Water Industry (Specified Infrastructure Projects) (English Undertakers) (Amendment) Regulations 2020 Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office

Water Industry (Specified Infrastructure Projects) (English Undertakers) (Amendment) Regulations 2020

Earl of Erroll Excerpts
Monday 8th June 2020

(3 years, 10 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Earl of Erroll Portrait The Earl of Erroll (CB) [V]
- Hansard - -

My Lords, there are various points I thought I would make, but other speakers have already made them much more competently that I would, so all I want to say is that I think the same way as the noble Baroness, Lady Scott of Needham Market, does about why there is no new sunset clause. I can see that the original regulations are probably so workable that I now understand that there is probably no need for one. My gut feeling is usually that if Parliament has decided that a sunset clause is needed, one should continue it.

I notice that a lot of the thoughts around the original regulations were about resilience and the need for conservation projects. It is essential to use water more efficiently. Smart metering keeps being mentioned. Looking at the experience of the electricity industry, I wonder whether smart meters have the desired effect. Meters do because you can see the overall consumption, particularly when bills hit people, but rather than spending an awful lot of money on technology, such as smart meters which are likely to go wrong or be outdated, we would do better to spend the money on upgrading our broadband provision so that you can hook anything into it.

The Thames tideway tunnel is a wonderful example of how to do things right, how to think ahead and how to carry forward the prescient thinking of Bazalgette all those years ago. I now entirely agree with these regulations.