Green peer refuses Thames Water sewage

Jenny Jones, a Green Party member and peer, has stopped paying the sewage charge on her Thames Water bill. She cites the company's status as the worst offender for serious pollution incidents as her reason for protest.

Jones decided to act after reading a Guardian report from July 2025. That report stated serious pollution incidents by English water companies rose 60% in a year. The Environment Agency recorded 75 serious incidents among a total of 2,800, with Thames Water named as the worst offender.

The case for withholding payment

Jones argues that water companies are failing in their duties. She says they discharge raw sewage into waterways, impose hosepipe bans despite wet winters due to inadequate reservoir storage, and fail to fix leaks that lose about a fifth of England and Wales's public water supply. She also contends a large portion of customer bills funds interest payments on debt, rather than infrastructure fixes, enabling shareholder payouts.

She believes non-payment of bills is the quickest way to force change. Jones references the successful poll tax protests of decades past. She argues that even a few million people delaying bill payments could threaten the financial viability of privatized water companies.

Confrontation with the utility

After deciding to protest, Jones wrote to Thames Water. She stated she would pay for water supply but not for sewage services. The company replied that it does not separate bills in that manner. It then sent her a threatening letter and a vastly increased bill with penalty charges.

Jones acknowledges the letters are unpleasant and that bailiffs have been mentioned. She does not recommend others take the action lightly. She plans to read all correspondence calmly and await any court case.

Proposed solutions and systemic failure

The peer states the real solution is nationalization. She says public opinion favors renationalization, but the government cites a fictitious £100bn cost. Jones claims this figure is bogus because it includes company debt as part of its value. Many argue the actual cost is far lower, possibly zero.

The government has discussed "public control," which allows oversight and penalty charges but not public ownership. Jones counters that if laws and oversight worked, the current crisis would not exist.

She argues that company bosses are not held accountable for illegal dumping of effluent. Instead of prison, she suggests sentencing them to community service cleaning up the pollution they allowed.

Jones notes that despite a Labour government being in power for over two years, the situation persists. Bills are increasing while chalk streams die, river ecosystems collapse, and swimmers fall ill from sewage near beaches.

She vows to continue her protest. Win or lose in court, Jones believes she will win in terms of her own self-respect. She has drawn a line in the sand.