Letter: Undrinkable rules
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: The discussion document drawn up by Ofwat, the water industry's regulator, is timely ('Higher standards could add pounds 100 to water bills', 14 July).
In September the European Commission is holding a conference in Brussels specifically to discuss possible modifications to the water laws with water suppliers from all over the Community.
Given that no one wants to alter water standards that protect human health, what scope is there for modifying existing directives to make their implementation less costly, and for ensuring uniform compliance, EC-wide? I have two proposals: first, we must look at whether we need all the detailed standards the directives contain. At present drinking water has to comply with no less than 62 parameters. These standards are mandatory. No distinction is made between important health-related standards and those that relate to aesthetic considerations, notably appearance.
Secondly, we should ensure that allowance is made for the fact that compliance takes time. At the moment, either you comply with the law to the letter or you are breaking it. There is no possibility for a country to submit a programme to Brussels to show what it intends to do. Consequently, countries, like Britain, with active environmental groups (who seem reluctant to export their attentions to other countries with worse records) move in to attack Britain for 'breaking the law', even when our water authorities are struggling - as are their equivalents all over the Community - to comply.
What hope is there that the next applicants for EC membership - from Eastern Europe - can possibly live with EC water directives unless we make such changes?
Yours sincerely,
CAROLINE JACKSON
MEP for Wiltshire (Con)
London, SW1
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments