Last month I opened a Backbench Business debate in the House of Commons on the government’s Strategic Policy Statement to Ofwat.

Despite the dry title, this is an incredibly important issue for all of us who care about the ecological health of our rivers and waterways – as the Strategic Policy Statement is the primary mechanism through which the Government influence the water regulator, Ofwat, to refocus priorities for capital expenditure by the water companies in England for the next five-year pricing period, from 2025 to 2029.

Since privatisation, Ofwat’s remit has focussed mostly on ensuring supply of quality drinking water while keeping down household bills, with much less regard to investment in water quality. But given Ofwat’s unique position as the economic regulator, its approval is required for all capital investment. So I have been pushing for Ofwat's focus to be not only on household bills and water supply, but also on the environmental impact that water companies have.

With the rising cost of living, none of us wishes to see bills rising sharply, but equally, if water rates are set so low as to preclude necessary capital investment in water treatment, we will simply kick the can down the road for another five years and the problem of sewage discharges into our rivers will be harder to solve and more expensive to fix. It is clear from both public campaigning and surveys undertaken by water companies themselves that consumers rightly really care about protecting the health of our rivers.

There is also a great deal of political consensus behind this issue. Since launching my Private Members Bill to clean up our rivers over two years ago, I have worked with politicians from all sides of the House of Commons to garner support for change. That being said, I had to call out recently some attempts to use this issue for party political posturing ahead of local elections – this issue is too important to disrupt the overwhelming consensus we have created by campaigning on a cross party basis.

In fairness to water companies, there is no quick fix for six decades of underinvestment in water infrastructure – despite the posturing some party political campaigners continue to make. Water companies are also not solely responsible. For example, when new houses are built, developers do not have to pay towards the cost of water and waste water infrastructure. Agricultural runoff is also a significant issue.

Even when water companies do come up with plans to improve sewerage, it takes years to build significant new infrastructure, even after completing lengthy planning processes.

Last month I visited the largest water treatment infrastructure project in the UK – the Tideway Tunnel project – 25km of new sewers under London, which will remove almost 40 million tonnes of sewage currently discharged legally each year into the Thames. This transformative project is being delivered at a cost of only around £20 per annum per household. But it illustrates well both the high cost, £4.9billion, and the length of time involved in delivering a transformational project to improve water quality - 11 years from securing planning to becoming operational.

So a long term solution for whole river catchments  requires long term campaigning, and I shall be keeping up the pressure. Later this month I am hosting a public meeting in Ludlow with Severn Trent Water about efforts to clean up the River Teme from Knighton to Ludlow, where real local progress is underway.