Water Companies: Fines

Lord Bishop of Norwich Excerpts

Thursday 6th February 2025 Lords Chamber

[The Lord Bishop of Norwich]

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Grender, for securing this timely debate. It is a scourge on us all that sewage pollution is damaging so many of our watercourses and coastlines—damaging their ecosystems but also our enjoyment of them. I remember my first experience of such pollution when, as a young lad, I caught sticklebacks in my hands from the ditches around our Yorkshire village. One day, I went to my usual place of good stickleback hunting to find it putrid, with a storm drain leaking sewage and items—at the time, I did not understand what they were—floating in the ditch. The sticklebacks were gone for over a year.

The Rivers Trust reports that none of our rivers are now in good overall health. Its 2024 report, State of Our Rivers, notes that 54% of our nation’s rivers are impacted negatively by the water sector, mainly through sewage effluent. Surfers Against Sewage reports that there were 604,833 discharges of raw sewage into UK waterways in 2023, with the water in 75% of UK rivers posing a serious risk to human health. A BBC investigation 18 months or so ago found that three water companies illegally discharged sewage on dry days. Thames Water, Wessex Water and Southern Water collectively released sewage in dry spills for 3,500 hours in 2022. All three spilled on the hottest day on record.

Surely, with the right effort and the right pride in the boardroom and among shareholders and the workforce—and with the right investment in infrastructure—none of this needs to be the case. The American poet and writer Wendell Berry gave a twist to the golden rule, suggesting:

“Do unto those downstream as you would have those upstream do unto you”.


Boardrooms should perhaps have that as their inspirational quote on the wall.

So, as well as stopping the sewage pollution, the fines must be used to restore our rivers and damaged habitats. We need the polluter pays principle to be taken incredibly seriously, with the right level of fine, not only to prevent but to give enough funding directly through grants—to farmers, communities and conservation groups, as we have heard—to restore our rivers and damaged habitats and to enable our watercourses to begin to thrive again with the right interventions. It has been argued that it is cheaper to pay the fine after a discharge than to do the right thing in the first place. But the cycle of polluting, fining and restoration—and polluting again, fining again and restoring again—will not ultimately enhance our aquatic ecosystems, and it will do us, as people, no good at all.

As well as the fines, we need to embed culture change and good leadership. Allowing sewage pollution should be as damning an indictment on those responsible as not taking seriously their health and safety duties to their staff or the contamination of drinking water. There needs to be a culture of pride in our boardrooms to compete to have the least sewage released among their competitors. Investors need to take pride in supporting having the right infrastructure in place and the right investment in infrastructure, not in maximising financial returns at the expense of the environment.

St Francis of Assisi gave water a priority in his great canticle, “Song of Brother Sun”. He wrote:

“Thou flowing water, pure and clear,

Make music for thy Lord to hear,

Alleluia, Alleluia”.

When we finally take sewage pollution seriously, we might be able to add our own Alleluia. Until then, will the Minister agree with me that the choking of our river courses with sewage and swimmers and surfers dodging floaters need not only our lament but a culture change in the industry to give the highest protection to the intrinsic value of our nation’s seas, lakes, lochs, streams and rivers, those liquid threads of the water of life that wind their way through our landscapes and memories?

Environment and Climate Change Committee Report: An Extraordinary Challenge: Restoring 30 per cent of our Land and Sea by 2030

Lord Bishop of Norwich Excerpts

Wednesday 11th September 2024 Grand Committee

[The Lord Bishop of Norwich]

My Lords, I believe that restoring land and sea for nature is a crucial part of our response to the twin crises of climate change and biodiversity loss. It is a great privilege to follow four outstanding speakers, real heroes of the environment, particularly for the environment in this nation. It is indeed an extraordinary challenge that we face, but one that I hope we can rise to.

The report contains many excellent recommendations. I commend the noble Lords on the Select Committee who have taken evidence, distilled it and brought us a report containing so much clarity and wisdom. It is imperative that the regulation of habitat protection is retained and strengthened to make sure that protected land is truly being managed for nature. Alongside that, and ultimately far more effective, is for those who own and manage land or use the sea to have a great pride for the natural world in their stewardship and for society at large to value nature. I see the beginnings of a positive change in that regard, as more and more landowners, tenants and people who work the land and the sea recognise our negative impact on the environment and notice the silenced song of creation in so many places.

The importance of nature protection and restoration is also something that the Church of England recognises, as we increasingly strive to manage our land—churchyards, glebe land and the historic farming estates—effectively for nature. In 2023, the Church Commissioners—and I declare an interest as a Church Commissioner—partnered with Natural England to expand the wide Wybunbury Moss National Nature Reserve in Cheshire, leasing land to protect that delicate ecosystem of the moss, restoring its fields to a more natural state and improving access to nature for local residents.

In Hereford, the 100 acres of the Bartonsham Meadows have been leased to the Herefordshire Wildlife Trust, which plans to enhance the flora and restore the ancient hedgerows of that those meadows. We are working closely with our tenant farmers to provide regenerative agriculture to enhance soil health, plant hedgerows and woodlands and to make ponds. In the diocese of Norwich that I serve, the careful management of churchyards, with some areas left unmown until the autumn, has allowed much more nature to thrive at Hemblington, where oxeye daisies proliferate, and at Blakeney, where wild claries are now seen for the first time in abundance.

However, I wonder whether two areas of this report could have been stronger. First, there is the international dimension. Areas of the UK’s land and sea are important for migratory birds and marine mammals. These species do not recognise international borders, but different national commitments can have a profound impact on their populations and their conservation. We also have globally rare habitats, such as heather moorland and sphagnum blanket bog, and there are other outstanding examples of unique species and habitats in the UK’s overseas territories and Crown dependencies, although this report does not cover those places in detail. These internationally important species and habitats are protected by commitments, conventions and directives which UK Governments were instrumental in creating. We have led the way in nature conservation. Ramsar sites, the Berne convention and the EU birds and habitats directive—all of them have our fingerprints on them. So can the Minister say whether His Majesty’s Government will undertake to be absolutely committed to our international obligations for nature?

Secondly, there is only a passing mention in the report to the benefit of nature on human health, development and well-being. I am sure we have all experienced the benefits of spending time in nature, and I am struck that when I read the Gospels, I note how often Jesus withdraws to the natural environment of the Galilee to recharge and reconnect. Studies have shown that we thrive when out in nature, and there are many positive health benefits in terms of reducing stress and enhancing our mental well-being, as well as the enjoyment of physical exercise. In nature, children develop inquiring minds, learn to assess risk, and experience awe and wonder through taking a closer look at the flora and fauna. Yet all the evidence points to children being out in nature far less. However, when I visit schools in the diocese of Norwich, I am always struck by the passion of children for the environment. I would love it if every child could plant a tree in their formative years. There is nothing like getting your hands in the soil—“humus” and “humanity” sharing the same root.

When we pay attention to something, we are far more likely to treasure it. When we treasure something, we want to protect it. When we protect something, we want to see it thrive. Protecting land and sea for nature benefits everything and everyone. Will His Majesty’s Government undertake an assessment of the benefit of forest schools and similar nature-focused learning for child development, so that we can have a generation of children even more passionate about protecting our natural environment?

As I said, this is an extraordinary challenge, but one I believe we must meet, for our sake, for our children’s sake, and for the sake of the planet. When things are good for nature, they are generally good for humans, and generally good for business as well. The Book of Revelation speaks of the leaves of the trees being

“for the healing of the nations”.

To plant is to hope, to restore is to heal, to protect is to love, ultimately. We must do all that we can to protect species, habitats and landscapes, and I hope that His Majesty’s Government will not only take note of this report but act on it.

Sustainable Farming Incentive: Species Management and ELMS

Lord Bishop of Norwich Excerpts

Thursday 25th January 2024 Lords Chamber

[The Lord Bishop of Norwich]

My Lords, it is a pleasure to follow a fellow tree planter, the noble Lord, Lord Robathan. I give a tree to every person I confirm as a sign of the care of God’s creation. I am grateful to the noble Earl, Lord Caithness, for securing this debate. I declare an interest as a member of Peers for the Planet and as a Church Commissioner.

Landowners and conservationists with whom I have spoken have broadly welcomed the changes to the sustainable farming incentive, not only the increased payment rates, which make uptake more attractive, but the new areas of action, the increased flexibility and the promise of a simpler, clearer and faster application service. Let us hope it does what is says on the new, streamlined tin. This better-rounded and more holistic agri-environmental scheme in England will undoubtedly see a greater uptake across all agricultural sectors. The tools are certainly in place to help deliver both sustainable food production and nature recovery.

In particular, I welcome the new emphasis on soil health. Being under our feet, we too often forget it, but soil is perhaps our greatest natural asset and the key to so much nature recovery. I am glad that the noble Baroness, Lady Bennett of Manor Castle, shares my enthusiasm for soil. Healthy soil supports a range of environmental, economic and societal benefits. These include food production, climate change mitigation and increased biodiversity. These vital soil functions are at risk from poor soil management or inappropriate land use, leading to soil degradation, soil compaction and soil erosion from wind and water. Ecological breakdown of our soils together with climate change are perhaps the primary threats to food security.

Of course, any change to a scheme, or the start of any new scheme, needs the test of unintended consequences, and I see three risks that I would be grateful if the Minister could address. First, I am conscious of the acknowledgment from the noble Earl, Lord Caithness, of the incredible commitment of farmers and the added stresses and challenges of new schemes. With the increased options that are now available through a single application process, will farmers be supported in the uptakes of those applications and given the right advice and support? Can the Minister say what advice and support will be given to applicants, particularly so that this public funding secures the most value and delivers effective environmental outcomes? We do not want to find, in future years, that we have been paying for suboptimal or even perverse outcomes for nature.

Secondly, it is critically important that farmers, once in ELMS, are taken on a journey of increasing ambition for nature. There is a risk that farmers remain on sustainable farming incentives, the lowest level of ELMS, and pick the low-ambition, free-choice, well-funded options that align with their existing farming actions. This will not deliver the widescale change in farming activity needed to restore declining wildlife populations. If we are to progress towards the targets in the Environment Act, we need a more joined-up nature landscape, with wildlife corridors, acknowledgement of the impact of edge effects and some clear understanding of which species we want to protect, recover or thrive. If we want to continue to hear the magnificent call of lapwings, curlews or corncrakes, clear strategies need to be developed across whole landscapes. Yet in all this, there is a risk that high-quality, high-yielding land will be taken out of food production in favour of higher payments for environmental goods. Can the Minister say how the correct balance can be struck that benefits these various competing areas, so that we can maximise both food security and nature recovery?

Finally, ELMS is just one side of the coin when it comes to nature and farming. Funding to encourage nature-positive farming needs to be underpinned by the right level of regulatory baselining to prohibit actions that cause the most damage to nature. However, the announcement by the Government said almost nothing about regulation, other than to review the relationship between Natural England, the Environment Agency and farmers and landowners. This is at a time when EU regulatory legislation protecting hedgerows, soils and watercourses came to an end on 31 December last year. This cross-compliance has now dropped out of UK law, leaving regulatory gaps in these areas. We urgently need a new regulatory framework, starting perhaps with the swift progression of the replacement hedgerow protection proposals that were consulted on last summer; they have yet to be replaced. My final ask of the Minister is for a firm commitment that protections for nature will, at the very least, be maintained this year at the same level as the old regulations.