Southwark Council and local community group Save Your Riverside have expressed their disappointment and anger at yesterday’s confirmation by Thames Water that it will use Chambers Wharf as one of the key construction sites for the proposed Thames Tunnel.

 Southwark Council is unanimously opposed the use of Chambers Wharf. London Mayor Boris Johnson and Bermondsey MP, Simon Hughes have also expressed concerns about the impact on the community.

Cllr Peter John, leader of Southwark Council, said:

“It’s disgraceful that Thames Water are ploughing on with their plans to use Chamber’s Wharf for part of the Super Sewer.  The community, the council, the Mayor of London and the local MP are all opposed to the use of this site. It seems Thames Water are only listening to their shareholders.

We have fought this proposal at every opportunity as we can find no possible justification for placing a major building site in the middle of a densely residential area and right next to a primary school. We have consistently argued that the disruption caused by 24 hour HGV traffic and drilling will blight lives for years to come.

It beggars belief that these arguments have fallen on deaf ears. Thames Water don’t even appear to acknowledge the petition presented to them by the pupils of Riverside Primary School. They should have closed this issue for good, but are instead just railroading opposition.”

Call for greater clarity on costs

Describing Thames Water plan to use Chambers Wharf as one of the major drilling sites for the Thames Tunnel as a  “flawed proposal”, Save Your Riverside said the utility had ignored resident and community concerns, commenting:

“We urge the government to act now on voiced concerns and demand a full disclosure of costs from Thames Water. Without this information it will be impossible for the planning examiners (major infrastructure planning unit MIPU) to make effective comparisons between alternative sites and routes.

We also believe Chambers Wharf have not had a proper consultation. We were only named as a potential site in April of last year, later than any of the other sites. In addition, at phase 2 of the process we have been given no alternatives to consider, with Thames Water as much as admitting any consultation was done as a matter of show, rather than through a real desire to get opinions and feedback.”

The Government has expressed its support for the proposed Thames Tunnel as the most cost-effective and quickest currently available solution for the environmental problems in the Thames Tideway and a number of influential environmental groups have also come out strongly in favour of the project.

However, there is still uncertainty about the final likely cost of the Tunnel -Thames Water has said that the current estimate of £4.1 billion could see between £70 to £80 per year to bills. Thames Water customers currently pay an annual bill of £339  - below the average household water and sewerage bill of £376 in England and Wales.

Giving evidence to the Thames Tunnel Commission in 2011, water industry regulator Ofwat described the tunnel as by far the largest project ever carried out by the water and sewage sector in terms of cost, size, risk and complexity. In its Evidence Note to the Commission, Ofwat said:

“As the economic regulator, it is our role to ensure that the project costs are properly scrutinised and tested. However, the project will significantly increase sewerage bills for Thames customers but we will be working to challenge the overall costs of the project to minimise the impact on customers’ bills.

The nature, scale and complexity of the Tideway project means that it will be difficult to use Ofwat’s normal tools to assess economy and efficiency of costs.

This is why it will be important to test all aspects of risks (including financing) in the appropriate markets through competitive tendering where this is possible… we remain concerned that the costs will escalate further."