No Directors Prosecuted for Deliberate Sewage Dumping by Southern Water
One of Britain’s biggest water companies was fined £90m ($126m) today for deliberate dumping of “billions of litres” of sewage into the North Sea over a 5 year period. But no Directors or other staff were implicated in the proceedings, and none were bound over to ensure that they would receive prison sentences if/when it happens again.
“These offences show a shocking and wholesale disregard for the environment, for precious and delicate ecosystems and coastlines, for human health, and for fisheries and other legitimate businesses that operate in the coastal waters,” said the judge. But the £90m fine compares to annual profits of well over £200m.
The judge said the company had a history of criminal activity for its “previous and persistent pollution of the environment”. It had 168 previous offences and cautions but had ignored these and not altered its behaviour. “There is no evidence the company took any notice of the penalties imposed or the remarks of the courts. Its offending simply continued,” he said.
In 2019, three employees were convicted of obstructing the collection of data by the government-owned Environment Agency, which was investigating raw sewage spilled into rivers and on beaches in south-east England, but none spent a single day in jail.
The case between the environmental regulator and Southern Water, which the company tried to suppress, raised questions about the Southern Water’s corporate governance and why employees would obstruct the agency.
It also puts the spotlight on the regulator’s monitoring of sewage treatment plants and water companies and the extent to which the public can trust assessments of water cleanliness.
Southern Water, which supplies 4.6m customers in Kent, Sussex, Hampshire and the Isle of Wight with water and sewage services, was charged at the same time as the employees but the company was found to be not “criminally liable” for obstruction of the investigation.
Five staff members were convicted in 2018 of obstructing EA investigations between July 11 and 13, 2016 although two of the convictions were overturned on appeal. Several of the employees argued that they were acting under the instruction of the company solicitor not to give data to the regulator, even though the agency is dependent on information supplied by the water companies for its monitoring of sewage outflows.
The court documents cite a “lack of co-operation . . . and in some cases . . . conduct which was clearly calculated to frustrate the inspection”.
In one example, a management scientist said she was instructed by a lawyer to refuse to allow the EA to take documents that would have provided data on sewage outflows from a waste water treatment works.
In another example, a colleague was instructed by a superior “to remove the bagged diaries from the officers’ possession and lock them in his van”.
Marie Bourke, a senior associate at law firm Russell Cooke who was not involved in …