Water Bill

Dawn Butler Excerpts

2nd reading
Friday 28th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Clive Lewis]

One second.

If scientists tell us the climate crisis is an existential threat to humanity and to this country, we must treat it as such: an existential conflict. In that context, the actions of these companies—selling off reservoirs, failing to invest, polluting our water—are not just negligent; they are acts that actively undermine our national water security. In any other existential crisis, we might call that what it is: sabotage. And in a time of national peril, sabotage has another name: treason.

Let me explain why this matters to me personally. When I served on tour in Afghanistan back in 2009—not in a boy band—I experienced something utterly alien to me: the gnawing fear of thirst; not the mild irritation of forgetting a water bottle, but the deep physical worry that there may not be enough clean water to get through the day. In Britain, we have been blessed: water falls from the sky; it fills our rivers, it soaks our fields, and we joke about it—it is part of who we are. But in Afghanistan there was no humour; only heat, dust and desperation. There I saw children trekking miles through the desert, not for food, not for money, but to beg for clean bottled water. Once we have seen that, and once we have felt that fear, we can never take water for granted again. We never again believe it is something we can waste or pollute or privatise without consequence.

That is why I have brought forward this Bill: because anger is not enough; outrage, no matter how justified, will not fix the pipes, stop the sewage or fill the reservoirs. We need a plan. We need a strategy. We need a future. We can do it better.

My Water Bill delivers that. It sets out the high standards our country deserves and the democratic governance our water system desperately needs. First, it establishes clear, ambitious targets to stop the sewage in our rivers and on our beaches, to restore our water to high ecological and chemical standards, and to deliver universal, affordable access to water as a basic human right—a right we have never had before in this country. It demands a system designed not just to extract profit but to adapt, to build resilience in the face of climate change, and to harness nature-based solutions that work with the environment, not against it.

Secondly, it transforms governance. The Bill introduces representation for workers and local communities on the boards of water companies. It gives voting rights to employees and customers, so that those who use and maintain a system have a real say in how it is run. Water is not a commodity but a common good, and those who depend on it and pay for it should help govern it.

Thirdly, the Bill lays the foundations for a democratic future. It establishes a commission on water ownership to advise the Secretary of State on long-term strategy, looking at international best practice, especially in OECD countries, where public water ownership is the norm, not the exception. Crucially, it creates a citizens’ assembly on water ownership to bring the public into the process, to deliberate, debate and decide how we can govern this most precious of resources.

The public care, but how do I know that? I know because a small fraction of them are in the Public Gallery today, having travelled here from all over the country; I know because of the thousands of emails that have been sent to MPs across the House; and I know because those people will never stop campaigning until this injustice is resolved. They know that we can protect something not by selling it off, but by standing up for it, involving people in its care and ensuring that it serves the public, today, tomorrow and for generations to come.

My Bill offers a pathway out of crisis. It offers control, resilience and democracy. It is not just about cleaning up our rivers, but about cleaning up the system that allowed them to be polluted in the first place. Privatisation is not just a problem—it is the problem. We can do it better. I can hear some people on the Labour Benches thinking, “But we have just passed”—

[Dawn Butler (Brent East) (Lab)]

You can hear thinking?

[Clive Lewis]

I can now—for my next trick, I can hear thinking! I can hear them thinking, “But we have just passed the Water (Special Measures) Act 2025, Clive, so what are you talking about?” Yes, we have, but I am afraid to say it has been watered down—[Interruption.] Sorry, I had to get that one in—it was all going so well. The Act does not live up to what was promised, it does not deliver what is needed, and it certainly does not live up to its name. Do not get me wrong: it is a start.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dame Meg Hillier]

I certainly recognise the point about job security. Many of my constituents work three or four jobs and are struggling to survive.

[Dawn Butler]

I would like to inform the House that the Employment Rights Bill outlaws exploitative zero-hours contracts, and that is something that Members—especially Government Members—should talk about constantly.

[Dame Meg Hillier]

Absolutely, and that is a yet another example of why it is good to have a Labour Government.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dawn Butler (Brent East) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Norwich South (Clive Lewis) for introducing this Bill and for his excellent speech—there are not many speeches for which those in the Gallery burst into a spontaneous round of applause.

This is a complex issue and there is no easy solution. As we have heard, the Government are doing a lot of work on this and are holding water companies to account, but the question is whether more can be done. For example, how can my hon. Friend and the Government work together on this, and what can be taken from his Bill? Ultimately, my constituents, who are struggling with the cost of living crisis, do not want to be paying for the failures of the water companies, which are taking billions of pounds for their shareholders while my constituents struggle to turn the tap on. The leaks we have in Brent East are frustrating too, because after the leaks we get potholes, so all of this is interconnected.

In 2023 there was a 54% increase in sewage spills —there were a whopping 464,056 spills in 2023. It is sometimes difficult to put such huge numbers into context, but the average person passes wind 7,000 to 9,000 times a year. I hope that puts into context just how many spills go into our waters and rivers—[Interruption.] I sense that is landing really well with people: we can imagine how many times we pass wind, and if we just double that, double that, double that, double that, double that, and double that again, that is how much spillage goes into our waterways.

The water companies do not care. As I have said, they give billions of pounds to shareholders and some of those shareholders are part of tax avoidance schemes. I am really pleased that this Government are also tackling tax avoidance schemes, because that is vital.

Infrastructure is crumbling, pollution is doubling, and my community in Brent East is paying the price—as are other MPs’ communities. I was one of 30 or so MPs who signed a letter to say that Thames Water should be put in special measures, because I do not know of any other company or organisation that can fail so many times and still be able to take money out of the system and give it to shareholders and still have a contract—it makes no sense.

My constituents cannot afford the proposed increase of over 50%. This is about profits being privatised. Sometimes people, especially politicians, talk about profits and say it is the politics of envy; it is not the politics of envy when profits are taken and put in the pockets of millionaires and billionaires while the failures have to be paid for by ordinary citizens. That is not right. It is not just about the environment but about justice, because the least wealthy communities are often hit the hardest. That is why it is so important that their voices are heard in this place.

I am not scared of citizens or of talking to people and having them inform us about the direction of travel. That is what we, as Members of Parliament, are here for, and the more people who talk to us and inform us of what they want to see us doing, the better.

The Olympic rower and legend that is Sir Steve Redgrave is calling on the Government to tackle pollution for profit in the Thames after some of our rowers were sick after competing there. He said:

“We won’t sit quietly while this catastrophe continues.”

He also said that it is “completely unacceptable” and that “urgent action” is needed to stop sewage discharges at dangerously high levels—E. coli and bacteria levels are 10 times the Environment Agency’s threshold for waters. The threshold is lower in France, so we cannot really compare our levels with theirs. At the moment, Thames Water is being taken to court by the Good Law Project, defending a staggering £3 billion bailout.

The other thing is this. The water companies are carrying too much debt, but that is how they manage their businesses. That needs to be called out, because the situation cannot continue. My hon. Friend’s Bill comes up with some of the solutions.

I have the wonderful Brent reservoir in my constituency, which is a site of special scientific interest. It keeps water pollution levels down to the extent that we can have some surviving wildlife and fish in our rivers, but it is finding that really hard, and it does not have enough money to keep going. It was recently given £55,000 of funding from the Mayor of London’s grow back greener fund—I thank him for that—and it has managed to put in a floating ecosystem to improve water quality, but that gets harder when Thames Water pumps sewage into our rivers. That cannot continue. Change has to happen, and it has to be accelerated.

EU Referendum: Energy and Environment

Dawn Butler Excerpts

Tuesday 12th July 2016 Commons Chamber

[Barry Gardiner]

The hon. Lady, whom I regard as an hon. Friend, particularly on these matters, speaks with great knowledge. She is absolutely right about the Green Investment Bank, which was set up for a particular purpose: the Government recognised that there was a market failure. It was quite right of the Government to put the Green Investment Bank in place, but unfortunately the borrowing powers did not come quickly enough, and I think it is a huge mistake now to privatise the bank. It is a matter of deep regret to all who work in this environment. As for the hon. Lady’s remarks about the European Investment Bank, I shall come on to that subject later in my speech.

[Dawn Butler (Brent Central) (Lab)]

On the subject of insecurity in investment, National Grid has said that fuel prices are about to rise as a result of the Brexit result. My “Prepay Rip Off” campaign showed that consumers were being overcharged to the tune of £1.7 billion a year. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is important that the Government outline what they are going to do to ensure that consumers are not ripped off further by having to pay more for their fuel?

[Barry Gardiner]

My hon. Friend and constituency neighbour has run a superb campaign on fuel poverty. She makes reference to the £1.7 billion that the Competition and Markets Authority report showed UK bill payers were being overcharged—overcharged by quite obscene amounts. It is, of course, right for the Government to come up with clear proposals about how to tackle that abuse, without just saying, as they have to date, that people need to be enabled to switch more easily.