National News The Brexit Thread 🇬🇧🇪🇺

It’s unfair to tarnish the Oceaniaian government with the actions of our own. After all, they had smart TVs rolled out 30 years ahead of ours!
 
  • React
Reactions: QR
One of my siblings works for the Environment Agency, monitoring pollution levels in rivers and waterways across the region. They were banging on about this possibility 3/4 years ago and are as delighted as you would expect by the latest developments. Not to mention a bit sad and stuff, because he always used to get told it was nonsense that the supply of essential chemicals could be affected, despite it being his job to know how it all works. Now the same people who told him he was wrong are telling him it isn’t a big deal. And around and around it goes…

My dad is retired but until two years ago worked for Thames Water in the waste department (he was a sewage worker, to be blunt), and he couldn’t believe it when he heard about the plans to just dump it neat. His brain isn’t what it used to be, but he’s still got enough marbles left to understand the potential severity of it.

That this has gone on right before the UK hosts COP26 is beautiful irony if nothing else. Like attending a vegan rally straight from the opening of an abattoir, or rocking up at an electric car convention in a monster truck.
 
One of my siblings works for the Environment Agency, monitoring pollution levels in rivers and waterways across the region. They were banging on about this possibility 3/4 years ago and are as delighted as you would expect by the latest developments. Not to mention a bit sad and stuff, because he always used to get told it was nonsense that the supply of essential chemicals could be affected, despite it being his job to know how it all works. Now the same people who told him he was wrong are telling him it isn’t a big deal. And around and around it goes…

My dad is retired but until two years ago worked for Thames Water in the waste department (he was a sewage worker, to be blunt), and he couldn’t believe it when he heard about the plans to just dump it neat. His brain isn’t what it used to be, but he’s still got enough marbles left to understand the potential severity of it.

That this has gone on right before the UK hosts COP26 is beautiful irony if nothing else. Like attending a vegan rally straight from the opening of an abattoir, or rocking up at an electric car convention in a monster truck.

It is the same as those claiming PROJECT FEAR every time when experts in their field said what would happen in their fields of expertise after Brexit.
 
It is the same as those claiming PROJECT FEAR every time when experts in their field said what would happen in their fields of expertise after Brexit.
The Government would surely have been made aware of these problems during the transition period? But just seemed to jump on the “Project Fear” band wagon as it was the easier option at that particular time. They really aren’t fit for purpose. How many other critical decisions are they ducking or failing to understand?
What’s the point in having a Government that doesn’t understand it’s role?
 
The Government would surely have been made aware of these problems during the transition period? But just seemed to jump on the “Project Fear” band wagon as it was the easier option at that particular time. They really aren’t fit for purpose. How many other critical decisions are they ducking or failing to understand?
What’s the point in having a Government that doesn’t understand it’s role?
The Government were absolutely aware of this as every single department and Arms Length Body (such as the EA) were heavily involved in the risk assessment process and yes I am absoluty sure that, as Ryan points out, supply of chemicals for water and effluent treatment were identified as at risk due as we are heavily dependent on a supply chain that involves Europe.

The scenarios will have looked at what happens and how cross border movements/supply might be affected. Im sure mitigating factors will have included looking for supplies elsewhere, but would be discounted as impossibly costly, extremely logistically challenging and simply unreliable long term. Critical industries such as drinking water and effluent treatment simply can't work effectively without certainty of supply of vital chemicals.

All of this Risk assessment was coordinated across government departments by DExEU (the department for Exiting the EU) which was set up in 2016 and shut down on 31st Jan 2020...because Brexit had been "delivered" and Boris had delivered on his promise to get Brexit done. "Responsibility" for managing ongoing impacts of Brexit fell to the Cabinet Office. Their planning and preparedness was then wholly consumed with Covid pandemic issues.

DExEu won't have factored in Covid (happened mostly after DExEu was shut down) and they won't necessarily have factored in the chronic underlying structural issues in the supply and logistics chains that left them vulnerable (even though reliance on foreign labour across multiple sectors would have been identified as a risk of Brexit), that would affect supply even more than they could imagine at that time.

So the risks were certainly all identified but to what extent these were dismissed or to what extent the dots were joined up, we have yet to see any evidence in public (and may not see any official papers for a long time yet). Nonetheless, the evidence of risk of how Brexit would impact and how other stresses on the system would exacerbate them was clearly there...I think they called it "Winter Readiness" planning last year (so perhaps the GoT references were not that wide of the mark[emoji6]). I have a sneaking suspicion for some reason that a government packed full of Brexiteers and a cabinet office run by uber-brexiteers, as this one will have taken every opportunity to downplay the impacts of the project they were so fully behind. They do have a bit of form for it...and for not listening to experts when it suits their political aims!

Essentially it is yet another example of how Brexit and Covid have created a perfect strom with the impact of each being made worse by the other.

And this, dear reader, is why people keep stating that Brexit has made things worse!

The uplands might be sunlit if we ever reach them, but are likely to be smothered in partially treated sewage sludge for lack of anywhere else to put it long before then and will stink quite a bit. It'll be like the UK's very own dirty protest over Brexit!
 
IIRC Water companies have always been allowed to discharge raw sewage - its not a good thing in ANY way - if they exceeded a certain volume they got fined.

Southern have copped for a £90million fine - I would question where that money goes. To reinvest in infrastructure? Doubt it.

If we flushed the loo less often (if its yellow let it mellow, if its brown flush it down) then didn`t tarmac our drives, and stopped the population growth that would have a positive impact. 🤷‍♀️

And now for some good news - unless you are a turkey.

It is so awful here folk are applying for visas, we`ll know who and where they are and other useful things.

 
IIRC Water companies have always been allowed to discharge raw sewage - its not a good thing in ANY way - if they exceeded a certain volume they got fined.
Yes, a very limited amount which can be managed safely and occasionally organically by the environment. Not an open tap without restriction that threatens to send our water quality back thirty-plus years.

When two members of my family who did / still do this for a job are both stunned by the decision, despite being on opposite ‘sides’ not just in terms of industry but also politically, it makes me think this isn’t just a shoulder shrug. It’s a bad move that has largely come about because they didn’t sort things out before yanking the plug out of the wall.

I don’t know that not flushing the toilet when you go wee wee is the answer to them not sorting out how toilets work. It might save on your water bill a bit and use less fresh water in the cistern (still worth doing) but it does nothing in regards to sewage. The same amount is going down there eventually whether you flush once or three times, and it’s what they do with it when it gets there that is the issue.
 
Yes, a very limited amount which can be managed safely and occasionally organically by the environment. Not an open tap without restriction that threatens to send our water quality back thirty-plus years.

When two members of my family who did / still do this for a job are both stunned by the decision, despite being on opposite ‘sides’ not just in terms of industry but also politically, it makes me think this isn’t just a shoulder shrug. It’s a bad move that has largely come about because they didn’t sort things out before yanking the plug out of the wall.

I don’t know that not flushing the toilet when you go wee wee is the answer to them not sorting out how toilets work. It might save on your water bill a bit and use less fresh water in the cistern (still worth doing) but it does nothing in regards to sewage. The same amount is going down there eventually whether you flush once or three times, and it’s what they do with it when it gets there that is the issue.

Surely if the frequency is decreased be it water, pee or turds then it makes the end result easier to manage, reduces volume in the system so negates the need to discharge?

If we pee three times a day then have dump and flush there is more sewage but less total volume - multiply that by 30 million households.....

I`m trying to learn here before I dig a home composting loo down by the shed so I can "do my bit".
 
It`s a fact of life dearest, some people are intellectually challenged, they are all around us, and the primary reason we need signs on things that are obviously dangerous.

And they can vote too.

:)
Trouble is some of them are running the country
 
If we flushed the loo less often (if its yellow let it mellow, if its brown flush it down)
So for decades water companies prioritise dividends over investment in infrastructure, make commercial decisions to risk fines over investment and the solution is to flush less? I don't think you are really getting this.
 
So for decades water companies prioritise dividends over investment in infrastructure, make commercial decisions to risk fines over investment and the solution is to flush less? I don't think you are really getting this.

Really?
Are they not balancing a see-saw without increasing bills?
 
£57 billion paid in dividends since 1991. That's all you need to know.

Against a capital expenditure across the same period of £123 billion.

Is that not how all private businesses work?

Do "something" to make a reasonable profit for investors?

Consumerism is what is screwing the planet because we need an eternal supply of new consumers to keep buying "stuff" that is done by population expansion. Population expansion consumes more, does more harm, creates more waste.

Fewer people - consume less - waste less.

Time to cull a few out.
 
Against a capital expenditure across the same period of £123 billion.

Is that not how all private businesses work?

Do "something" to make a reasonable profit for investors?

Consumerism is what is screwing the planet because we need an eternal supply of new consumers to keep buying "stuff" that is done by population expansion. Population expansion consumes more, does more harm, creates more waste.

Fewer people - consume less - waste less.

Time to cull a few out.
It's an essential utility. Provided by the tax payer at its inception (because the private sector couldn't make a profit out of it) and sold on the cheap to the private sector. Its number one concern should have been maintaining, updating and improving the infrastructure not the opposite so it could pay dividends to shareholders. If the £57 billion paid to shareholders was recalculated to 2021 prices and then factoring in the efficiencies that investment over the past 30 years will have brought and suddenly you don't have the enormous problem you have now.

It truely is a disgrace and a scandal.
 
Back
Top Bottom