THAMES Water has failed to justify plans for a reservoir in Oxforshire, campaigners said yesterday.

On the opening day of the public inquiry into the firm’s plans, the Environment Agen-cy, Group Against Reservoir Development (Gard), and local councils all said they did not see the need for the reservoir between Abingdon and Wantage.

The public inquiry, led by Government-appointed insp-ector Wendy Burden, opened yesterday at Conference Centre Oxford, in Park End Street, Oxford.

The reservoir is a part of Thames Water’s draft Water Resources Management Plan (WRMP).

The 25-year plan outlines how the company aims to meet predicted demand for water in the region between now and 2035.

The inquiry is set to last five weeks, after which the new Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman would make a decision.

Gard’s QC, Natalie Lieven, said the public inquiry was a “critical moment” for the protest campaign to make its arguments and prevent the scheme going ahead.

She also said Thames Water had not proved the need for the reservoir.

She said: “It justifies its inclusion by reference to demand predictions, which are not robust, and to thoroughly flawed consideration of alternative options.”

Speaking on behalf of Oxfordshire County Council and Vale of White Horse District Council, Matthew Reed also said the need for a reservoir had not been justified.

And he said the social and environmental impact of the reservoir had not been properly assessed.

David Travers QC, for the Environment Agency, said the plan was neither “robust” nor a “sustainable solution” to forecast water shortages.

But Keith Lindblom QC, for Thames Water, said the firm had to address significant long-term uncertainties rath-er than ignore them, or hope they would disappear.

He said: “As Thames Water’s evidence to the inquiry will show and as the Secretary of State will be invited to accept, the strategy in the revised draft WRMP is robust, complete and sustainable.

“It is fit for purpose and does not need to be changed.”