River Habitats: Protection and Restoration

Ellie Chowns Excerpts

Thursday 29th January 2026 Westminster Hall

[Dr Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Butler. I thank the hon. Member for South Dorset (Lloyd Hatton) for securing this debate and all colleagues here today. As the Minister is well aware, protecting and restoring river habitats is a subject very close to my heart and the hearts of my constituents in North Herefordshire; I am delighted to have an opportunity to speak about that further today. I thank the organisations behind the Making Space for Water campaign, too.

Our rivers must not be seen as drains. They are the veins and arteries for what is the lifeblood of our land and everything that lives on it. They are integral to our collective health, our communities, our environment and our economies. They are essential channels for the circulation of that lifeblood of fresh water. We ignore them and pollute them at our peril. If we make space for water, we get multiple benefits. It helps us to be resilient to flooding, protects us from the risk of drought, helps farmers to deliver food security—crucial for us today—and, of course, helps to boost nature and biodiversity resilience.

I will speak first about flooding. That affects my constituency of North Herefordshire horrendously frequently and it is only going to get worse. I have already spoken numerous times in the House about the fact that climate change is increasing the severity and frequency of flooding incidents. If we make space for water, if we give room to our rivers, we will of course enable ourselves as communities to be more resilient. We saw the devastating effects of the floods last November in Monmouth and Skenfrith, just over the border from my constituency. We know that if we invest in Making Space for Water and looking after our rivers, that will have numerous protective benefits for us all as an economy.

I have seen that in practice myself, on an Environmental Audit Committee visit last year to the Netherlands. People there are really innovative on this issue. They have a huge project called Room for the River, through which they have taken it hugely seriously. They have started by identifying the problem and what the solutions could be, and then ensured that there is public support and Government commitment behind that. I have strongly urged the UK Government to take a similarly strategic approach to managing water and flood resilience in our communities, because this problem is only going to become more and more challenging. It has devastating effects on people’s lives.

I turn now to river pollution. One of the first things I did when elected to the House was to set up the all-party parliamentary group on water pollution. That is such a significant issue across the country and especially in my constituency of North Herefordshire. The hon. Member for South Dorset referred to the outrageous pollution caused by sewerage companies and the profiteering that has happened for decades at the expense of the natural environment and, indeed, the pockets of consumers, citizens and bill payers. It is clear to me and to the rest of the Green party that water should be in public hands. This is a natural monopoly. It is a service that should be provided only for the public good.

It is absolutely right that the Government are taking action to tackle the problems caused by the water and sewerage companies. Yet, as I have emphasised previously, if we look only at the water and sewerage companies, we are not looking at half the problem—in fact, more than half the problem, because we know from the Government’s own data that agricultural water pollution is an even bigger contributor to water pollution than is sewage. Yet in last week’s White Paper, it merited only one page of the 48-page document. That is deeply disappointing. It signals that although the Government talk about cleaning up our rivers, lakes and seas, they are not taking a holistic, joined-up approach to this problem. We cannot deal with these issues in isolation.

Agricultural water pollution is even more of a problem in my constituency; more than 70% of the phosphate pollution, which has had a devastating effect locally, comes from agricultural run-off. That has impacts on nature—in the suffocation of important species such as ranunculus, for example. It has impacts on people, who no longer feel able to swim in the rivers that they have swum in for their entire lives. It has huge impacts on the economy. We have had a planning moratorium in North Herefordshire in the Lugg catchment since October 2019, which has cost the economy at least half a billion pounds. Huge amounts of effort have gone into trying to resolve the issue locally, and I pay tribute to the work of the council and the local citizen scientists, who have done everything they can to address it. However, without proper Government support, local actors are stuck.

People care passionately about this. The citizen scientists in the Wye catchment have done about 50,000 water sample tests since 2020—in just the last five years. That is an amazing piece of work. Farmers are stepping up and doing fantastic work themselves, out of their own pockets and motivation, coming together under the auspices of initiatives such as the Wyescapes project. That brings together 49 farmers throughout the Wye and Lugg catchments to work together on a proposal for a landscape recovery scheme. But they need Government support.

At the minute, we have a White Paper with just one page on agriculture. We have a diffuse water pollution plan on the Wye catchment, published at the end of last year, that says that, even with perfect implementation of all available measures, we will get nowhere close to solving the pollution problem that is totally gumming up our environment, communities and economy in North Herefordshire.

I ask the Minister: what more will she do? It is clear that we urgently need more. We need more support for farmers, we need funding for projects like Wyescapes, and we need a commitment on a proportion of the funding that has been committed to landscape recovery under the revised environmental improvement plan. How much of that will go to river corridors? How much of it will go to projects like Wyescapes? We also need more funding and teeth for the Environment Agency, to make sure that there is a level playing field for all people in the area. Fundamentally, we need a water protection zone for the River Wye. We need the Government to ensure that that option is fully and properly assessed.

Our rivers are the veins and arteries of our communities, economies and environment. They are not drains. They are essential to the health of our environment. We need Government support for citizens and farmers, and everybody else working to protect and restore our river habitats.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Emma Hardy)]

It is a pleasure, Ms Butler, to serve under your chairwomanship in Westminster Hall for the first time.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for South Dorset (Lloyd Hatton) for securing this debate and for all the passion, care and interest that he has consistently shown in this issue. I share his excitement about the wild beaver release. I was quite jealous that my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry East (Mary Creagh), the Minister for nature, got to be there at the beaver release and I could not—I could not wangle an invite—but it was an incredible moment to see and truly exciting.

I agree with so much of what my hon. Friend the Member for South Dorset said about how protecting and restoring our river habitats is one of the most urgent environmental challenges we face. I loved the imagery given by my hon. Friend the Member for Brent West (Barry Gardiner) about seeing rivers as the lifeblood and living veins of our country. That is a wonderful, poetic way of explaining why they matter so much. I completely agree that they are not drains; they are places that are full of nature and full of life—but I would say that, of course, living near the River Humber. I know how important rivers are.

However, communities see the problems that rivers face every day, through reduced water quality, declining biodiversity and rivers that are no longer the thriving ecosystems that they should be. Rivers are under pressure from multiple sources, as has been mentioned, including business activity, agriculture, waste water treatment, urban development, recreation, transport and, of course, the growing impacts of climate change, which have quite rightly been mentioned. These combined pressures have directly contributed to declining water quality and the loss of freshwater biodiversity across many catchments.

That is why we are committed to delivering the most ambitious programme of water reform in decades, including by strengthening regulation, which will definitely be done. Indeed, I can assure the hon. Member for Bridgwater (Sir Ashley Fox), the Opposition spokesman, that he will definitely see the transition plan, not just this year but, I can even say, early this year.

In addition to strengthening regulation, we will improve oversight of the water system and ensure action across every source of pollution. That is all set out in the White Paper, which was published earlier this month. As has been mentioned, among key measures, we are establishing a single empowered regulator for the entire water industry, backed by a chief engineer—it is astounding that the water industry did not have a chief engineer before, but it has one now—to drive long-term planning, improve performance and, importantly, prevent problems before they occur.

We have also committed to delivering an enhanced, better, joined-up regional water planning function, to help to identify lower-cost and high-impact solutions to improve water quality and supply, considering opportunities across the sectors. It was really interesting that my hon. Friend the Member for Brent West talked about catchment measures, looking at the entire river basin, and looking at how it is all interconnected. That is exactly my vision for the regional water planning function: to look at all the different impacts on that water body.

I could not agree more about how important nature-based solutions are and what they can deliver. We have already had a change-around in how we address flooding, through the change in the flood funding formula— I would really like us to embrace that—but we have to be honest: if we are embracing nature-based solutions, we are also embracing an element of risk. They do not carry the same certainty as adding chemicals to something, which makes it possible to predict a certain outcome. Nature is not like that, but nature is powerful, and I want to see it used more.

It was really interesting to listen to so many Members talk about the way that rivers have been engineered. I visited a beautiful chalk stream not too far from where I live, to see how it was done. These rivers were straightened, as has been said, and this is our industrial heritage. Many were straightened to power the mills that ground corn, or for navigation, and that is why they wanted to create straight channels. Let me say to the hon. Member for Tiverton and Minehead (Rachel Gilmour) that I love the word “rewiggling”—it is a great word. When we look at where we can rewiggle them, the hon. Member for North Herefordshire (Dr Chowns) was right that they can hold more water when they are rewiggled. They can literally create more space and protect more communities.

On that point, I thank all the emergency services and everybody who has been involved in the response to Storm Chandra. My sympathy and support goes out to everyone who has been impacted. The latest update that I have had from the team is that the overall flood risk remains at “medium”. That means that rivers impact is probable in parts of south-west England today. I really hope that does not result in properties being flooded, although I accept that the impact on the farming community has already been huge.

My hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth East (Tom Hayes) always makes me smile. I love the fact that he is constantly championing his constituency and wants to protect and look after the people there who have faced such awful flooding, and he is quite right to call out poor behaviour wherever he sees it. I liked hearing about all the different schools. I love an eco-council group—they are just fantastic. Any Member who ever feels slightly jaded by politics—which, of course, would never, ever happen—should go and spend time with primary children. They will come away feeling so uplifted, because primary children are so passionate and they care so greatly, so good on all of them. I ask my hon. Friend to pass on my congratulations; I hope that they continue to challenge us, as we take all our work forward.

As we have mentioned, we are also accelerating nature-based solutions, looking at where we can restore wetlands, reconnect floodplains and improve river corridors—that came up a lot, and quite rightly so: how do we make river corridors to create healthier, more resilient catchments? That work is happening alongside the reform of regulatory powers, cracking down on poor performance, improving transparency and ensuring that the polluter pays.

For the first time, our river systems will be managed in a fully integrated way, ensuring that every sector, including agriculture, plays its part in restoring the health of our waterways—I also welcome the hon. Member for Bridgwater to his place. That work builds on some of the work we have done through the Water (Special Measures) Act 2025. Our revised environmental improvement plan has been mentioned, and that has ambitious Environment Act biodiversity targets, including to

“restore or create more than 500,000 hectares…of wildlife-rich habitat outside protected sites by 2042”.

Creating and restoring river habitats and wetlands will be vital to achieving that.

I really enjoyed the launch of Making Space for Water, which I thought was a fantastic event. There was so much passion and willingness to collaborate in that room. Making Space for Water calls for incentives for land managers to help to create nature-friendly river corridors through the ELM scheme, as my hon. Friend the Member for Brent West mentioned—I will get him a response from the Minister for farming on some of the more specific details.

Through those schemes, we include specific actions in the sustainable farming initiative, which pays farmers for establishing and managing buffer strips beside watercourses. We also agree with Making Space for Water that it is important to reconnect rivers to floodplains, restoring natural processes and enhancing biodiversity. There are two pilot rounds in the landscape recovery scheme that we are looking at, and we have provided 56 projects with development grants to support farmers, landowners and environmental organisations in developing strategies for long-term nature recovery. Collectively, these projects aim to restore 600 km of rivers, helping to reconnect rivers to their floodplains.

The hon. Member for North Herefordshire speaks with passion and knowledge about agriculture pollution. She is quite right that it is one of the most significant contributors to pollution in our rivers, affecting over 40% of our water bodies. Agriculture pollution, including nitrogen, nutrients and soil or sediment run-off, has a profound impact on the health of freshwater environments and the biodiversity that depends on them. Under the Environment Act, we have set a clear long-term target to reduce nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment from agriculture entering the water environment by 40% by 2038.

There are various means by which we want to achieve that. We committed in the White Paper to simplifying and improving the regulatory framework for agriculture, developing a single robust, England-wide regulation and, where necessary, strengthening standards. We are doubling funding for the Environment Agency’s farm inspection and enforcement team, enabling at least 6,000 inspections a year by 2029, and we are strengthening local advice through our catchment-sensitive farming, as well as through the new £30 million farmer collaboration fund, which we announced earlier this month at the Oxford farming conference.

Just this week—in fact, just yesterday; I am losing track of which day is which—I held a roundtable with farming representatives, not just the NFU but people from different farming sectors, alongside environmental organisations and water company representatives, to talk about the problem of agricultural pollution. The reason I wanted everyone in the same room is not just that I wanted everyone to hear the message I was giving, but that I wanted everybody to hear from everybody else: the water companies could hear from the environmentalists and the farmers; the farmers could hear from the environmentalists; and the environmentalists could hear from the farmers. Everyone could gain an understanding of one another’s points of view and how we are going to work on this together.

During that meeting, I announced that we had launched the consultation on reform of how sewage sludge is regulated in agriculture. The consultation document, which went live this week, looks at the option of an environmental permitting regime, as recommended by the Independent Water Commission. That group of people has been working together on the issue of agriculture pollution. We brought together different stakeholders, and there was much consensus and much willingness to tackle the issue. It is far better that we try to do something collectively; farmers, environmentalists and water companies working together is the best way to tackle this. That work continues.

[Dr Chowns]

I thank the Minister very much for the update, and I agree that working together is important. I have written to the Minister to request a meeting between her, me and other MPs across the parties—Labour, Conservative and Lib Dem—in the Wye catchment. In that spirit of working together, will she commit to having that meeting soon?

[Emma Hardy]

I have seen the hon. Lady’s letter. I will get told off by officials for saying this, but I am basically looking at whether I can come back to the Wye and do something there with everybody. If not, we can do something in Parliament. I went to the Wye last year, and we announced our £1 million research fund to look at what is happening in the Wye. It would be quite nice to go back and see what has been happening. It is on my radar, and I will get her a proper answer in writing.

As Making Space for Water highlights, it is crucial to connect river habitats at the catchment scale. I emphasise the importance of catchment partnerships to improving water quality and restoring natural processes. The partnerships are well established and effective in co-ordinating local collaboration and delivering projects with multiple benefits. They include the Dorset Catchment Partnerships, which is leading work on the River Wey and other Dorset rivers to improve water quality, reduce run-off and restore natural flows.

This is why, earlier this month, we announced that we are investing £29 million from water company fines into local projects that clean up our environment, including doubling our funding for catchment partnerships, providing them with an extra £1.7 million per year over the next two years. As my hon. Friend the Member for North East Hertfordshire (Chris Hinchliff) said, it is essential that we support and pay tribute to the growing number of grassroots organisations and the work they do to protect our natural environment. Doubling funding for catchment partnerships should help them to continue to do that work.

That is part of the Government’s commitment to giving communities greater influence over water environment planning and decision making. Fundamentally, communities know their water areas the best. Through our increased funding, we expect to support more than 100 projects that will improve 450 km of rivers, restore 650 acres of natural habitats and plant 100,000 new trees. The additional funding is expected to attract at least a further £11 million from private sector investment, resulting in even greater benefit for local communities in all hon. Members’ constituencies.

Restoring chalk streams—another of my favourites—is a core ambition of our water reforms. We are home to 85% of the world’s chalk streams. As the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Tiverton and Minehead, said, we are one of the only places that has so many of them. They are home to some of our rarest, and keystone, species, such as the Atlantic salmon. As the Making Space for Water campaign rightly highlights, protecting keystone species is key to healthy rivers and streams. I could say so much more, but I am conscious that I have been talking for 14 minutes, so I will move on.

Water White Paper

Ellie Chowns Excerpts

Wednesday 21st January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Emma Reynolds]

I pay tribute to those volunteers. The new regulator will take a more supervisory approach to water companies. We will look at pre-pipe solutions to reduce the volume of rainwater and pollutants entering the sewage system in the first place, trying to move away from a system where we are fixing on failure and towards prevention. That is the right way to ensure that we clean up our waterways as my hon. Friend suggests.

[Dr Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

The Office for Environmental Protection said in its progress report last week

“Government have made it a priority to clean up our rivers, lakes and seas”,

but there is

“a lack of coherent, detailed delivery plans to address all major pressures”,

especially agricultural water pollution. Agriculture is the source of at least 40% of water pollution, and yet it seems to merit only one page in the White Paper. In my constituency, agriculture accounts for 70% of the issue. I ask the Secretary of State the same question that the Prime Minister dodged earlier: why on earth does it not have adequate attention here? Will she work with farmers to support river-friendly farming methods, and will she meet me and MPs across the House from the Wye catchment to address how we can tackle this major problem?

Oral Answers to Questions

Ellie Chowns Excerpts

Thursday 18th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Emma Hardy]

My hon. Friend raises a hugely important point. It was outrageous that those residents had to wait such a long time for water. We are putting customers first by more than doubling the compensation that they receive for water company failings, such as supply interruptions, low pressure, sewer flooding and meter company issues. It is because of changes under this Government that, for the first time, customers will receive compensation for boil notices. The recent incident in Tunbridge Wells is the first time that boil notice compensation has been issued. The changes will rightly increase the amount of compensation that customers receive. We are clear that, under this Government, customers come first, and we are going even further by introducing a water ombudsman as part our wider reforms.

[Dr Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

T7. I thank the Minister for ensuring the release of the diffuse water pollution plan for the River Wye catchment. The plan specifies that an 85% reduction in phosphate is needed. It also says that full implementation of all existing measures will not get anywhere close to that, yet it fails to evaluate the option of a water protection zone. Will the Minister urgently meet me and other cross-party Wye catchment MPs to discuss how we can progress the solution of a water protection zone?

[Emma Hardy]

The hon. Lady has raised this important point with me, and she will know my commitment to the River Wye following my visit. One recommendation is to explore the feasibility of a water protection zone. This would be a complex undertaking, and the Environment Agency is currently considering it. In the first instance, it might be wise to meet the Environment Agency, but if that it unsatisfactory, and she wants to meet me, I can arrange that.

Oral Answers to Questions

Ellie Chowns Excerpts

Thursday 4th September 2025 Commons Chamber

[Emma Hardy]

Unsurprisingly, I could not agree more. I thank my hon. Friend for his work to champion his community here in Parliament. The previous Government oversaw record levels of sewage pollution in our rivers, lakes and seas, but this Government have secured £104 billion of private investment to upgrade crumbling pipes and halve sewage pollution by 2030, so that communities can once again take pride in their rivers, lakes and seas.

[Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

As I have reminded Ministers on a number of occasions, tackling pollution in our rivers and seas requires us to address agricultural pollution as well as sewage pollution. I am disappointed not to hear the Minister mention that, but I like to come with solutions. I recently visited the Wyescapes landscape recovery project in my constituency, which is an innovative farmer-led project of 49 farmers protecting soil, reducing pollution, restoring nature and producing great-quality food. Will the Minister, or perhaps her colleague the Farming Minister, come to visit this innovative project to see how we can tackle river pollution and protect nature and food production?

[Mr Speaker]

Another Adjournment debate needed.

Oral Answers to Questions

Ellie Chowns Excerpts

Thursday 19th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Steve Reed]

I thank my hon. Friend for her question, and I understand her concerns. I reassure her that the Government will always act in the national interest on these issues. Thames Water must meet its statutory and regulatory obligations to its customers and to the environment—it is only right that the company is subject to the same consequences as any other water company. The company remains financially stable, but we have stepped up our preparations and stand ready for all eventualities, as I have said before, including a special administration regime, if that were to become necessary.

[Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

As the Secretary of State knows, my constituency of North Herefordshire is very seriously affected by water pollution in the Lugg and the Wye. I confess that I am disappointed that, in both his answers to the hon. Member for Monmouthshire (Catherine Fookes), he did not mention agricultural pollution at all. That is despite the fact that agriculture is the main source of water pollution in the country, as is shown in the report of the Independent Water Commission, which unfortunately was not allowed to look into it in any detail. I pay tribute to River Action, which this week won a court case forcing planning authorities to consider the cumulative impact of industrial agricultural development, and to Greenpeace, which last week pointed out the impact of toxic sewage sludge. Will he confirm whether he is updating the farming rules for water? Given that he has cut the budget of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I am sorry, but we are over time as it is.

Thames Water

Ellie Chowns Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Steve Reed]

My hon. Friend will be aware of the action we have taken through the Water (Special Measures) Act 2025 to give the regulator the power it needs to ban the unjustified bonuses that water bosses were able to pay themselves under the previous Government. The era where they could profit from pollution ended when that Government ended.

[Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

The Green party has campaigned for the public ownership of water since the year dot, unlike certain cynical opportunists behind me on the Reform Benches. We know allowing privatised monopolies to control water leaves infrastructure crumbling, waterways running with sewage, sky-high bills, and shareholders laughing all the way to the bank. Given this obscene and fundamental failure, why will the Government not even consider bringing water back into public hands, where it belongs?

[Steve Reed]

The problems facing the water sector are to do with failures of governance and regulation. We need to tackle the actual problems, not the imagined ones. If we were to seek to nationalise the water sector, that would cost in excess of £100 billion that would have to be taken away from services such as the national health service or education. It would take years to unpick the current model of ownership, during which time there would be no investment and water pollution would get worse. From the example of Scotland, we know that nationalisation is not the answer, because there are also problems with pollution there. We will ensure that our priority is pure water, not the purity of the hon. Lady’s ideology.

Oral Answers to Questions

Ellie Chowns Excerpts

Thursday 8th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Daniel Zeichner]

My hon. Friend makes an important point. I can assure him that I and Baroness Hayman, who leads on this in the Department, are very well aware of the recent reports and the antiquated nature of the legislation. We will come back with proposals in due course.

[Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

9. Whether he plans to improve support for nature-friendly farming.

[The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Daniel Zeichner)]

The hon. Lady and I have discussed these issues before. I know that she shares my passion for achieving the transition to the nature-friendly farming that we all want. The Government are investing £5 billion in farming over the next two years—the highest budget for sustainable food production and nature recovery in our history. Through a range of measures delivered through the Government’s environmental land management schemes, we are supporting farmers to implement nature-friendly farming practices. We now have more farmers than ever in nature-friendly farming schemes, and reform in the sustainable farming incentive will target funds fairly and effectively towards food, farming and nature priorities. We will announce further details later this year.

[Ellie Chowns]

On behalf of the Green party, on this special day of commemoration, I join colleagues from across the House in paying tribute to all those who sacrificed so much to resist and defeat fascism 80 years ago.

I thank the Minister for his response. We have indeed discussed these issues before and will continue to do so, I am sure. At the weekend, I spent time on two farms in my constituency—at both I met groups of farmers, including members of the Nature Friendly Farming Network, who told me of their huge frustration at being let down by the Government’s policy on farming and the lack of support. They recognise how vital farming is, including the transition to nature-friendly farming, for this country’s food security, nature protection and climate action. Does he agree with the farmers in my constituency about how vital the transition to nature-friendly farming is for those issues, and will he give us a date for when he will introduce such policies—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. We have a lot to get through today—come on.

Sewage

Ellie Chowns Excerpts

Wednesday 23rd April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

I thank the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron) for bringing this important debate to the House. As the Secretary of State said, we are all in furious agreement that the condition of our rivers, lakes and seas is an absolute scandal. It would be remiss of me not to point out that the problem is not just due to sewage, as the Minister knows. As colleagues have mentioned, agricultural pollution is a key factor in the condition of our rivers, lakes and seas, and we cannot fix the problem without addressing both sewage and agricultural pollution together. However, today’s subject is sewage, so I will focus on that.

Turning to the motion before us, I am not against introducing a blue flag system for rivers and streams, but that is just tinkering around the edges of a broken system. A shortage of flags and targets is not the problem. Last year, the Environment Agency gave the water companies a collective target of a 40% reduction in sewage incidents, but what did we have? A 30% increase. Monitoring and targets are not enough if there is no meaningful action or sanction. I understand that the water companies have well over 1,000 criminal convictions between them—some companies have over 100 convictions—but they are still getting away with it.

At the same time, bills are going through the roof by an average of over 20% in a single year, and by even more for rural constituents, including mine. It is the bill payers, not the shareholders, who are paying the price. Customer bills provide an average of 35% of company revenue to pay the financial costs—the dividends to shareholders and the interest on loans—of the privatised water and sewerage companies in England and Wales. In the case of Scottish Water, a publicly owned company that may have other problems, those costs amounted to just 8% of revenue from consumer bills.

[Mr Adnan Hussain (Blackburn) (Ind)]

In my constituency, raw sewage discharge increased by 75% in 2023, yet there are plans to raise bills by 32% in the next five years. It is clear that the British public are being ripped off. Does the hon. Member agree that while better regulation and investment rules may fix some of the issues, the only way to solve the whole problem is to bring the water supply back into public ownership?

[Ellie Chowns]

I completely agree. That is precisely the thrust of my argument.

Over the last three decades, shareholders have extracted £83 billion in dividends. They have invested effectively less than nothing, because the share capital and retained earnings in those companies are now lower than they were at the time of privatisation. The capital investment has been taken out of customer bills, yet customers are still paying through the nose. A professor at the University of Greenwich—I have his report here—has shown that the cost of the investment needed in the water industry would be much lower under public ownership than under private ownership. It is clear that, ultimately, public ownership is the only way to gain the control needed to ensure that this essential public utility works for the public benefit, yet the Labour party is unfortunately not willing to consider it.

The Government have the power to bring failing companies into special administration via the High Court, but during the passage of the Water (Special Measures) Act, the Minister said:

“Special administration must be a last resort, as it has significant consequences for a company’s investors.”––[Official Report, Water (Special Measures) Public Bill Committee, 14 January 2025; c. 96.]

That speaks volumes about who the Government think our water industry is for. It is not for those so-called investors—actually extractors—who have taken out so many dividends paid for by debt while neglecting our infrastructure and killing our waterways with sewage. There should be significant consequences for them. The people of this country—the British people—do not want their water to be investable: they want it to be clean, reliable, affordable and in public hands. Public ownership is the key element of the solution to the sewage scandal.

Water Bill

Ellie Chowns Excerpts

2nd reading
Friday 28th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Carla Denyer]

If hon. Members of this House feel threatened by the setting up of a citizens’ assembly in order to gather views, that may be an indication of the weakness of the democracy that we have in this place. I really value the contribution that citizens’ assemblies can make. They have been used in other countries, notably Ireland. They are not a replacement for the House of Commons, but they can add valuable extra detail.

[Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

rose—

[Carla Denyer]

I think my hon. Friend is about to chip in with an example.

[Ellie Chowns]

Does my hon. Friend agree that we have the example of the citizens’ assembly on climate change, which was established jointly by six Select Committees of this House a couple of years ago?

[Carla Denyer]

I agree with my hon. Friend, and I would also point to the citizens’ assembly set up by Bristol city council. Citizens’ assemblies are particularly strong at looking in depth at detailed, specific questions, rather than broad topics to do with how the entire country is run. I see citizens’ assemblies not as replacing the role of the House of Commons, but as supplementing it valuably.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dame Meg Hillier]

It seems there are an awful lot of mind readers in the Chamber today, because the hon. Gentleman anticipates my comments. I am proud to be a Labour and Co-operative Member, so I have thoughts on how, one day, we may be able to move to that nirvana of co-ownership.

We have seen too often that dividends and bonuses are paid without investment in infrastructure, which is where my hon. Friend and I would agree. We have a privatisation model that was supposed to deliver investment on the back of people investing in shares. In return for getting a dividend, there would also be an investment, but we have not seen enough of that.

Of course, under Ofwat rules, water customers bear a share of the cost. In Hackney, under Thames Water, which has been a poster company for the problems in this sector, bills are going up by more than a third. A number of constituents who are very worried about their water bills have written to me just in the last fortnight. When we talk about money in this place, we sometimes talk about millions or billions of pounds, but £100 a month is a great deal of money for many of my constituents.

To set that in context, I have a number of fantastic street markets in my constituency—ones where people can buy fruit and veg, and clothes and underwear at a reasonable price—and I also have the lovely Broadway market, where sourdough bread costs about £5 a loaf. I have constituents who do not have £5 left at the end of the week, let alone at the end of the month—those are the margins that people are working with. Water bills are therefore a significant issue, which is another reason why I am delighted to be here today, supported by colleagues of all parties who want to talk about the challenges of water.

On the face of it, the argument for nationalisation sounds appealing to many, but there is a cost—and it is not a hidden cost: to those who bought shares in good faith, to those pension funds that are investing, and in the upheaval of turning around these companies. Where would we get the people to run a nationalised water company? It is likely to be the same executives, if they would take the pay cut. There is not a wealth of expertise.

I spent a decade examining the work of Whitehall, and there are some excellent civil servants in this country who have done amazing work—many of the civil servants who did not do such amazing work appeared before the Public Accounts Committee—but finding somebody overnight with the technical and management expertise to run a major water company is a challenge.

To take the corollary, I am passionate about seeing insourced services in our hospitals, but after having intense conversations with executives at my local hospital, I know that, when the public sector has not done something for many years, it takes a very long time to build up the expertise. Let us take catering. If hospitals do not cater well, they could kill patients, so they need to make sure they have the management structure in place to deliver those skills. It is the same with water companies—it is not as easy as saying, “One day it’s private, and the next day it’s national. No problem at all.” The upheaval would be immense, so we need a measured plan, and I think this Government have begun to develop that plan, for all the reasons I will outline.

I will talk a little about what the Government will do to improve the situation, and then I will talk about the Bill, but I want first to touch on the comments of the hon. Member for Bristol Central (Carla Denyer). I am very interested in her passionate commitment to citizens’ juries. She has been elected, which is a privilege as we all know, to represent her constituents in this place, yet months after her election, she wants to pass responsibility for this big, difficult decision to a citizens’ jury, rather than taking responsibility for that decision as an elected MP.

[Ellie Chowns]

I think it is important to correct the misapprehension among some Government Members, which may arise from an inadvertent misreading of the Bill. Clause 4, on the citizens’ assembly on water ownership, at subsection (4), simply says:

“The Commission must publish the recommendations of the Citizens’ Assembly.”

It does not say, “This House will hereby delegate responsibility for making decisions about water sector ownership to the Citizens’ Assembly.” It simply suggests setting up a structure, which, as I said, has already been used by the House to provide the opportunity for the general public to consider in depth an issue of complexity.

[Dame Meg Hillier]

My point is clear. Just as, many years ago, a certain Mr Ratner famously talked about the price of a prawn sandwich in Marks & Spencer and the price of earrings in his store, people do not want to be on the board of Marks & Spencer to get a decent prawn sandwich; they just want to be able to buy a decent prawn sandwich, and while my political foundations are in devolution, neighbourhood structures, working and listening to people, ultimately we must responsibility ourselves.

I am looking at clause 4, as the hon. Lady highlighted. I have been around for many years, but one of the challenges about citizens’ juries is that while we can have this engagement, they are lengthy and costly, and we know that not everybody attends the whole time. How would we select people? There are many challenges in setting them up.

[Ellie Chowns]

rose—

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Order. I remind the hon. Member that interventions should be short.

[Ellie Chowns]

I remind the House briefly that all these issues are well investigated and understood, and the House has previously used this mechanism effectively.

[Dame Meg Hillier]

Well, in my experience of 20 years in the House, this system has been used once, and that was in 2019, by a selection of Select Committees, not by the Government of the day. I am aware that the first debates about citizens’ juries were 30 or so years ago, and there are many challenges to delivering them.

[Dame Meg Hillier]

Absolutely. I think we would all agree that we talk all the time to constituents, whether on doorsteps or at public meetings and other forums, because that is our job. I say to constituents every week when I am on their doorsteps, “I am here because I need your expertise. I can’t do my job without you.” But it is a cumbersome task to be on a citizens’ assembly as it requires people to devote a great deal of time, and only a certain subset of society has the time to do that. Many of my constituents are working three or four jobs and struggling to survive. They do not have the time to do that, but their voices need to be heard, too.

[Ellie Chowns]

I declare experience in this area in that, through Herefordshire council, I set up a citizens’ assembly. A process called sortition is used to ensure a fully representative sample. Participants are paid for their time so that people of all socioeconomic backgrounds can participate, and additional efforts are made to ensure that under-represented groups can participate. Will the hon. Lady acknowledge that such an institution might be more representative of the general public than this House, in which two thirds of MPs were elected by only a third of the electorate?

--- Later in debate ---

[Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

I am delighted that we are having this debate in the House today. Clean water is a subject that is very close to my heart as the representative for North Herefordshire, and to the hearts of my constituents, because the condition of the River Lugg, the River Wye and their tributaries has caused terrible damage to the local ecology and, indeed, to the local economy. I draw the House’s attention to my role as co-chair of the all-party group on water pollution, which I established.

These issues are crucial. I will start by reflecting on the debate we have had thus far, and then go on to make three points. One hon. Member said that we should not do anything in a rush, but it is clear that nothing in this Bill would be done in a rush. The Bill sets out a considered approach to tackling a very complex issue, and there has been some debate today about the potential to use citizens’ assemblies as one component in addressing it. I regret to say that some of the comments and interventions have perhaps been rooted in a misunderstanding of, or a lack of engagement with, the concept of citizens’ assemblies. For example, the citizens’ assembly to which I have referred, which was set up jointly by six Select Committees of this House, was held in Birmingham, not London, and partly online. Travel expenses and participation expenses were paid. Full attention is paid to participation.

[Mark Ferguson]

Birmingham is, in fact, far more difficult than London to get to from my constituency. I do not believe it is about the specific geographic place; it is about how we get people together from all corners of the country, to make sure we have a regional spread.

[Ellie Chowns]

I warmly invite the hon. Member to read up about how citizens’ assemblies work, how the sampling works and how participation is facilitated for all people, and about the time commitment. The citizens’ assembly previously established by this House was over three weekends in Birmingham. These are not huge commitments, but they are a valuable mechanism for ensuring that the public have the time to consider an issue in depth.

I want to raise three points on this important Bill. First, I could not agree more with the hon. Member for Norwich South (Clive Lewis) that the privatisation of water has been an absolute disaster. We have seen soaring bills, soaring executive pay, soaring dividends and soaring siphoning of finance out of our country into the pockets of private interests, while at the same time our infrastructure has crumbled and our rivers have become increasingly polluted. It is long past time to resolve this national disgrace.

My Green colleagues and I believe that public ownership is a core part of the solution, but it is not the only solution. We have to ensure that the water system is adequately regulated, so that whoever is in charge sticks to the rules, does not make profits on the back of pollution and does not pump sewage into our rivers—that is fundamental and essential.

[Dame Meg Hillier]

How does the hon. Lady propose to pay them for running the water system? We all agree there are problems, but in the current climate, where would she get the money from to pay for this to happen?

[Ellie Chowns]

I refer the hon. Lady to my previous comments on the merits of citizens’ assemblies in considering the details over many dozens of hours. I also refer to my party’s manifesto.

Secondly, climate change is a systemic challenge. I am glad that some hon. Members have mentioned this and that it is included in the text of the Bill because, as the hon. Member for Norwich South said, it is a huge problem when there is too little water. Too much water is also a huge problem, and that problem is increasing.

I have already spoken several times in this House about flooding in my constituency. Climate change is making these challenges more frequent and more severe, so any Water Bill needs to address not only the water industry, water supply and sewage, but also climate change and its interactions with water. I am pleased that is mentioned in the Bill.

Another topic mentioned by the Bill, somewhat briefly, is perhaps even closer to my heart—and certainly close to my constituency. Indeed, as I put my hand to my heart, I feel the jewellery I am wearing, which represents the River Wye. Pollution is the elephant in the room in how this issue is currently being tackled. Pollution comes not only from sewage but from agricultural run-off. Nearly three quarters of the pollution in my constituency is from agricultural run-off. There has been a planning moratorium across almost all of my constituency for more than five years, with devastating economic effects. Tackling the water industry will not address this. Indeed, the majority of my constituency is served by the only non-profit water company in the UK.

The problem we face is around pollution. I find it disappointing, even distressing, that although the conversation about water in this House has rightly focused on sewage, it has not focused sufficiently on tackling water pollution. As DEFRA figures and the Environmental Audit Committee’s report both show, half of the problem is from agricultural water pollution. Slightly more of our waterways are in bad condition because of agricultural pollution rather than sewage pollution. This is an issue that we need to tackle together, working in concert with farmers.

We need to support farmers, which is why I am so devastated by the direction in recent months, which has arguably been wrong. I am particularly upset that just a couple of weeks ago, the sustainable farming incentive was taken away from farmers without anything to replace it. We need a Government who work with farmers and support them to transition to nature-friendly farming, so that we can reduce the agricultural run-off that has such a devastating effect on our waterways.

The Government have this vital role to play in leadership. It is essential to tackle the failures of the privatised water industry, essential to tackle the outrageous volume of sewage overflows into our rivers and essential to tackle agricultural water pollution.

[Jeremy Corbyn]

Could I take the hon. Member back to the question of farming pollution? Does she feel that the problem is too many pesticides being used in farming, too large fields, or an inability to restore the natural drainage systems, such as ditches, which lead to water going into groundwater, rather than rushing down and filling and polluting our rivers?

[Ellie Chowns]

I hope the right hon. Member would agree that it is a multifaceted problem, and that there are different issues in different places. There is no one-size-fits-all approach. In my constituency, the issue is particularly about phosphate pollution, but in other places it is about nitrates, and in other places it is about water volume. I absolutely agree with his earlier comments on the importance of upland water management and natural flood management approaches, which are ways to ensure that we manage water, keep water on the land and address questions of drainage. Indeed, I mentioned this in a debate on the Planning and Infrastructure Bill just the other day, because it is vital that the Bill addresses the question of water management.

We need to treat these things in an integrated and site-specific way. I have called for many years now for a water protection zone in my constituency to ensure that the sources of pollution are correctly attributed and tackled, and have called for more funding and teeth for the Environment Agency to enforce the existing rules, which will help to reduce the problem of pollution.

To conclude, I warmly welcome the Bill brought to the House today by the hon. Member for Norwich South, which presents a thoughtful, constructive and detailed way of bringing people together to address what we all recognise is a crucial problem. However, I say to him—and to the Minister—that we must tackle agricultural water pollution with the same sense of urgency and commitment with which we are addressing sewage. Sir Jon Cunliffe’s Independent Water Commission explicitly excluded this issue from its terms of reference, except in so far as it relates to the water industry. I have read the water commission’s terms of reference very carefully, and have spoken to the commission about it: it is not set up to address the problem of agricultural run-off into our rivers. We need the same level of focus on this issue as we do on sewage, because if we want to clean up our rivers, lakes and seas, we need an integrated approach.

Farming

Ellie Chowns Excerpts

Thursday 13th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

I welcome this timely debate on the future of farming, in the week in which the SFI rug was pulled out from underneath farmers.

Surely the future of farming has to be young farmers. I have been in touch with some young farmers in my constituency to ask what they think I should talk about in this debate. I was sent a screenshot by Beth, who was partway through her SFI application. It said, “Thank you for doing your application. When you are ready, submit it. If we need to close applications, we will give you six weeks’ notice. We will publicise this on gov.uk and we will email you.” If that is not a broken promise, I do not know what is.

Louise, another farmer in my constituency, said that she was

“angry, disappointed, upset and exasperated…we have followed the Government’s advice to the letter, and been kicked in the teeth”.

Another farmer said:

“Pulling SFI is absolutely criminal—just more short-term thinking that forces us into decisions we don’t want to make.”

Ben said:

“yet another nail in the coffin for…family farms…with no warning environmental projects that had been in planning for months on our farm will have to be stopped….We cannot plan for the future when the rules keep changing.”

The future of farming needs to be S, F and I: S for sustainable, F for fair and I for in partnership.

[Charlie Maynard (Witney) (LD)]

I think the hon. Member will agree that the shutting down of the SFI with no notice on Tuesday night is an awful situation. DEFRA has been either disorganised or sneaky, but either way it diminishes the trust of our farming communities in the Government.

[Ellie Chowns]

I could not agree more. This has diminished trust. It is vital to rebuild that trust because we need that sustainable, fair and in-partnership future for farming. It needs to be sustainable in environmental terms— we need to recognise the reality of the climate crisis and the nature crisis. We need to support our farmers to make the vital transition to nature-friendly farming. Farmers in North Herefordshire are at the forefront of that, but they need the Government to back them, not knock them off their feet with policy changes with zero notice.

We need farming to be sustainable environmentally, and sustainable economically. It is not acceptable that the rates of return on farming are so low for so many. The Government have a crucial role to play in tackling that. The Green party has long called for a doubling of the nature-friendly farming budget, because of all the extra benefits that farming provides socially, economically and environmentally. We need the Government to step up on that.

Farming needs to be fair, both internationally and locally. Internationally, our farmers must not be undercut by trade deals that let in products that undermine our animal welfare and environmental standards. We need to ensure that the Government stand firm on that. Farming needs to be fair locally, because access to farming support schemes has not been equal. It is hard for many farmers to access those schemes. Whatever replaces the SFI, I hope that the Minister will ensure that farmers have equal access, and the support that they need to access those schemes. [Interruption.] I see that the Minister is nodding.

Finally, the future of farming has to happen in partnership with farmers themselves—their voices have to be heard—and with the rest of Government. We need a fully joined-up approach to land use, food, farming and sustainability. It also needs to happen in partnership with nature, because without a thriving natural world, there is no sustainable future for farming.