Abingdon reservoir consultation ends as local businesses and MPs raise concerns

The public consultation on the proposed Abingdon reservoir has closed; the plan could cost up to £7.5bn and customers of Thames Water, Affinity Water and Southern Water are expected to pay through bills. Local businesses and some MPs have raised concerns about local impacts, costs and Thames Water's ability to deliver.

The public consultation on the proposed Abingdon reservoir has concluded. The project is being discussed because it would be a large new water storage facility with significant cost and local impact implications. The scheme has drawn both local opposition and professional support as planners outline potential benefits for future water supply. Thames Water has given indicative dates for when construction and operation might occur. Key points: - The proposal has an estimated cost of up to £7.5bn, with customers of Thames Water, Affinity Water and Southern Water reported as bearing costs through bills. - Affected local business owners include the operator of an airstrip on land that would be flooded; the owner reported he had not received formal direct contact from Thames Water and raised concerns about loss of farmland and wildlife displacement. - Local MPs voiced doubts about Thames Water's finances and the company's ability to deliver the project, and questions were raised about construction traffic and local disruption. - Supporters, including the Institute of Civil Engineers forum chair, say the reservoir would help address an expected shortfall in water supply by 2050; Thames Water has said it hopes to start building in 2029 with the reservoir operational by 2040. Summary: Local businesses and some elected representatives have expressed concern about the project’s local impacts and the financial burden on bill payers, while engineering voices have emphasised the scheme’s role in longer-term water resilience. Thames Water has set indicative dates for construction and operation, but detailed approvals and delivery arrangements were not specified in the consultation material.