Yesterday evening, during the second reading of the Water Bill, MPs debated who should pay if fracking goes wrong and pollutes our water. A number of MPs backed the proposal to make sure that fracking companies are liable for the costs of any accident and have the clean-up funds available.
This was a welcome debate of critical issue. Our rivers and groundwater are one of our most precious natural resources, but in many parts of the UK they are under great pressure from over abstraction and pollution. The Water Bill is an opportunity to address this through reforming the abstraction regime amongst other things, but it is also an opportunity to ensure that fracking is properly regulated and does not add to existing problems.
This is important regardless of whether or not we think fracking is a good thing for the country. In fact, we have often been reassured by politicians that the UK’s regulatory regime is, as the Prime Minister put it, ‘one of the most stringent in the world’. Yet if this is to be the case, why do we not have clear rules to make sure fracking companies pay if anything goes wrong and a river of aquifer is left polluted?
Such rules are particularly important in the event of the operator going bankrupt, particularly given the long timeframes over which a site might be operational. The fiasco in Scotland where open coast coal mining companies have gone into administration and left the taxpayer with the clean-up bills is a good illustration of this.
Assurances that accidents won’t happen aren’t enough either. Even if the industry is well regulated accidents could still happen – as they have in the USA. What’s more, if there is no risk to the natural environment, as some have argued, then insurance to cover the costs of a pollution incident should be available at negligible cost.
That’s why the RSPB, the Salmon and Trout Association and other NGOs are calling on MPs to introduce an amendment to the Water Bill that would ensure the taxpayer is never left with the costs of cleaning up a fracking-related pollution incident.
The amendment is incredibly simple. All it would do is require the Environment Agency, who regulates the industry, to ensure anyone receiving a permit to frack would have to demonstrate that they have a secured a financial provision – like a guarantee – that would cover the costs of a pollution incident regardless of when it happens and the status of the original developer.
Who should pay if fracking goes wrong? Let me know what you think here or on Twitter (@harryhuyton).