As part of my volunteer Water Guardian duties, last weekend Mrs Jackson and I took part in the national Water Blitz citizen science survey of the nation’s water bodies. Our test kits were issued by Dorset Wildlife Trust and we measured nitrate and phosphate levels in the stretch of the Stour I patrol in Gillingham. I hope to see the full picture across the country very soon, but the single measurement we took by the railway bridge near the sewage treatment works showed high levels of nitrate and moderate levels of phosphate. Taken at that location, after a few dry days, these levels are likely to come from agriculture and sewage treatment. The shame is that I expected these sorts of readings: such is the state of our general expectations of our rivers these days.
Last week there was a well-meaning summit of water industry players who discussed how to restore river health and increase customer trust. In the same week the water industry lobby organisation, Water UK, issued a statement on the same subject of restoring trust. The main recommendations of both were to expose data to greater scrutiny and set up yet another body to independently measure sewage overflows into our rivers and seas.
I suspect that we have long held the view that water companies marking their own homework using dubious data has generally been a bad idea, proven by the many scandals of sewage dumping, dry pumping and poor corporate behaviour. There is work here to restore trust, but it’s much more likely to come from rigorous, joined up oversight and transparency by a rigorous and joined up independent regulatory system.
The Labour government tasked Jon Cunliffe to lead the Independent Water Commission to review and recommend the way forward for regulating the industry: he will report in June this year, but the National Audit Office (NAO) submitted their homework on this subject ahead of time on 24th April. The resulting report pointed to a range of problems.
The Environment Agency issues regulations and targets for rivers and water bodies – but takes no account of the costs and impact on customers. OFWAT regulates water companies individually – but no one is taking a national view of water supply, or of sewerage assets.
Given that there are more than 30 massive schemes to be delivered in the next ten years for new reservoirs and strategic water transfer schemes, costing tens of billions of pounds, someone needs to look at that big picture and make sure we – and the environment – get good value.
While regulators are under the microscope elsewhere for being too strong and standing in the way of growth, the water industry regulators badly need a shakeup. They are not nearly strong enough. Liberal Democrats have been campaigning for this for years, and we want to see OFWAT replaced by a Clean Water Authority that also deals with the wider regulatory problems above. Now at last it seems that change may be coming. Water pressure works.
Gary Jackson
North Dorset Liberal Democrats

Here’s one to give climate deniers a laugh, and get them triumphantly exclaiming that they knew all along it was rubbish.
Brace yourself. It’s been calculated that global warming could make Europe colder.
What did I tell you? Hilarious!
But hang on a moment … before anyone laughs themselves too silly it’s worth asking how a northern ice age could be one of the consequences of global warming?
I’ve written previously about the increasingly rapid melting of the Greenland ice cap, and how it contains enough water to raise sea levels by seven metres. However, the melt-water pouring off the island is also having another negative effect on the oceans.
For centuries northern Europe’s climate has been generally mild, thanks to warm surface waters from the tropics being carried towards us by currents like the Gulf Stream. Collectively, these currents are known as the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), and the system is estimated to distribute an amount of heat equivalent to the energy flowing through one million power stations.
Unfortunately, the cold meltwater pouring off the Greenland ice cap is now slowing down the warm water flow: past collapses of the AMOC have been associated with ice ages in the northern hemisphere and increased warming in the south.
I take no pleasure in sharing alarming climate and environmental reports in my articles. I totally understand why some people can’t bear to think about it all: Even I have to switch off every now and again and for a precious period of time act as if it’s all going to be fine.
But burying our heads in the sand is not a constructive response to the existential threats we face. Polling shows that a majority of Britons now accept that the climate is changing due to human activity, and my hope in writing as I do is to help motivate everyone to take whatever actions they can to turn things around before it’s too late. The sooner we shift the world economy away from climate-warming fossil fuels and environmental destruction, the better our chances of building a future worth living for.

Ken Huggins
North Dorset Green Party

Calls for political change can be seductive, says Simon Hoare MP, but without proper scrutiny, we can risk years of buyers remorse

As a society we are becoming increasingly impatient (my wife has literally just walked in and commented that I have always been impatient and she did not see how I could become even more so … but I shall leave that there). Hot meals and groceries to the door. Next day delivery. Click and collect. All have contributed to creating what is being called the Amazon Prime syndrome. At the click of a button we can purchase items and have them in our hands within a few hours. Don’t like what we chose? Wasn’t quite what it said on the tin? Easy. Send it back and full refund is received. We then simply click and repeat.
Our electoral cycles are not so simple: buyer’s remorse takes four or five years to get a refund.

I know it’s so
Last May, Dorset’s Liberal Democrats urged a change from Conservative Council control. The Conservative administration had not done anything wrong but my Party had been running the show for while and people wanted a change. In much the same way that people change a household appliance of hairstyle – ‘nothing wrong with it per se, I just wanted a change’. In July of last year Labour told the country it was time for a change, and that only Labour could deliver that change. The country agreed and gave both Sir Keir a thumping majority and my party a massive kicking.
We believe that washing machines live longer with Calgon because, with cheery confidence that does not encourage questioning for proof, they tell us that it does. I have never compared the time of a Kwik Fit fitter to a non-Kwik Fit fitter but I know, because they tell me, that they do indeed fit quicker.
The word change has become the political version of ‘new and improved’ or ‘whiter than white’. The electorate have defined, erroneously, that change is only capable of being a positive thing. But anyone who has sung the hymn Abide With Me will know that ‘change and decay in all around I see’ is not an ode to joy. Change can, of course, mean progressing from the status quo: but it can also mean regressing.
The negative effects of change are never entered into the voter’s calculation. They should be. Recipients of PIP do not see the Government’s changes as being positive. Farmers are not positive about the devastating changes of the Family Farm Tax, or the abrupt end of the the Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI). Businesses of all types and sizes are seeing tax and National Insurances changes which are hostile to business. The national economy is undergoing a change – but in the wrong direction. Pensioners do not like the change brought about by the removal of the Winter Fuel Allowance. A growing economy changed to a shrinking one. I could go on but you will have got my drift.
Locally, I know people did not expect a change in Council leadership to lead to the spectre of night time car parking charges, Adult Day Centre closures or council tax increases. All change from the previous administration … but in the right direction? Constituents tell me not.
I tend to agree.
So, what is the key lesson we should learn? Change can be good, but it can also be bad: looking forwards but also dragging backwards.
When we politicians promise change, it is usually because we have sniffed the air and determine that there is an electoral appetite for it. We then owe it to the electorate to spell out what we want to change, why we want to change it, what we will change it to and how we will do it. If politicians don’t proactively offer up these things, then the voters need to drag it out of us. Buyer’s remorse for five years will be tedious.
As the voiceover perpetually advises: always read the label.