Asked by: Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (Green Party - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government, in light of the complaint in relation to the Government's badger culling policy being considered by the Bureau of the Standing Committee of the Bern Convention at its third meeting of 2024, what methods have been used to measure the badger population since 2012 to ensure local extinction events do not take place.
Answered by Baroness Hayman of Ullock - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
As part of the existing badger control licensing policy, for intensive and supplementary badger control, Natural England set minimum and maximum numbers of badgers to be removed, in order to comply with commitments under the Bern Convention. This is to ensure the badger control operations deliver disease reduction benefits without endangering the local badger population.
The number of badgers removed and extent of culling activity is also closely monitored by Natural England during the operational period to ensure local extinction of badgers is avoided and to monitor the humaneness, safety and effectiveness of these culls. In addition, prior to licence authorisation, Natural England can also conduct sett surveys and sett checks in order to determine whether there is badger activity present in an area and that local extinction has not occurred.
On 30 August, the new Government announced the start of work to refresh the Bovine TB strategy for England, to end the badger cull by the end of this parliament and drive down disease to save cattle and farmers’ livelihoods. This work starts immediately and includes the launch a new survey to start this winter to update estimates of badger abundance and population recovery.
Further details can be found on GOV.UK at https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-to-end-badger-cull-with-new-tb-eradication-strategy (attached).
Asked by: Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (Green Party - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government how they are monitoring the success and roll-out of biodiversity net gain policy; and what plans they have, if any, to review the current system of exemptions.
Answered by Baroness Hayman of Ullock - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
We will build the housing and infrastructure that Britain desperately needs while protecting the environment.
That is why we are working closely with the sector to make biodiversity net gain work effectively and proportionally, with exemptions in place for any development that would have no or minimal impact on nature.
The list of specified exemptions is narrow and focused and keeps the policy ambitious, whilst being proportionate and deliverable for developers and local planning authorities.
Officials are monitoring the implementation of biodiversity net gain closely, and regularly meet with those engaging with it across local planning authorities, developers, and the land management sector.
Biodiversity net gain fundamentally changes how developers choose land to build on and how they design sites, and we are pleased to see so many stakeholders embracing this opportunity to deliver both much needed development and deliver for the environment.
Asked by: Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (Green Party - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to (1) monitor, and (2) address, non-compliance with biodiversity net gain regulations.
Answered by Baroness Hayman of Ullock - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
We are working closely with local planning authorities, who are responsible for monitoring and addressing incidents of non-compliance with biodiversity net gain regulations.
Failure to deliver, or attempt to deliver, biodiversity net gain outcomes which are secured with conditions or limitations (subject to which planning permission is granted) can result in enforcement action by the planning authority. Planning authorities have a range of existing planning enforcement tools at their disposal.
Defra has funded the Planning Advisory Service to deliver training and guidance on biodiversity net gain to local planning authorities, ensuring they can competently enforce regulations.
As biodiversity net gain delivery develops, Defra will continue to review the role of guidance in supporting when enforcement action can be taken. Defra will also continue to work with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government on any future measures that could support enforcement of BNG and develop the essential housing and infrastructure Britain needs, while safeguarding the environment.
Asked by: Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (Green Party - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Hayman of Ullock on 8 August (HL429), what assessment they have made of the changes that have taken place since the publication of The cost of nationalising the water industry in England by the Social Market Foundation on 5 February 2018, and the impact of these changes on the cost of compensation to stakeholders.
Answered by Baroness Hayman of Ullock - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
If the whole water industry was nationalised, share- and debt-holders would need to be compensated, which could cost over an estimated £99 billion. This is based on Ofwat’s Regulatory Capital Value (RCV) 2024 figures for companies in England and Wales. This figure is higher than the Social Market Foundation's 2018 estimates because the industry's RCV has grown over the past six years, following new investment in infrastructure and RPI inflation.
Given the significant costs attached, the Government has no intention to nationalise water companies. It would take years to unpick the current ownership model, during which time the sector's issues would only get worse. The Government instead wants to tackle the situation as quickly as possible by improving the privatised regulated model.
That is why, alongside providing the regulators new powers to take tougher and faster action through the Water (Special Measures) Bill, the Government has also announced a full review of the water system. This will shape further legislation that will fundamentally transform how the current system works and clean up our rivers, lakes and seas for good.
Asked by: Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (Green Party - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government, in light of the complaint in relation to the Government's badger culling policy being considered by the Bureau of the Standing Committee of the Bern Convention at its third meeting of 2024, on what occasions their actions have been brought to the attention of the Bureau of the Standing Committee, and how many times that they are aware of has an open file been kept on their actions.
Answered by Baroness Hayman of Ullock - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
A complaint was submitted to the Bureau of the Standing Committee of the Bern Convention in 2019 in relation to the licensed culling of badgers to prevent the spread of bovine tuberculosis (bTB) in England. In response to the evidence submitted by the UK Government, the Bureau decided there was insufficient evidence to open a complaint. Instead, it decided to keep it on standby so the situation could be monitored. As requested by the Bureau the UK has provided further progress reports in 2021 and 2023. The UK’s next progress report is due in July 2026.
Asked by: Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (Green Party - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government why compensation to shareholders would be required for a water Company in the Special Administration Regime, if they decided that public ownership was a necessary precondition of environmental and public health regulations being met.
Answered by Baroness Hayman of Ullock - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
A Special Administration Regime (SAR) is not a form of renationalisation. It is a tool to ensure vital public services continue to be provided after a company fails.
Compensation for shareholders is not a requirement for placing a company into a SAR.
Asked by: Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (Green Party - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether the 30-day constant rate water quality trial, conducted at the Blackford public water source in South Harefield in April and May by Affinity Water Ltd and HS2 Ltd, found any construction-related changes to the water quality at that site, prior to plans to restart abstraction at Blackford pumping station.
Answered by Baroness Hayman of Ullock - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The Environment Agency is aware of the trial at the Blackford public water source in South Harefield in April and May, however, the Environment Agency has not yet seen the results. Affinity Water expect to finalise the trial’s report in October and the Environment Agency expects to see it then. Any action carried out by the Environment Agency will be dependent upon the result of the trial. The Environment Agency continues to provide advice and guidance to both Affinity Water and HS2 Ltd.
Asked by: Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (Green Party - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Hayman of Ullock on 8 August (HL429), what plans they have to conduct their own analysis on the cost of taking Thames Water into public ownership, and whether they plan to consider alternative calculations from other agencies such as by Moody's Ratings who calculated that the cost would be £14.5 billion.
Answered by Baroness Hayman of Ullock - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
We have no plans to nationalise Thames Water or other water companies so are not considering alternative calculations on renationalisation. We continue to carefully monitor the situation at Thames Water. The Government is also focused on tackling the public’s immediate concerns to clean up the nation’s polluted waterways and turn around the sector’s performance.
Asked by: Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (Green Party - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the answer by Baroness Hayman of Ullock on 23 July (HL Deb col 354) that taking Thames Water into public ownership would "cost billions of pounds and take years to unpick the current ownership model", whether they plan to publish a full analysis of those costs.
Answered by Baroness Hayman of Ullock - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The cost of nationalisation was calculated in a report published by the Social Market Foundation titled ‘The cost of nationalising the water industry in England’. The report estimated the costs of nationalising water companies, including Thames Water, would be £90bn. This research draws on a range of existing academic studies, as well as publicly available data from Ofwat, the London Stock Exchange and the annual accounts of the water companies. The research can be viewed on the Social Market Foundation’s website www.smf.co.uk.
Asked by: Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (Green Party - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they have any plans to ban bottom trawl fishing in marine protected areas; and if so, when.
Answered by Baroness Hayman of Ullock - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
It is essential to manage bottom trawling in our Marine Protected Areas appropriately due to the significant damage it can have on protected seabed habitats. Fisheries regulators make detailed assessments of the impact of all fishing activities on the protected species and habitats in our Marine Protected Areas and develop byelaws to restrict fishing when it has been assessed as damaging. 60% of England’s MPAs have bottom trawling restrictions already. This is something that will be getting early attention as we consider next steps in the context of our domestic and international nature conservation obligations and how we support the fishing sector.