Environment Agency failed to visit serious pollution incidents, files show

Internal documents shared with BBC News show the Environment Agency attended only a fraction of reported pollution incidents in 2024. The agency went to just 13% of all pollution incidents reported to it that year, a figure that includes both serious and less severe cases, according to the material supplied by a whistleblower. In many instances, the EA appeared to rely on updates from the water companies involved, rather than sending its own inspectors to the scene. The documents also reveal that an internal EA directive from this year said that all potentially serious incidents should be attended in person, raising questions about how the policy is implemented in practice.

In 2024, the EA did not attend almost a third of nearly 100 water-industry incidents that were later deemed potentially serious. The data also show that the agency downgraded the environmental impact of more than 1,000 incidents that it initially assessed as potentially serious without sending investigators. The EA says it responds to all reports but has ways to assess pollution that do not require a physical visit. It stresses that when reports come in it is careful not to underestimate the seriousness of an incident.

An EA insider told the BBC that not attending incidents effectively means the agency is relying on water company evidence, which may not always be damning. “What not attending means is that you are basically only dealing with water company evidence. And it's very rare that their own evidence is very damning,” the whistleblower said.

Campaigners say the problem goes beyond isolated failures. Ashley Smith of Windrush Against Sewage Pollution (WASP) describes the difficulty of getting the EA to attend pollution incidents as “virtually impossible.” Smith, who has campaigned in Oxfordshire and other regions, recounts that when callers ask the EA about incidents, they are often asked whether there are any dead fish—an outcome that is not always present because fish can escape polluted waters. “The EA then says – we’ll report that to Thames Water – and it will be Thames Water if anyone who gets in touch with you,” Smith told the BBC.

Matt Staniek, a Lake District water quality campaigner, cited multiple incidents where the EA accepted explanations from the local water company about sewage spills at face value. Staniek says later data requests showed those explanations were not supported by independent evidence. “The Environment Agency has not been holding United Utilities accountable,” he said. “And the only way that we get them to properly turn up to pollution incidents and now actually try and do a proper investigation is by going to the media with it, and that should not be the case.”

A United Utilities spokesperson responded, saying the company is “industry leading at self-reporting incidents to the Environment Agency.” The government’s landmark review of water industry regulation has promised to end self-reporting by water companies. Lawmakers and campaigners broadly agree that the current system is not working, and plans are being drawn up to merge regulators—potentially including the EA—into a single body that oversees the entire water industry.

James Wallace, chief executive of River Action, told the BBC: “The Environment Agency is so hollowed out that it cannot investigate pollution crimes, effectively telling polluters they can act with impunity.”

In July, the BBC reported that staff shortages had forced the EA to cancel thousands of water quality tests at its main laboratory in Devon. An EA spokesperson said, “We respond to every water pollution incident report we receive. To make sure we protect people and the environment, we are careful not to underestimate the seriousness of an incident report when it comes in. Final incident categorisations may change when further information comes to light. This is all part of our standard working practice.”

The broader context is a system under strain as regulators face calls for stronger oversight and potential consolidation. The documents obtained by BBC underline persistent gaps between policy expectations and on-the-ground responses, reinforcing calls from campaigners and some lawmakers for a unified approach to pollution tracking and enforcement. While the Environment Agency contends that it uses various assessment methods and emphasizes not underestimating risk, critics say the current framework limits accountability and reduces pressure on polluters to invest in preventative measures.

The documents and interviews obtained by BBC News do not indicate that a single incident was mishandled, but they paint a pattern of delayed on-site investigations and a reliance on secondary sources. Supporters of stronger regulation argue that operational reforms are essential to deter polluters and restore public confidence in water quality oversight. Critics, meanwhile, warn that rapid consolidation of regulators could reduce local accountability and slow the ability to respond to region-specific pollution threats. The government has signaled it will publish further proposals in the coming months, aiming to streamline oversight while maintaining robust environmental protections. In the meantime, campaigners say the current approach allows polluters to operate with limited scrutiny, and call for ongoing monitoring, transparent reporting, and consistent on-site investigations for serious pollution incidents.