checks,checks allows this. You may want to ask your water company if this is a practice they use.use at your Water Assembly.

  • Water company improvement plans may be completely unfit for purpose and lack public input. Inviting water companies to a community assembly to increase accountability and transparency can be a useful way for your local community to ensure they stay on track.

    • A recent community assembly in Wrexham was hailed by local rebels as really useful and the beginning of good connections made with the local water company and the regulatory body. Keep an eye on this section of Community Assemblies case studies for examples of local groups addressing water issues!

  • Sewage overflow incident data from water companies may not be real-time. For instance, water companies share information with the Rivers Trust, who produce a sewage map of overflow event numbers and volume. Valuable as that resource is, it isn't yet ideal until real-time monitoring data is available there.

  • One option is writing a Freedom of Information (FoI) request to water companies to get exact data. Wording needs to be well-crafted, to prevent your responder from side-stepping a question. Fortunately, help is available: FoI letter template help here

  • Let's just be clear, though, it isn't just sewage we need to be mindful of, there is also licensed industrial effluent. For local information on incidents in England, email pollution.inventory@environment-agency.gov.uk . This automated reporting inventory (pollution inventory electronic data capture / PIEDC) "provides information about releases and transfers of substances from regulated industrial activities."

    • For Scotland, Ireland and Wales, you will need to check with your regulatory authority. (More info coming.)

  • The questions your community or local group might want to ask include:

    • What are the thresholds that trigger reporting and for which chemicals?
    • How do those thresholds compare with permitted levels in other parts of the world?
    • Are the licensing laws adequate, or do they need updating?
    • Are safety assessments purely about human health, for which an adult male is the standard and which downplays impacts on children, pregnant women and unborn foetuses?
    • What are the ecological implications of licensing where you are?
    • Are water extraction licenses adequate to reflect changing weather and ecology patterns?
    • Can we trust profiteers or the Environment Agency and other authorities to tell the whole truth, or is it another case of lies, damn lies and statistics?

Our Anthropocene

  • Plastic pollution is one of the reasons that archeologists now argue that we are no longer in the Holocene, as our plastic footprint means that our earth's surface is now littered with long term plastic pollution (together with human created climate change escalation). Now we need to call our current phase of history the 'Anthropocene'.

  • So much to say and so many organisations are already operating in the plastic pollution space, for now, check out our sources of pollution page for links.

  • If you are looking to build plastic pollution campaigns at the local level and feel bewildered at the amount of possible allies, Dirty Water crew will provide your digital armbands to keep you afloat. Watch out for spreadsheets of potential allies - coming soon.

  • We aim to help you build your lists of allies, with a searchable spreadsheet of organisations campaigning in water pollution issues. But we also need your co-creation...

  • Please help us build our list of contacts at region and nation level by using the editable page of this (soon to launch - as at May 2024) contact list, so those collaborations are not lost over time as people move on.

  • Meantime, if the circular economy and reduced consumption better than recycling is your swim style, the Ellen McArthur Foundation is a good start.

The War on Water

Where there is contaminated land, there are unmapped aquifers and vectors for pollution transmission through soils, ineffective landfill solutions, wildlife and wind. Given the long legacy of military usage of toxins for a variety of purposes, there is evidence to suggest that, as with other branches of government, human failure, legislative shortcomings and mistakes will also be endemic to military practice.

When it comes to land owned or previously owned by the Ministry of Defence (MoD), bear in mind that these are areas where technical and chemical 'innovations' will be initially tested. To be clear, it is the MoD that will tend to be on the 'cutting edge', trying out new tools and toxic chemical compounds to undermine the 'enemy'. The public are not permitted to enter MoD designated zones, so external oversight of practices is minimal. Only if concerns reach a government committee, whose discussions are behind closed doors, might there be any accountability for mistakes made.

Given the lack of technical and scientific expertise among ministers scrutinising this government department, achieving any level of balance in 'public interest' versus 'strategic imperative' seems unlikely. Do we trust our leaders to always act in the best interests of people and planet, despite whatever best efforts? What little evidence we share here is no doubt the tip of the iceberg. Look at the track record (That is on those pages that did not get deleted off the internet during the production of this page..!)

  • Ministry of Defence sites formerly used for weapons testing are subject to secrecy laws and confidentiality practices (e.g. 'D Notices', which forbid public access on the basis of ‘national security’). Find out more about the legacy of our military on our environment here:
    • Radioactivity
    • Site History
    • MoD Land Contamination History Stalls Forthside Land Transfer
    • WWII MoD Legacy
    • Note that limits to the Freedom of Information legislation apply when asking about toxic pollution on ex military sites, specifically: Sections 24 and 26 are exemptions in the FoI process; the Ministry of Defence may argue that the Public Interest Case is not met weighed against national security and the safeguarding of defence capabilities.
    • There is an interesting 'Declassified' report that offers some insight into the scale of military pollution in the UK. While the Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) and Declassified UK (DUK) have mostly reported on Greenhouse Gas Emissions being hugely underreported, they do raise concerns also the MoD's performance on environmental damage from pollution, particularly radioactive waste management. They also say the following: "The MOD also seems to ignore the latest scientific research showing the catastrophic global environmental impacts which would result if it launched its nuclear weapons."

Where's The Nearest Lighthouse? (What can I actually do?)

Given this lack of transparency and availability of information from authorities and companies, one lever for your group to find information you need is to submit a Freedom of Information (FoI) request. FoI requests are a useful tool to obtain information of any kind from those in power, be they regulatory authorities, government departments, local and unitary authorities, or private companies. That said, FoI requests are not always effectively responded to, particularly if you miss any tricks on how to exercise your rights. FoI requests are a skill worth developing as a group.

  • Fortunately, What Do They Know helps you avoid wipeout, offering existing case studies and template letters. Surf the constant tide of previous cases similar to your local situation. Search for information on your water horizon via their website and share your information with others entering those waters after you.

    • A case study on their website, for instance, refers to a resident who has put in a Freedom of Information request to the national regulatory body, Natural Resources Wales. Now, anyone searching the site for "leachate" will bring this request and similar example cases up. This invaluable resource means your local group will not have to be put off by having to reinvent the wheel and can avoid missing essential questions and exactly how to ask them in your Freedom of Information request.

  • If your FoI request leaves you dissatisfied, you do have the right to take up your dispute with the Information Commissioner

  • Commissioning independent scientific analysis or reports from consultants means knowing what questions to ask your potential contractor. You need to avoid their conflicts of interest with contracts with local authorities or water companies, for instance. Check if they have such contracts, or have had in the past; this could mean that if you hire them, your data could be compromised by pre-existing confidentiality and non-disclosure agreements, limiting your available data. That risks your group not getting the information you need to hold bodies to account.

    • It is helpful if an independent contractor is to be commissioned to provide your local group with any scientific or engineering report, that you ask them in advance if they obtain any more than 10% of their work from authorities or companies you seek to challenge. If they do significant amounts of work for e.g. a water company, a local council, or a water regulator, that could mean they will have a conflict of interest. If they are legally constrained in working for your group because of pre-conditions of contracts previously held with those bodies you want to hold to account, then go elsewhere! Greenpeace labs and some university engineering and chemistry departments have been known to support local groups in their research. We'd love to hear of your experiences here.

  • Allies Ahoy! Do you trust the information being provided by your identified engineer, environmental auditor, or other contractor? If not, talk to independent allies such as Friends of the Earth, who may have historic documentation or community connections to bring more information to light.

  • Fundraising? You will want to check that risk out before you fundraise for such an important fact-finding project. Let's not burn out on such an involved deep dive. If you haven't got the funds to source an independent report:

    • Might a crowd-funder help?
    • Get in touch with our Fundraising Team.
    • Lush Charity Pot grants provide targeted funding to small, grassroots groups delivering projects in the areas of animal protection, human rights, and the environment. This includes campaigning, activism, non-violent direct action, and implemented projects for rights, regeneration and rewilding. Find more info here.

Seeking Nature-Based Solutions?

  • Across the UK local planning regimes still leave much to be desired. For instance:
    • Does your local authority have a flood risk mitigation strategy? If so, does it include recommendations for tree planting? If your local authority has that documented, are financial constraints hindering implementing and meeting targets? Is this a potential community assembly in the making to bring local people together behind such projects?

  • What provision is made for:
    • Rewilding areas including grouse moors, through upstream land works to let straightened river stretches go back to historic natural paths - otherwise known as 're-wiggling'!
    • Is there scope for beaver population releases to achieve natural landscape engineering affordably and at scale?
    • Does your local nature partnership (LNP), or other national network which involves local communities and lay experts recommend other habitat management plans to mitigate impacts? You may already have connections with local NGO's, but also check out:
  • You have a chance to make a splash if your local authority has declared a Climate Emergency.
    • If so, where local landfill sites have a toxic legacy, you can reasonably ask what remediation and mitigation provision is made for leachate risks following heavy rainfall. Is that part of that climate emergency planning process? For example, are there buffer mechanisms between buried toxic waste and water courses? Some plants reabsorb toxic elements in soils. Are these possible options for your local community to request?

  • So many questions arise around toxic landfill... Be sure to check out our Dirty Water Social Justice page. We hope to bring you case studies of legal cases too, as they arise.

All Hands on Deck

We would love for you to contact the Dirty Water crew on your local issue to share knowledge and experience!

You can contact us via our Telegram or Mattermost channels or by email dirtywatercampaign@proton.me

Back to top