SE Water Failures were “Forseeable and Preventable”

A new expert report has said that South East Water was wrong to blame its failures in Tunbridge Wells at the end of last year on a bad batch of chemicals and unusual fresh water supplies.

A detailed report by the government agency, the Drinking Water Inspectorate or DWI, into the collapse of the supply to 60,000 customers says there is no evidence for either theory.

The DWI instead has concluded that South East Water’s failures were “foreseeable and preventable” and the company has now been placed into a so-called “transformation programme”.

The DWI explained: “A transformation programme is one of the most significant steps the Inspectorate can take. It is used when a water company has shown a pattern of serious or repeated failures that cannot be addressed through individual enforcement actions alone.”

The DWI statement issued on Tuesday continued: “Under a transformation programme, the Inspectorate works with the company to identify the root causes of poor performance and formalise these programmes into legal instruments, to deliver the changes needed to ensure consumers receive the reliable water supply they are entitled to expect.”

Local water industry expert, Charles Hedges (pictured below), told Southborough News: “A lack of maintenance, jar testing and recording of pH as well as undersized equipment highlights the lack of investments at Pembury – investments that should have occurred 30 years ago.”

Charles Hedges continued: “In its 2024 report, OFWAT records a series of failures by SE Water that go back to 2018. The DWI report of 2026 provides evidence of continued failures that reflect poorly on the technical leadership within the company.”

The DWI said the December disruption (mainly affecting the area shown above) originated at Pembury Water Treatment Works, where South East Water did not have sufficiently reliable systems in place to detect and respond to emerging issues in real time.

The DWI report states that: “The site had experienced earlier signs of instability that, if appropriately investigated and acted upon, would have prevented the works failure and subsequent loss of supply and impact on consumers.”

It continues: “Analysis of five years of raw water data demonstrated that raw water conditions prior to and during the event were within normal historic operating ranges. There is no evidence of a sudden change in raw water quality which would explain a sudden treatment failure.”

The DWI states: “Raw water monitoring at Pembury was insufficient for effective process optimisation with no continuous temperature monitoring at the works inlet and pH and alkalinity sampling alone insufficient for short-term or real-time decision making without constant review. Regular jar testing to confirm optimal coagulant dose had not been performed despite this being a requirement under a regulatory notice.”

The report continues: “The company pursued a batch chemical (coagulant) batch theory during the early stages of the loss of supply event. The theory has since been disproven with the chemical being confirmed within specification. The focus on a bad batch theory also meant operational resource distracted from identifying the need and attempt to optimise the current coagulant and process. The reactive jar testing which was completed onsite was delayed by a day due to staff availability.”

The DWI concludes that the supply interruption and boil water notice “arose not from exceptional raw water conditions but from longstanding weaknesses in operational management, treatment optimisation, monitoring, maintenance and organisational preparedness at Pembury water treatment works. Taken together, the findings point to systemic and repeated failings across both operational control and emergency management arrangements, resulting in serious consumer impact.”

The full DWI report is found here:
https://www.dwi.gov.uk/drinking-water-inspectorate-south-east-water-tunbridge-wells-investigation-conclusion-november-2025/

The chief executive of South East Water, Dave Hinton (pictured below), remains in his job despite the scathing report from the regulator.

The Environment Secretary Emma Reynolds said she had already “hauled in the CEO and Chair of South East Water to my office to ask them why we’re seeing repeated failures in leadership and service to customers, and I took the extraordinary step to ask Ofwat to investigate its licence conditions. I have demanded a serious recovery plan and swift action to prevent an incident like this happening again.”

Emma Reynolds continued: “This government has already banned unfair water boss bonuses, and our once-in-a-generation reforms will establish a new, single regulator with more teeth and greater powers to drive transparency including new MOT-style checks.”

Meanwhile the local MP Mike Martin said on Wednesday that a compensation fund for local businesses is set to be increased. Mike Martin met with the chief executive of the Water regulator OFWAT, Chris Walter, in Tunbridge Wells last Friday (see below).

South East Water’s compensation fund is currently only £600,000 despite evidence of an £18 million hit to the local economy.

Mike Martin MP said: “South East Water has now conceded what we’ve been saying for months – their paltry sum to local businesses barely touches the sides of the true financial damage inflicted on our local economy because of their water outage.”

Claims must be submitted to Wedlake Bell LLP, who are administering the process, using email sew@wedlakebell.com

After submitting a claim, businesses are being encouraged to let Mike Martin know using this link: https://mike-martin.co.uk/business-compensation

South East Water’s Chief executive, David Hinton, said on Tuesday he was not taking any bonus for the 2025/2026 year. 

David Hinton said: “We are focused on delivering our long-term business plan, the most ambitious we have ever produced, designed to improve operational resilience while keeping customer bills affordable. Customers can be assured that we are working at pace to complete our full programme of works.”

In its latest update on Pembury Water Treatment Works on 9th April, South East Water stated: “Two new filters were installed to improve treatment processes, reduce the risk of water quality issues and increase the capacity of water that can be provided into the Tunbridge Wells system. These filters will allow South East Water to support the Pembury network from the Bewl water treatment works, providing an additional source of water to the Tunbridge Wells system, if needed. Additional operational improvements include revised site maintenance schedules, updated testing guidance for operators, and a revised inventory of critical spare equipment.”

Opposition Builds to Lib Dem Plan for £68 million Council Debt

The Liberal Democrat Borough Council plans for a new “boutique” cinema and more shops in the RVP Shopping centre is set to be a big local issue in the May elections.

Leading figures from a range of political parties have spoken to Southborough News stating their outright opposition to the scale of the new council funded building (shown below).

The plans would involve the council taking on a debt of £ 68 million, which would mean an additional £5 million a year in debt servicing costs – on top of the council’s existing spending of around £ 20 million a year.

A leading Conservative councillor said the plans needed “further scrutiny”, while a Tunbridge Wells Alliance party candidate called for the architects to be given a “lower cost brief.”

Meanwhile, a councillor from the Independents for Tunbridge Wells Party in Pembury, David Hayward, called the Lib Dem plans “a ridiculous construct.”

The deputy leader of the council, Justine Rutland of the Liberal Democrats told Southborough News last week that the council was committed to the spending in order to boost the attractiveness of the RVP and provide “experience venues” particularly for young people.

You can watch a new 3 minute version of her interview here on this link:
https://youtu.be/C-jPzKdYzzI

David Hayward, (pictured below) who is standing for re-election in May, reacted to the video by saying: “It is ridiculous that the lessons of the Calverley Square debacle have not been learned.”

David Hayward continued: “The RVP purchase was instigated by the need to stop the alternative, which was effectively asset stripping. I know, I was in the inner sanctum at the time.”

“The work done, across parties and with the officers to secure the deal was amazing. The decision to use the consultants that were brought on board was a success. Maintaining Fenwicks and bringing in Primark was nothing to do with, as claimed, the LibDem administration, it was all part of the original scheme.”

David Hayward then argued: “But now, this boutique cinema expansion for Royal Victoria Place is a ridiculous construct which will place the council in debt and destroy heritage assets. This proposal is ignoring the whole borough’s needs without proper scrutiny as to whether these plans are value for money.”

David Hayward of the Independents for Tunbridge Wells party is one of 5 candidates in the Pembury and Capel ward in the May election. He concluded: “A cynic might suggest that securing the LibDem vote in the town centre is far more important than the needs of the residents outside of the LibDem strongholds.”

Meanwhile, Thomas Mobbs, (pictured below) who’s a Conservative Councillor for Rural Tunbridge Wells said: “Further scrutiny is needed to ensure these plans are value for money and back local businesses.’’

Thomas Mobbs argued: “The decision to expand Royal Victoria Place comes with huge financial implications for council tax payers in Tunbridge Wells. It will plunge the council into debt after many years as a debt free council.”

Thomas Mobbs stated: “Although we supported initial proposals, we have growing concerns about the long-term financial sustainability of the plans ahead of local government reorganisation and do not believe residents and local businesses have been consulted enough throughout the process.”

And a former councillor from the Tunbridge Wells Alliance Party, who is a candidate this time in Park Ward, Nick Pope (pictured below) also called for a rethink.

Nick Pope said: “I have always been surprised that Tunbridge Wells Borough Council allowed the corner buildings on Camden Road and Calverley Road to fall into such a terrible state of disrepair with leaking roofs. The council owns these buildings and has failed to maintain them.”

Nick Pope continued: “It has taken several decades of neglect for them to end up in this sorry state on the busiest shopping street in Royal Tunbridge Wells. A charity bookshop had to vacate one unit around 8 to 10 years ago because of the terrible damp and mould on the walls due to a leaking roof. The buildings could be restored and turned into commercial units with flats above.”

The corner buildings on Camden Road and Calverley Road, where the “boutique” cinema is due to be built are shown below thriving in 2012 when occupied by the White Stuff chain before the area was allowed to become derelict.

Nick Pope of the Tunbridge Wells Alliance Party continued: “As for Ely Court, a relatively small amount of money could turn the space into a fantastic space for a group of small businesses with a relatively small investment. Currently, it is an unwelcoming space for customers with the wind cutting through the passageway making it cold and unwelcoming, even on sunny days, so few customers linger and many of the small businesses fail to attract business and close within a few months.”

Nick Pope stated: “The loss of the Camden Centre is a mistake. It is the community hall for the town centre. Again, this building has not been well maintained and has a leaking roof. It was only opened about 35 years ago.”

Nick Pope argued: “Personally, I think it is the wrong time to invest in a major redevelopment of this corner of Royal Victoria Place. The borough council is about to be disbanded, and a smaller investment could revitalise the existing unloved buildings owned by the council and create a hub for small businesses on the corner of Royal Victoria Place.”

Nick Pope concluded: “The architects should be given a lower cost brief that keeps the existing buildings, bringing them back into use, and makes Ely Court a much more welcoming space for customers and small businesses.”

62 candidates are standing in total in the 7th May local elections, with Conservatives, Lib Dems and Reform each contributing 13 candidates, the Green Party 12, Labour 6, Tunbridge Wells Alliance 3, Independents for Tunbridge Wells Party 1, plus one independent candidate.

These are the individual wards:
Cranbrook, Sissinghurst & Frittenden: 4 candidates (Reform, Cons, Green, LibDem)
Culverden: 6 candidates (Independent, Cons, Lab, Green, LibDem, Reform)
Hawkhurst, Sandhurst & Benenden: 4 candidates (LibDem, Alliance, Reform, Cons)

Paddock Wood: 4 candidates (Green, LibDem, Reform, Cons)
Pantiles: 5 candidates (Cons, Green, Reform, Lab, LibDem)
Park: 6 candidates (LibDem, Lab, Green, Reform, Alliance, Cons)

Pembury & Capel: 5 candidates (Reform, Independents for Tun Wells, Cons, Green, LibDem)
Rural Tunbridge Wells: 5 candidates (Reform, LibDem, Cons, Lab, Green)
Rusthall & Speldhurst: 6 candidates (Green, Reform, Alliance, Lab, LibDem, Cons)

Sherwood: 9 candidates for 2 seats (Cons 2, Reform 2, Lab, Green 2, LibDem 2)
Southborough & Bidborough: 8 candidates for 2 seats (Cons 2, English Democrats, Green, Reform 2, LibDem 2)

There is no voting in High Brooms ward, which elects just one councillor, who was voted in two years ago.

The current state of the parties is: LibDem 21, Cons 8, Labour 4, Tunbridge Wells Alliance 3, Independents for Tunbridge Wells 1, Vacant 2 Total=39

The candidates for the local elections are available to view on the Borough Council website:
https://tunbridgewells.gov.uk/council/voting-and-elections/elections/thursday-7-may-2026/statements-of-persons-nominated?root_node_selection=510839&search_page_508814_submit_button=View+statement


This is a full transcript of Justine Rutland’s 24 minute interview explaining the reasons for the Lib Dem scheme:

Lib Dems Push For Big Council Debt to Boost Shopping Centre

The Liberal Democrats who run Tunbridge Wells Borough Council say a major investment in the town’s RVP shopping centre is “really crucial” despite criticism of the proposed council debt of up to £68 million needed to fund the project.

In an extended interview with Southborough News, the deputy leader of the council, Justine Rutland (pictured below) spoke about the need to regenerate the areas of the RVP which were “underutilised” and “could be housing a lot more activity than it is.”

Justine Rutland said: “Retailers are very fussy. They will want to see that their shops are successful and if they are not, they will go, so onward investment in the shopping centre is really crucial to make sure that it keeps delivering…and we make the town a better place to live.”

She continued: “It was always the idea that the shopping centre should become, more of a mix of experiences. So not just shopping… People definitely still want to go and buy things…but they also want leisure. They want to meet up with people.”

The council’s plan is for a modern “boutique” cinema to be built on the corner of Camden Road and Calverley Road that used to be occupied by White Stuff in the Victorian shops. (see below)

Justine Rutland explained: “The idea is to bring people into the centre, not just to, you know, buy some shampoo and a pair of trousers, whatever, but to have experiences and to have more of a day out, and then hopefully with a cinema, a day out – slash afternoon out – an evening out, and to start to rebuild that nighttime economy that will then support all the hospitality venues that we have.”

When asked about the estimated £ 5 million ANNUAL cost to the council of paying back the debt involved in funding the building of a new cinema and new leisure retail and space, Justine Rutland said: “The idea is that it would pay for itself eventually.”

The scheme is controversial as it involves demolishing the Friendly Societies’ Hall, which was visited to great excitement by one of Queen Victoria’s daughters in 1877 and currently is home to a thriving snooker centre (see below)

The Tunbridge Wells Civic Society has applied to the government for the Friendly Societies Hall to be listed to prevent its demolition.

Justine Rutland wouldn’t be drawn on the current income from the RVP shopping centre, which the council took full ownership of in 2023. The last published income figure from 2019 referred only to annual income of less than £1 million a year, but the council says updated figures are “confidential.”

Asked how the extra income generated by the new investment could possibly bring in as much as £5 million a year to cover the council’s debt servicing costs on its £68 million loan, Justine Rutland said: “We have plenty of data and economic studies to show that the recommended scheme is viable with economic activity growing.”

But she continued: “Well, of course, we will be looking continually at the data, and we will get updated economic impact assessments. And if we decide nearer the time that we need to make the big decisions, that it doesn’t work anymore, then we won’t proceed, but we are doing the groundwork to prepare for a scheme. We’re confident, we’ve got operator interest, and we’re confident that the wider benefits will make it a viable scheme.”

You can watch her answers on the Southborough News YouTube channel on this link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7E4wsVk0bRs&t=229s

Justine Rutland rejected a comparison with the Conservatives’ proposed £100 million Calverley Square project to build a new theatre, which collapsed when councillors decided the costs would have been a huge burden on council taxpayers. She said: “This is a very different scheme to Calverley Square. I think everyone has looked on at that scheme and is determined not to make the same mistakes.”

Justine Rutland was also asked about the petition signed by 5,000 people opposing the destruction of the Friendly Societies Hall housing the snooker club. And she was asked about the impact on the takings at the Trinity, which currently offers cinema three nights a week. Her answers are on the YouTube video or West Kent Talking podcast.

The interview has been watched by several hundred people already. One viewer said: “We need fewer councillors, lower council tax, and a council that lives within its means — not one taking on huge debts for speculative developments.”

Another sceptic said: “I’m afraid Justine Rutland’s responses give me no confidence that the scheme has been properly thought or could be partly financed by developing some of the excess space at RVP for housing.”

But there is still clearly interest in a new three screen cinema, with one resident commenting on the Nextdoor site: “I would love to see a cinema here. Trips to luxury and boutique cinemas (Everyman, Curzon etc) have doubled in two years. I love the cinema in Hawkhurst.”

More information about the council scheme is at:
https://rvpfuture.com/

The petition to save the snooker hall is at:
https://c.org/wDcWGyb9Hv