Oral Answers to Questions

Emma Hardy Excerpts

Thursday 5th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Patrick Hurley (Southport) (Lab)]

9. What steps she has taken to help protect communities vulnerable to flooding.

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

I want to begin by sending my deepest sympathy to everybody impacted by recent flooding; having your home or business flooded is devastating. I pay tribute to the emergency services, the Environment Agency and the communities and volunteers who have stepped up to keep people and communities safe. The latest intelligence I have is that the weather warning remains yellow across much of the south-west. We will keep a close eye on that today.

[Claire Young]

I draw the attention of the House to my membership of the all-party parliamentary group on flooding and flooded communities. Protecting homes from flooding is vital in communities such as Pilning, Severn Beach, Yate and Chipping Sodbury, yet the CIRIA C790 code of practice for property flood resilience seems to be a well-kept secret. Will the Minister work with the construction and insurance sectors to raise public awareness of the code, and will she consider formalising it through legislation, ensuring that my constituents have the protection and the lower insurance premiums that they deserve?

[Emma Hardy]

We recently produced a report, through Peter Bonfield, called “FloodReady”, which was exactly about how we incentivise more people to get property flood resilience. It was about working with contractors, manufacturers and everybody involved in the industry to make this a mainstream option for more people. I highly recommend that the hon. Lady has a look at that report; I hope that she and her constituents find it really useful.

[Patrick Hurley]

Farmers in my constituency report that watercourses are not being sufficiently maintained, there is not enough investment in drainage infrastructure, and there is a limited ability to deal with changing rainfall patterns and rising water tables. They tell me that the creation of an internal drainage board could help with all that. I know that work has been done to establish new IDBs through a statutory instrument, so will the Minister tell us the current status of that work, and will she please expedite it being laid before the House?

[Emma Hardy]

I join my hon. Friend in paying tribute to the fantastic work of the internal drainage boards in managing water levels, reducing flood risks and supporting communities, businesses and farmers alike. Of course, we are working hard on our statutory instrument. I am sorry that I cannot give him an exact date, but I can guarantee that it is something I am committed to doing.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

Last week, 50 mm of intense rain fell across large parts of Somerset and exacerbated the already saturated ground, with a major incident declared on Tuesday. With more unsettled weather in the forecast and high spring tides imminent, residents have told me that they are worried they could be facing a repeat of the devastating 2013-14 floods. With the increasingly unpredictable, intense and changing patterns of rainfall, communities must be given the resources they need to prepare extreme weather resilience plans.

I thank the Minister for her commitment to meet me in Somerset later this year, but will she bring forward that planned visit to Glastonbury and Somerton to witness the devastating impact that flooding is having on my communities while the floodwater levels remain up?

[Emma Hardy]

The hon. Lady raises a really important point—I have been following the situation really closely, and it is devastating. She is quite right to point out the trauma and upset caused by flooding. We invested £80 million in Somerset between April 2024 and March 2025 on flood and coastal risk management, and we will allocate another £75 million to Somerset between April 2025 and March 2026. I will check whether my diary aligns so that I can make an earlier visit.

[Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)]

4. What steps she is taking to improve the inspection of water infrastructure.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sarah Olney (Richmond Park) (LD)]

5. What steps she is taking to help reduce water bills.

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

People have every right to be frustrated about bill rises—years of neglect and under-investment have left our water infrastructure crumbling, and those increases now show the cost of putting that right. This Government are focused on tackling the cost of living, preventing those huge bill increases from ever happening again by fundamentally changing the system, and protecting the most vulnerable by strengthening schemes such as the guaranteed service standards and WaterSure.

[Sarah Olney]

Thames Water’s typical metered charges increased by 40.7% this financial year, and prices will rise again each year until 2030. While our water companies have been mismanaged and reform to bring down the cost of bills is needed, more can be done to encourage customers to meter their water usage. The average non-metered household in London is charged £81 a year more than a metered household, but that is not widely known, so will the Government do more to advertise the cost-saving potential of water meters? What further steps is the Minister taking to bring down the average water bill?

[Emma Hardy]

The hon. Lady is absolutely right. I am a huge champion of water meters, which not only help with bills but help reduce people’s water use. In turn, that helps with abstraction, especially in areas where we have many chalk streams. I am very keen to look at what more can be done in that space. Ofwat has a water efficiency fund, through which it is looking at innovative ways in which we can talk to the public and get them to understand, as the hon. Lady rightly said, the benefits of having a water meter, not only for their bills but for the environment.

[Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith and Chiswick) (Lab)]

Does the Minister have plans to introduce a national social tariff? It was not in the recent White Paper, but Independent Age, which is a national charity based in my constituency, estimates that such a tariff could lift up to half a million pensioner households out of water poverty entirely.

[Emma Hardy]

I share my hon. Friend’s concern about the ability of so many people in both our constituencies to afford water bills. That is why, over the next five years, water companies are going to be doubling the number of people getting help through social tariffs. We have also reformed WaterSure, which provides support to people with disabilities who might require more water use, or those who might require it for various other medical reasons. We are focused on making sure that the most vulnerable in all our communities are able to get the water they need at a price that is affordable for them.

[Lloyd Hatton (South Dorset) (Lab)]

6. What steps she is taking to prevent undisclosed payments to water company executives.

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

The Conservative Government allowed millions of pounds to be diverted from essential investment and used for unjustified bonuses. We are clear that executive pay must reflect company performance, and support Ofwat’s plan to consult on requiring companies to report publicly the details of all executive remuneration.

[Lloyd Hatton]

Just last month, The Guardian reported that the chief executive officer and chief financial officer of Wessex Water received around £50,000 in undisclosed payments from a parent company. Just weeks before, it was reported that a former Wessex Water boss was handed a whopping £170,000—again from a parent company. The galling part is that both payments were made in the same year that Wessex Water was slapped with a ban on paying bonuses. With all that in mind, does the Minister agree that if bonuses can simply be rebadged as extra payment from parent companies, we must urgently toughen up the bonuses ban so that we can finally hold failing water company bosses to account?

[Emma Hardy]

This situation baffles me. It seems simple to me that bonuses should reflect performance, and if performance is not good enough, people should not get a bonus. I am not sure why that seems so difficult to understand. It is not just about the letter of the law, but about the spirit of the law. Ofwat has exposed serious transparency failings across the water sector, and we are therefore tightening transparency rules to shut down any attempt to dodge the bonus ban.

[David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)]

Welsh Water’s chief executive has one of the highest paid jobs in Wales at almost £900,000 a year, and the company is hiking basic pay to get around the Government’s crackdown on executive bonuses, despite being a not-for-profit. That is even though Welsh Water presides over some of the worst sewage dumping and leaks in the UK and sky-high price rises. Will the Minister look into companies trying to bypass the new regulations in that way and ensure that those loopholes are closed?

[Emma Hardy]

With respect, I think the hon. Gentleman has just made the case for why mutualising water companies is not the answer on performance. This Government have already banned more than £4 million in unfair bonuses, which have been blocked by Ofwat for 2024-25.

[Johanna Baxter (Paisley and Renfrewshire South) (Lab)]

7. What steps she is taking to reform the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966.

--- Later in debate ---

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

Following Storm Chandra, vast swathes of West Dorset are under water. An amber warning is in place, and we are expecting more flooding. Whole villages have become islands. Eighty-four houses in Yetminster have sewage in them. One family in Maiden Newton had only just moved back into their house following 15 months of repairs after the previous flooding, only to get flooded again within three days. Will the Minister please visit West Dorset and explain to residents how she will get the water companies and the Environment Agency to focus on flood-prone areas?

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

I can hear the hon. Gentleman’s passion and how upset he is about the devastating impact that repeated flooding has had on his community. We are putting a record amount of money into flood defences and will continue to do so. We are also looking at how we can work more effectively with other agencies in the area. I share his concern that, over the next weeks, it will continue to be quite wet. I give thanks to the emergency services and everybody involved.

[John Whitby (Derbyshire Dales) (Lab)]

T4.  Tideswell brook was deemed to be the second most pharmaceutically polluted river in the UK, despite being a site of special scientific interest and in a national park. Concentrations of some chemicals are currently more than 2.8 times higher than annual average environmental standards. Will the Government therefore follow the example recently set by the European Union, and require sewage treatment works to treat pharmaceutical micro- pollutants?

[Emma Hardy]

My hon. Friend raises a really important point. He will have noticed that we published the PFAS—perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances—plan earlier this week, which looks at the issues of chemical pollution and how we can tackle it more effectively. We recognise the serious concerns at Tideswell brook. Through our water White Paper we are reforming waste water regulation and enabling earlier interventions. I will be keeping a close eye on the situation as it develops.

[Sir Roger Gale (Herne Bay and Sandwich) (Con)]

On 8 January, the United States Secretary of the Interior wrote to the Secretary of State on behalf of the big game hunting industry, asking her to ensure that the Government would abandon their commitment to the ban on importing hunting trophies. In her reply, will she give a robust indication that this Government are committed to that ban?

Sustainable Drainage Systems

Emma Hardy Excerpts

Thursday 5th February 2026 Westminster Hall

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

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mrs Barker. I thank the hon. Member for Newton Abbot (Martin Wrigley) for securing this important debate. I have enjoyed sitting through a debate in which there has been so much love for previous Labour policy, because, of course, it was the Labour party that introduced the 2010 Act that both the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives seemed so very keen to enact. I gently say that they had a mere 14 years—well, the Liberal Democrats had five—in which it could have been enacted. It falls to this Labour Government to tackle the issue of SuDS.

Putting that to one side, as I said to the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) earlier, my full sympathy and support go to everybody who has been impacted by flooding. It has been horrific, especially for the families, homes and businesses that are facing repeated flooding episodes. After today’s oral questions in the Chamber, I am considering how quickly I can come down and see the flooding for myself. I will pick that up with the hon. Lady, because it is really important.

Lots of incredibly important points were raised in the debate. A point was made about why water companies would not be interested, but in fact they are. The reason why many of them are is because of what we call, when it comes to water, the pre-pipe solutions. To explain that more simply, if an awful lot of surface water ends up in the sewerage system, we end up with more storm overflow incidents, because the system becomes overloaded, water spills out into the rivers, lakes and seas, and then there are pollution incidents.

There is, then, an incentive for water companies to be interested, because holding the surface water away prevents some of the pollution. There are some really good examples—admittedly in more urban areas—of that happening. A project in Mansfield involved Living with Water, the local authority, the Environment Agency and the council all working together. I am interested in looking at regional planning—this is in the White Paper—and how to bring together different interested parties in the same region to look at stopping the system becoming overloaded, which is one way of tackling pollution.

[Martin Wrigley]

I am delighted that the Minister is talking about water companies splitting surface water from foul water. That is exactly what they are doing in the middle of Dawlish: creating massive new tanks for that purpose. The programme has been going on for about two years; most of Dawlish has been dug up and its town centre has been in disarray because of it.

Throughout the last 10 years, South West Water has been talking about the separation of surface water and foul sewage, and insisting that it happens higher upstream. That is fine and proper—and, yes, it is agreed on that. However, South West Water is not interested in what happens to the surface water off estates that are already separating it out. That is not a problem that the company is addressing; it already has big enough issues elsewhere, where it is fixing past problems. That is where the SuDS come in, and that is why South West Water is not interested in those.

[Emma Hardy]

I am happy to go on to talk about SuDS, but I wanted to address why there is a collective self-interest in everybody getting involved in this, because it will help to reduce pollution. That is why it was a key part of the White Paper. Speaking personally, as someone who loves nature, this is also an opportunity to increase nature in different areas. These pre-pipe solutions do not have to be concrete tanks; they can be somewhere that is quite beautiful.

We want to maximise the opportunities offered by better managing rain and looking at where it lands. It is estimated that the average household roof collects 85,000 litres of rainwater every year—obviously a little more in your constituency, Mrs Barker, and a fair bit in Hull as well, but a little less elsewhere—which is equivalent to an estimated 4 trillion litres annually across the UK, or 1.6 million Olympic-sized swimming pools. We are therefore thinking about not just SuDS or pre-pipe solutions, but rainwater management. There are many different things we can do. That is why we want to work together with other stakeholders including water companies, environmental groups, local authorities and developers to come up with how we can collectively achieve this ambition.

On sustainable drainage, it is quite right to point out that the 2010 Act was never fully enacted by the coalition or the Conservative Government. SuDS are vitally important for sustainable development. They help to reduce additional pressure on the sewage system by up to 87%. I am a huge fan, and have spoken quite often about my love for sustainable urban drainage. They can also enable growth: a SuDS retrofit programme in London created the additional headroom for 116,000 new homes.

Since we came into Government, our record on SuDS is that in December 2024, we made changes to the national planning policy framework to support increased delivery of SuDS, so that it now requires all developments to utilise SuDS where they could have drainage impacts, and requires those systems to be appropriate to the nature and scale of the development. In June 2025, the Government introduced new national standards, making it clear that SuDS should be designed to cope with changing climate conditions, because whenever we do anything now in this country, we need to have our minds on how our climate is changing, and make sure that we are resilient for the future. SuDS should also deliver wider water infrastructure benefits in the form of flood prevention, storm overflow reduction and reuse opportunities—but of course there is more that we need to do.

As I say, some time has passed since the 2010 Act was enacted, and it is important that we consider the most efficient and effective way of securing its objectives. We currently think that that could be through changes to planning policy and adoption and maintenance, which I will come on to, rather than commencing schedule 3. With that in mind, we have been tightening national planning policy on this important issue. We are consulting on a new national planning policy framework at present, which adds the requirement that sustainable drainage systems are designed in accordance with the new national standards, to provide a consistent basis for their design and implementation.

Additionally, we are consulting on legislative and policy options to reduce the prevalence of unadopted estates and the injustices associated with them, including for SuDS. On 18 December last year the Government published two consultations, one on enhanced consumer protections for homeowners on privately managed estates and another on reducing the prevalence of estate management arrangements. We continue to collaborate with industry leaders and, since data has been mentioned, I note that we are supporting the development of a new rainwater management platform, which will provide digital tools to support the delivery of high-quality SuDS.

We are working with the industry body CIRIA—the Construction Industry Research and Information Association—to better understand the challenges around property-level SuDS and rainwater harvesting. Subsequent guidance will support industry to deliver in line with our recently published national standards for SuDS and will be publicly available. To ensure the longevity and proper maintenance of SuDS, we are scoping options for maintenance funding mechanisms and the methodology for calculating maintenance costs. We will publish guidance later this year, which will support the delivery of SuDS in line with the new national standards.

I will answer some of the questions on maintenance. We recognise the challenges relating to the adoption and maintenance of SuDS and how that can impact communities, so we are committed to ensuring they are well maintained. As I mentioned, we issued standards in June ’25, and in support of those we are currently conducting research into the funding of SuDS maintenance. We are looking with industry and experts at different funding mechanisms as well as the methodology for calculating maintenance costs.

To ensure that SuDS are provided and maintained as part of a new development, section 106 agreements can be used to provide for the maintenance of SuDS over their lifetime, where the statutory test is met. We are consulting on a new national planning policy framework to require SuDS to be designed in accordance with the new national standards, and a consultation that sets out that SuDS should have maintenance arrangements in place to ensure an acceptable standard of operation for the anticipated lifetime of the development—that is really important; it is not just about when it is built, but the lifetime of the development—building on the current requirement for those to be in place for major development proposals. The consultation is open until 10 March. I encourage Members and anyone interested to respond to that consultation.

There has been mention of specialists and making sure that we have the people we need. We need skilled planners, including specialists in areas such as ecology and infrastructure—they are essential to making sure we have proactive planning services. We know that local planning authorities continue to face challenges in recruiting and retaining staff. Ultimately, it is up to local authorities who they employ and how they do so. Nevertheless, given how widespread those pressures are, the Government are significantly expanding support through the planning capacity and capability programme, including growing the graduate and mid-career pipeline, strengthening specialist training through the Planning Advisory Service and launching a new planning careers hub to open additional routes into the profession. We are trying to grow our own planners for the future, and looking at whether an increase to local authority funding for SuDS could be required.

I hope all that helps to illustrate that this Government have not waited 14 years to deliver what the previous Government were attempting; we are getting on and delivering it now—from changes to the planning framework to ensuring that we have the talent we need, innovation, and working with others to find new ways to deliver the protection that our country needs. We are strongly committed to improving the implementation of SuDS; the actions I have outlined today are just the beginning and I look forward to working with all hon. Members in this room towards that goal.

Government Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances Plan

Emma Hardy Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd February 2026 Written Statements

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

I wish to update the House on the Government’s work to address the challenges posed by per­ and polyfluoroalkyl substances, often known as forever chemicals, and to announce the publication of the UK Government’s PFAS plan.

PFAS represent a global and long-term environmental challenge. Their persistence, mobility and widespread historic use mean they are now found throughout our environment, including in water, soils, wildlife, and some consumer products. Although PFAS deliver important benefits in areas such as clean energy technologies, medical devices and essential safety equipment, we must take proportionate and science-based action to minimise their harmful impacts on both public health and the natural environment.

Today, the Government are publishing the PFAS plan, which sets out a comprehensive framework for how the UK will monitor, manage and reduce the risks from PFAS across society and the environment. The plan has been developed collaboratively with the devolved Governments and reflects a shared, UK-wide commitment to protect people and nature while supporting innovation and economic growth.

The plan establishes a clear long-term vision—to reduce and minimise the impacts of harmful PFAS on public health and the environment, while supporting the transition to safer and more sustainable alternatives.

To achieve this, the plan sets out co-ordinated action across three pillars:

Understanding PFAS sources—Understanding and identifying the sources of PFAS including where they originate from.

Tackling PFAS pathways—Accounting for the movement of PFAS around society and the environment.

Reducing ongoing exposure—reducing and managing ongoing exposure to PFAS for people, animals, and the environment.

The plan marks an important step towards a more co-ordinated, transparent and proportionate approach to managing PFAS across the UK. It will provide a platform for action across Government, industry, and others.

As a commitment in the environment improvement plan, progress on delivery of the PFAS plan will be incorporated into the statutory reporting cycle, ensuring regular scrutiny and accountability.

I will place a copy of the PFAS plan in the Library of the House and it will be available on gov.uk.

[HCWS1297]

River Habitats: Protection and Restoration

Emma Hardy Excerpts

Thursday 29th January 2026 Westminster Hall

[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.

[Chris Hinchliff]

I am afraid the Minister has slightly walked into this. Previously in this Chamber, I extended an invitation to her to come and visit RevIvel in my constituency. That is a campaign to restore the Ivel chalk stream. It has a pilot project looking at taking the Chalk Streams First approach, which would potentially restore that aquifer, and not just help the Ivel but see the return of chalk streams that have completely ceased to flow. It would be really exciting to talk to my hon. Friend about that and some of the challenges that people are experiencing with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs water restoration fund. I just put that back on her agenda.

[Emma Hardy]

I did walk into that, didn’t I? I thank my hon. Friend. If he wants to send that through to me, I will of course take a serious look at it. I am very keen to be getting out and about when it is a bit less wet—but rain should be what I am used to.

Restoring the health of our rivers is fundamental to safeguarding nature, supporting resilient communities and securing our water environment for generations to come. The Labour Government are committed to delivering the most comprehensive programme of reform ever undertaken. It involves strengthening regulation, boosting enforcement, investing in innovation, supporting local partnerships and empowering farmers, land managers and water companies to play their part. From national action on agricultural pollution and chalk stream protections, to ambitious local projects in South Dorset, we are driving real, long-term improvements. Together, those measures demonstrate our unwavering commitment to cleaner water, thriving habitats and a healthier natural environment across England.

Water (Special Measures) Act 2025: Enforcement

Emma Hardy Excerpts

Tuesday 20th January 2026 Westminster Hall

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

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank the hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Tom Gordon) for securing this debate. I am particularly delighted he has done so today—great timing—since today we have published our new vision for water.

These are once-in-a-generation reforms to our water system, delivering tough oversight and real accountability, and putting an end to water company excuses. This Labour Government are doing away with water companies marking their own homework and are holding them firmly to account. From an MOT-style approach for water companies’ pipes and pumps to no-notice inspection powers, we are creating a system where customers get the service they deserve and bosses have nowhere to hide. We have already taken tough action on the worst performing water companies, while protecting customers by doubling compensation for those impacted by supply interruptions.

There are a few more treats included in today’s White Paper, among them a new chief engineer to bring technical expertise to the new regulator for the first time in 20 years; new performance improvement regimes, so that any water companies falling behind in finances, environmental standards, drinking water quality or operations will face tough consequences; and dedicated supervisory teams to replace the current one-size-fits-all approach and give the new single regulator a thorough understanding of how each company operates; no-notice inspections; mandatory water efficiency labelling; accelerated roll-out of smart meters; regional planning to bring together councils, water companies, farmers and developers to deliver joined-up plans to tackle river pollution, water resources and housing growth; and senior accountability to ensure water bosses are directly accountable for the service that customers receive.

[Mims Davies]

My constituents, particularly businesses, want clear understanding around compensation, but the area that interests me is the chief engineer role. The guidance that was given to her fellow Minister, the hon. Member for Coventry East (Mary Creagh) before the recent 16,500-property outage in East Grinstead and the villages was that it would affect Sussex Weald and Crowborough. How can this new chief engineer help us to get South East Water to be clear about what is already going on?

[Emma Hardy]

I have huge sympathy and support for the hon. Lady and her constituents in the situation that they have faced in the last few weeks and I understand the urgent need for compensation, not just for her residents, but many of the neighbouring constituencies. She mentioned that it is the first time that Ofwat has ever done an investigation into whether a company is still complying with its licence to operate. It is looking at the customer part of the operation licence to see whether or not the company is complying; that is the first time that has ever been done. The Consumer Council for Water is visiting the Tunbridge Wells area to hear direct testimony from people about how they have been treated and how the situation has impacted them. I share the love expressed in the Chamber for the Drinking Water Inspectorate, particularly for Marcus Rink and all the work he does, and the inspectorate is looking carefully into that matter as well.

One of the things that we promised in the Water (Special Measures) Act were powerful new customer panels to ensure that customers are at the heart of company governance. Some first accountability sessions will be held in spring 2026, requiring customers’ views to be taken into account in company decision making and allowing those customers to hold companies to account—one of the many things that was in that Act.

While we are on the situation that the hon. Member for East Grinstead and Uckfield (Mims Davies) faced, I will mention the hon. Member for Tunbridge Wells (Mike Martin), whom we spent rather a long time with over the last few weeks. It is outrageous; my heart sank when I saw Tunbridge Wells and its residents being impacted again after the awful situation that businesses faced in the run-up to Christmas. I am keen for them to receive compensation as quickly as possible. He is right to point out the concerns that we all had about the disinformation that was put out. The need for clear communication to everybody about what is happening is incredibly important.

There are many things from the water White Paper that I would like to highlight. I hope we get a chance in Parliament over the coming weeks to look at some of that in more detail. There is a section on debt at the bottom of page 26 of the White Paper that states:

“We will therefore consider how the regulator can work with companies and investors to ensure companies do not accumulate unmanageable levels of debt”.

There is a direct reference to debt in the White Paper. It is also worth pointing out what it says in the section called “Putting Customers First”. Page 31 mentions

“increasing public access to water for recreation and wellbeing”',

something that I know my hon. Friend the Member for Cannock Chase (Josh Newbury) is really interested in. That is because of the love that there is for the Tyne and how beautiful it is—we want to see people having access to it.

The White Paper mentions the powerful new customer panels as well, and also looks at regulators strengthening the “customer measure of experience”. That is one of the metrics used to judge water companies and we want to strengthen that metric of experience.

Another thing that comes up in debates on agricultural pollution is the effect that it has on the beautiful and stunning River Wye, and which I know is a huge source of concern for my hon. Friend the Member for Monmouthshire (Catherine Fookes). On page 35, we talk about how we will

“consult on reforms on how sewage sludge use in agriculture is regulated and whether this should be included in the Environmental Permitting Regime..”

One of the big focuses and challenges is what the difference would be, if these measures were all in place. One of the many key things is about prevention rather than cure—I know you will understand that analogy very well, Dr Allin-Khan. It is about getting companies to fix things before they break. Around the country, we have too many examples of things breaking before companies recognise that they should be fixed. The MOT work, the engineer and the resilience standards are all about understanding where the problems are and getting in there and fixing them first. Fundamentally, that is cheaper and better for customers, because it costs less to fix something before it breaks and creates a disaster somewhere.

[Mr Carmichael]

I am interested to get the Minister’s view on this subject of the relationship between the Department and companies. She may be aware that the Department is currently appealing to the first-tier tribunal a decision of the Information Commissioner requiring them to disclose information to Democracy for Sale, an organisation run by investigative journalists. DEFRA’s defence is that they have to have a safe space when talking to water companies about these things. I am not expecting her to comment on live legal proceedings, but will she reflect on that, and interrogate her officials when she returns to the Department about whether it is appropriate for the Department to defend such cases where, in this case, the party receiving the obvious benefit is Thames Water?

[Emma Hardy]

As the right hon. Gentleman has noted, I cannot speak about live investigations, but I will reflect on what he outlines.

The hon. Member for Epping Forest (Dr Hudson) mentioned livestock and its importance, something that came up a lot during our many calls. Yes, we need adequate water for people, but there have also been many animals in distress.

We will carry out pilots across the country to look at the new regional regulatory structure and how we are going to make it work. That is a massive opportunity for Members across the House to get involved.

My hon. Friend the Member for Hexham (Joe Morris) was talking about rural communities being supported and ensuring that we have emergency provisions for livestock. In relation to the River Tyne in particular, I encourage him to speak to his water company and find out exactly when it will upgrade those storm overflows, so that he can see tangible progress in his area.

We have also doubled the funding for catchment partnerships, which is great news where we have those, particularly in rural areas. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Monmouthshire for her work on the Bill Committee and for the work that she continues to do in championing the River Wye. She is quite right that rivers do not obey geographical boundaries, so we have to work together. I put on record my thanks to the Welsh Government for all the work they have done. We have worked together on many different measures and will continue to do so.

I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Cannock Chase for his work on the EFRA Committee. He is right that there should be clear consequences for failure, and he will be pleased to know that following the Water (Special Measures) Act, the Environment Agency is on track to deliver 10,000 inspections in the year ’25-26. That is a massive increase on the previous year’s 4,600 inspections; we are more than doubling inspections of water companies. We are also doubling compensation because, sadly, we have seen that the doubling of compensation for customers who face supply outages or receive boil notices is desperately needed.

I would like to be in a situation—as we will be when we implement all these measures—where we do not need to compensate customers because we are not continually seeing failure. But until that moment, I will continue to work hard, push on and deliver the changes that the industry so desperately needs.

Water Supplies: East Grinstead

Emma Hardy Excerpts

Monday 12th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mims Davies (East Grinstead and Uckfield) (Con)]

(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will make a statement on the ongoing interruption to water supplies in East Grinstead and the surrounding villages and support for people affected.

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

I would like to update the House on the ongoing water supply disruption across southern England, but before I do that, I pay tribute to my dad, David Mattinson, who passed away last Monday at Dove House hospice. I thank everybody at the hospice for the wonderful care they gave him. As a primary headteacher, he inspired so many people and was truly loved. He will be deeply missed by my sisters, my mum and me, and all who knew him. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”] I thank the nature Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry East (Mary Creagh), for covering me during my leave, and my friends and colleagues across the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. They met the chief executive of South East Water and numerous MPs last week and several times over the weekend. I really appreciate the teamwork and solidarity, so I thank them.

This is an unacceptable supply failure, particularly for residents in Tunbridge Wells, who face significant disruption for the second time in as many months. We are holding South East Water to account as the company responsible for the areas most affected. We have been clear in our daily meetings with the company that restoring supply must be the company’s absolute priority, that every possible measure must be taken to protect vulnerable customers, and that those affected must receive proper compensation for the disruption they have experienced.

Far too many people are unable to wash safely or have adequate sanitation in their homes. Far too many businesses are being affected. The supply issues in Kent and Sussex have been caused by several short-term factors, including a period of prolonged cold weather, which led to a large number of burst pipes and water mains across the network, and operational issues at water treatment sites caused by Storm Goretti. However, the disruption in the south-east comes against a backdrop of previous outages and continued poor performance by South East Water in maintaining a reliable service for its customers.

It is yet further evidence that the water system is broken. For too long, water companies have failed to maintain their infrastructure and build the resilience needed to withstand events like this. Customers are paying the price for years of under-investment, and the Government will fix this through our wholesale water reforms. Those include stronger rules on maintenance and resilience, backed by £104 billion of private investment for infrastructure upgrades and the creation of a new single powerful regulator.

[Mims Davies]

My condolences, Minister.

Again, we have no water across parts of Sussex and Kent. That is expected to continue at the very least until tomorrow in my area. Again, we have a shambolic response, with more than 16,000 households in East Grinstead, Ashurst Wood and some of my Wealden villages affected. Again, my constituents have been left with poor, misleading or no communication from South East Water, with too many vulnerable people—even those on the priority services register—left waiting. Again, we have livestock owners struggling to get water for their animals. Many businesses have shut, as have many schools and nurseries. Again, water bottle stations have been poorly organised, with little or no clear provision for hard-hit rural villages and areas, forcing residents to make long drives. There have been failures to open or stations running dry far too quickly, creating huge gridlock, frustration and anger. All this, unbelievably, coincides with East Grinstead train station serving as the terminus for Gatwick airport rail replacement buses, which demonstrates a complete lack of joined-up planning. The local resilience forums are in place, but the logistics are failing.

What penalties or sanctions will the water company face, and what level of compensation—which my constituents and, indeed, many other constituents deserve—will they actually receive? Given the numerous and repeated serious failings on the part of South East Water in just the last five years, does the Minister agree with me and with many others that South East Water urgently needs new leadership that is capable of addressing emergencies properly and, crucially, restoring much-needed confidence in the company’s ability to manage its systems, infrastructure and water supplies and to provide the service that is needed, now and in the future?

[Emma Hardy]

I am with the hon. Lady wholeheartedly. I completely understand the anger and frustration that she feels on behalf of her local residents who are once again experiencing problems with this company. As I have said, the short-term factor is the freeze and thaw, but the longer-term factors are the lack of resilience in the company and the fundamental problems that it has. We need to address that on a systemic basis: we need to set resilience standards, so that a maintenance system that is “fix on failure” becomes a proactive system.

The hon. Lady is right to raise the problems surrounding this company. It is already being investigated by the Drinking Water Inspectorate because of the earlier issues in Tunbridge Wells, and the inspectorate will conduct further investigations. I have met Ofwat representatives to discuss my concern about the company’s performance, and have asked them to look into whether it is meeting its obligations in respect of serving its customers.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

--- Later in debate ---

[Helena Dollimore (Hastings and Rye) (Lab/Co-op)]

My constituency was affected by the water outage over the Christmas period, and I thank the Minister for her support over that period—for keeping me updated, and for briefing the water company. I really feel for the people who are experiencing these outages. The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee has been trying to learn the lessons from the incidents in my constituency, but it seems that the mistakes are still being repeated.

The report outlined the need for more water stations, the need to consider the weight of six 2-litre bottles for people who are disabled and on the priority list, and the fact that those learnings are not being taken into account by the water companies, as well as the need for hygiene: several days into a water outage, people cannot wash their hands, they cannot clean and prepare food and they cannot have a shower. What are the Government doing to put pressure on the water companies to heed the findings and the learnings from each of these outages in our constituencies, given that the lessons do not seem to be being learnt every time?

[Emma Hardy]

I thank my hon. Friend for the leadership that she showed in her constituency during the Christmas period. We had all hoped to have some time off, but she had to reopen her office to communicate with residents. She is right to say that we need to learn lessons. What frustrates me more than many other things is the fact that the same problems are being caused by the same companies when it comes to communicating clearly and adequately with residents and ensuring that they know who their vulnerable customers are. I want our forthcoming White Paper to consider whether we have all the powers that we need, but, as I have said, the Drinking Water Inspectorate will be conducting its own investigation of what happened in Tunbridge Wells over Christmas and what is happening currently, and I do not want to get ahead of that.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Dr Neil Hudson (Epping Forest) (Con)]

May I, from this side of the House, offer my sincere condolences to the Minister and her family for their sad loss?

Thank you, Mr Speaker, for granting the urgent question from my hon. Friend the Member for East Grinstead and Uckfield (Mims Davies). The shortage of water supplies in Sussex and Kent continues to have terrible impacts on local communities. Tens of thousands of homes have been without a water supply, schools and libraries are shut, businesses—in particular, hospitality businesses—have had to close their doors, farmers and horse owners fear not having enough water for their livestock, and some hospital appointments are being moved online. This is simply not good enough from South East Water, especially given its repeated failures, and given that this is the second major incident in a matter of weeks.

I understand the distress, anger and, frankly, exhaustion that many in the local area feel. They need clear communication, rapid action now and reassurance for the future, yet we have heard from my Conservative colleagues in Kent and Sussex repeated accounts of poor communication and logistics from South East Water, including bulk sharing issues with Southern Water. We have been told that constituents have travelled to and queued at vital bottle collection points, only to find that no water has been delivered.

Can the Minister confirm when the thousands of households affected by the shortage can expect their service to be restored to normal, and can she provide guidance on what is being done to ensure that homes can access adequate supplies, particularly vulnerable households in more isolated areas, where travelling to bottle collection points is not feasible? When will schools reopen, and what is being done to ensure that GP surgeries and hospitals can deliver their appointments and care? What measures have been put in place so that farmers and horse owners have enough water for their animals? Finally, given the Cunliffe review’s focus on ensuring water supply, can the Government confirm what they will take forward from that review to address this as a structural issue, to ensure supply and consumer confidence for the long term?

[Emma Hardy]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his kind comments regarding my father.

We have doubled the amount of compensation available. That has had a huge impact, particularly in Tunbridge Wells, where for the first time people will be compensated for being on a boil notice. We are looking at tightening resilience standards. As I mentioned earlier, it is about moving from the system that we have at the moment, which is “fix on failure”, to proactive maintenance. Part of the reason for this problem—aside from the short-term impacts of freeze and thaw—is that there is not enough long-term resilience in the system. There are too many points at which it can easily fail.

The hon. Member for East Grinstead and Uckfield (Mims Davies) said that we need to make sure that we have bottled water in villages in more rural areas, and I have raised that directly with the company. As the shadow Minister rightly pointed out, it is difficult for some people to get to the bottled water stations, so we want to make sure that we have them in the right places. I have told South East Water that I expect it to communicate regularly with its Members of Parliament to make sure that the stations are in the right places and that it is sharing intelligence about that. I completely agree with him on communication: there has not been enough use of social media and the website has been too slow to update. There should be much more and much clearer communication going to Members of Parliament.

On when we expect the situation to return to normal, I sent the latest sitrep to all the MPs affected and I will continue to do that. We are having another strategic group meeting with everybody tomorrow to see where the situation is in the next 24 hours. I do not expect all this to be resolved in the next 24 hours, which is why I am holding another meeting tomorrow. South East Water should phone each individual Member of Parliament impacted and update them on what is happening.

Finally, livestock were mentioned by a number of colleagues on yesterday’s call. South East Water is supporting 11 farms with bottled water, and it has made some deliveries of alternative water to farms across the region, but the hon. Gentleman is right to mention that this is having a huge impact on the welfare of animals, so the water company needs to take it seriously. I hope that, following this urgent question, it intends to do so.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

About 16,500 residents have been impacted as a result of the latest water outage. GPs and schools have shut; vulnerable people, including those in care homes, are unable to access water; and people have been forced to queue for hours at water distribution sites. Unfortunately for customers of South East Water, this has become a trend: over the last five years, the company has ranked within the bottom three for water supply interruptions.

Experts have stated that the potential for water shortages in the area has long been known, but terrible strategic planning, a failure to cut leakage and decisions to divert money towards dividends have distracted from infrastructure improvements that should have been prioritised. Does the Minister agree with the Liberal Democrats that the continued tenure of South East Water’s chief executive officer is untenable, given the scale, duration and repetition of these serious failures? Will the Government commit to a full, independent investigation into South East Water’s operational resilience, governance and crisis management?

On behalf of myself and my Liberal Democrat colleagues, I offer my condolences to the Minister on the terrible and sad loss of her father.

[Emma Hardy]

I thank the hon. Lady for her kind words.

I completely share the frustration; it would be nice not to be talking about South East Water in the House. I feel I have come to know the hon. Member for Tunbridge Wells (Mike Martin) very well for the sad reason that we seem to be meeting all too frequently about problems in that area. As I have said, the Drinking Water Inspectorate will be investigating the situation in Tunbridge Wells. One thing it will look at is bottled water and its supply to vulnerable people—has that been communicated well; has there been a sufficiency; is it in the right place?—because during a crisis it looks at whether people are getting the water they need, so that investigation will take place.

As I have mentioned, I have already met Ofwat to share some of my concerns about performance issues at the company. I will be asking it to look at whether it thinks this company has met its obligations in serving its customers, and I will be reflecting deeply and seriously on what it tells me.

[Mike Martin (Tunbridge Wells) (LD)]

I thank the Minister for all the help she has given me and my constituents over the past month. Tunbridge Wells is yet again without water. We seem to roll from outage to outage. As we stand here today, 6,500 houses are without supply. Schools are closed, and even more are closing as more areas go out of supply.

The Minister knows from personal experience that the leadership of South East Water suffers from an optimism bias, with appalling risk management. The leaders have no idea what is actually going on. During the call the Minister and I were on just an hour and a half ago, they said two things that were immediately proven to be false. That is not necessarily because they are lying, but because they do not know what they are doing. Plainly, the leadership of South East Water suffers from groupthink.

Last week, the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee showed the leadership to be negligent. The Committee Chair, the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael), accused the CEO of misleading Parliament and said his position was “untenable”. The Secretary of State in the Minister’s own Department has said that she is “shocked” by Hinton’s “lack of accountability”. Does the Minister have confidence in Dave Hinton, the CEO of South East Water?

[Emma Hardy]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question, and yes, we have been spending a long time talking to each other. I watched the EFRA Committee with great interest, particularly when Dave Hinton rated himself eight out of 10. It is really important that the Drinking Water Inspectorate has the space to do its investigation. It is also really important that Ofwat has the space to have a look at this company. My priority here and now is trying to get people’s water back on and the system up and running, and that is where I want to focus my time, but there are questions to be asked about why we are back in this situation again.

[Helen Whately (Faversham and Mid Kent) (Con)]

I offer the hon. Lady my condolences on the loss of her father.

About 5,000 homes in my constituency were without water this weekend. That on its own is bad enough, but then we have how South East Water responded—failing to deliver water to vulnerable people; sending elderly residents on a two-hour round trip to get bottled water, sometimes only to find that there was no water left; and ignoring the pleas from livestock owners for water for horses and other animals. This is a disgrace, and not for the first time. The chief executive of South East Water has shown us he is not up to the job. I urge the hon. Lady to use all and any powers she has to move him on and to get South East Water to appoint somebody who is up to the job.

[Emma Hardy]

I thank the hon. Lady for her question. I know she raised on the call her concern about livestock and the impact on animals. Water companies have a statutory duty to provide wholesome water—it is literally their job to provide that—and their requirements are set out in the security and emergency measures direction. They have a duty to provide water, so during a supply outage they have a duty to provide water to vulnerable customers and people who cannot otherwise access it. The Drinking Water Inspectorate will be looking at where we have seen failings.

Quite frankly, this is outrageous and it is unacceptable. I accept that the company cannot be held responsible for the freeze and thaw, but if there is a problem with the supply for whatever reason, it can be held responsible for the way it has responded to the crisis. There is no justification for its failure to get water to vulnerable customers or people who need it, and I will be picking that up directly with the company as soon as we are out of this latest crisis.

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

I sincerely thank all the Ministers for all their work over the past four days, supporting me and my constituents. My constituency has by no means had the worst outages, but a secondary school has been closed, multiple villages are out of supply, a hospital was out of supply overnight and 1,200 homes last night were out of supply. There are multiple points of failure not just in Mid Sussex, but right across the south-east. Frankly, I have been shocked by the fragility of the water supply system in our region. Quite simply, our infrastructure is not adequate to cope with normal weather events that we should all expect in January. We are on the edge of the supply area in Mid Sussex and East Grinstead. Will the Minister look at a duty to co-operate with neighbouring water authorities to ensure that those of us at the end of the pipeline are not cut off in the first instance?

[Emma Hardy]

The hon. Lady is quite right: it is a fragile supply system. We have had years of under-investment in resilience and there are too many points in the system where it can fail. It is not resilient. Other parts of the country are able to move water more effectively around their system, which creates much greater resilience. This system simply does not have the resilience it should. That is partly because of the historic problems around maintenance—historically, all water companies fix on failure, rather than undertake proactive maintenance—and partly because the system, as it is set up at the moment, does not allow the easy transfer of water across an individual water company. These are fundamental things that we need to address through our water reforms and changes in regulation. We can only build a resilient system if we are able to move water around some of the network. On the hon. Lady’s other points, the impact on schools is obviously appalling, especially at the moment as I know many pupils are doing their mock exams—my daughter has been doing hers as well.

[Helen Grant (Maidstone and Malling) (Con)]

I have no confidence whatsoever in South East Water. I have worked with it now for nearly 15 years. When things go wrong, and they often do in Kent and Sussex, its communication methods are absolutely atrocious: too little, too late and often very confusing. Often, all someone wants is to know when they can put the kettle back on or get in the shower. Yesterday, the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the hon. Member for Coventry East (Mary Creagh), who has worked extremely hard with the Minister on this matter, instructed that MPs be given two-hourly direct updates. That has not happened. She also instructed that a water station should be opened in Loose in my constituency, where over 2,000 people have been without water. That has also not happened. South East Water is not fit for purpose. Its leadership team is inadequate. It is out of its depth. I hope the Minister agrees that serious changes must be made, including the removal of the CEO, David Hinton.

[Emma Hardy]

I completely share the hon. Lady’s outrage. When communication was specifically requested by my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary, we asked for that information to be made available to Members of Parliament. A bottled water station was requested—it beggars belief, to be honest. As I have said, Ofwat and the Drinking Water Inspectorate will be looking into this matter. I will be reflecting seriously on the information and reports that both organisations give me.

[Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD)]

South East Water is failing Eastbourne. It is unacceptable that it left thousands of residents in Sovereign Harbour, Hampden Park, St Anthony’s and Langney without water supply this weekend; it is unacceptable that it refused my ask to set up a water collection station in Eastbourne, forcing residents to travel 35 miles to East Grinstead if they wanted bottled water; and it is unacceptable that many residents who are on the priority services register received absolutely nothing, including no information. Does the Minister agree that South East Water is a busted flush? Does she agree that it is a scandal that water bosses such as Dave Hinton dine out on enormous bonuses, salaries and the rest while failing the residents across our area? Does she agree that Dave Hinton needs to go?

[Emma Hardy]

One of the reasons we introduced the Water (Special Measures) Act 2025 and the bonus ban was exactly to ensure that people who get a bonus have earned it and that people who have not earned one do not get one. That seems a pretty straightforward way of doing things in my mind. This goes back to the point made by colleagues across the House that water companies should be talking to Members of Parliament about where they need to put bottled water stations and what is the most effective place for that. Water companies have a statutory duty—it is not just that they can if they want to—to supply water to people in the event of supply outages. Two fundamental things the Drinking Water Inspectorate will look at are how well or otherwise the company has supplied water to people on the vulnerable register and how well or otherwise it has made bottled water available. Quite frankly, I am as outraged by this as the hon. Gentleman.

[Katie Lam (Weald of Kent) (Con)]

I was very sorry to hear about the Minister’s father.

Thousands of my constituents over the weekend in Headcorn, Staplehurst, Coxheath and the surrounding villages had no running water. It is vital in these situations that we are able to share accurate and timely information, but South East Water had no idea what was going on; there was supposed to be a bottled water station in Headcorn, and yet for the entirety of Saturday, nobody from South East Water could tell me if there was even any water there. We were given multiple conflicting pieces of information, most of which turned out to be inaccurate, and the only way my team and I could establish whether anything was provided was to go there ourselves. Does the Minister agree that this is unacceptable and that it makes a bad situation so much worse?

[Emma Hardy]

I completely agree. Poor communication is a theme that has run throughout this crisis; again, it is something that needs to be looked at seriously when the Drinking Water Inspectorate does its investigation, and something that I hope Ofwat will look at as well.

Oral Answers to Questions

Emma Hardy Excerpts

Thursday 18th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Munira Wilson (Twickenham) (LD)]

4. What assessment she has made of the adequacy of flood defences in Twickenham constituency.

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

Merry Christmas to you, Mr Speaker, and to all.

Of course, in team DEFRA, we are dreaming of a dry Christmas, but just in case we do not get one, we are investing a record £10.5 billion into our flood and coastal defences, and the Environment Agency has reprioritised £108 million into urgent maintenance, halting the decline of our assets. If we have flooding over Christmas, dedicated teams will be on call across the country, ready to support and respond to those in need. I want to express my deepest gratitude to the Environment Agency and all our emergency services for their unwavering commitment and tireless effort; I thank them all for their hard work.

[Munira Wilson]

Happy Christmas to you and all your staff, Mr Speaker.

Recently, out of the blue, the Environment Agency’s flood risk map was updated to include an extra 3,800 homes in Teddington in my constituency at flood risk. There has been zero engagement with residents or elected representatives, and this is causing a lot of alarm and concern about how people and their homes can be protected. It has an impact on insurance premiums and those buying and selling homes in the area. What assurances can the Minister give my constituents about engagement in future and, more importantly, what mitigations and protections are being put in place?

[Emma Hardy]

The hon. Lady raises an important point. Part of the purpose of that mapping is to inform people and the wider community. For the very first time, the mapping under the new national flood risk assessment—NaFRA 2—includes the risk from surface water flooding, which was never included in previous maps; previously, only tidal and river were included. It is part of informing people. It is not that they have an increased risk; it is that, for the first time, that risk has been displayed to them. Of course, it is very important that all of this is articulated carefully and considerately with elected Members of Parliament. If she would like, I can put her directly in contact with the EA area director, who can talk a bit more about the detail that is available on these maps and how they can better inform residents and local communities about the level of flood risk they could be subjected to.

[Peter Fortune (Bromley and Biggin Hill) (Con)]

5. If she will make an assessment of the potential impact of the extended producer responsibility scheme on the hospitality sector.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lauren Edwards (Rochester and Strood) (Lab)]

7. What steps she is taking to clear waterways.

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

We will restore our waterways to places communities can be proud of, where nature flourishes. Our environmental improvement plan outlines actions to reduce the volume of rainwater and pollutants entering the sewerage system, and we are rebuilding the water network through a record £104 billion investment. That includes over £10 billion to reduce sewer discharges from over 2,500 storm overflows in England and £4.8 billion to reduce phosphorus pollution.

[Lauren Edwards]

Thank you, Mr Speaker, and merry Christmas.

Will the Minister outline how the Government are delivering a fairer system to clean up waterways such as the River Medway, which runs through my constituency? It saw over 200 sewage outflows in 2024 and the estimates for this year are even higher, while consumers are also facing rising bills over the next five years. Will she set out the support that will be available for consumers? A polluter should pay, and the water company should be diverting profits to improve its ageing infrastructure.

[Emma Hardy]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. I thank her for raising that important issue and for her work on it and her passion. She is right to point out as well that the Environment Agency budget was cut by half under the previous Government, which left it powerless to clamp down on polluting water companies. We have been clear that the amount of sewage discharged into our waters is unacceptable. That is why we have already banned unfair bonuses for water bosses, introduced tougher automatic penalties to clamp down on pollution and secured money to upgrade storm overflows across England.

But we are not stopping there, Mr Speaker; we don’t want to give you only that! We are going to give you more treats in the new year with our water White Paper, which will set out long term reforms to strengthen regulation, tackle pollution and accelerate the delivery of water infrastructure.

[Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)]

The River Otter in Devon is classified by the Environment Agency as “poor”, with twice the phosphate levels of other rivers in Devon. We hear from the Environment Agency that that is because of agricultural runoff. That is incorrect. Citizen scientists from the Otter Valley Association have proved that it is because of sewage discharges. Will she make sure that whatever succeeds the Environment Agency is a regulator with teeth?

[Emma Hardy]

The hon. Gentleman is quite right: of course we want a regulator with teeth, able to identify the exact source of pollution. As we have already said about our water White Paper, there will be a regional element it order to be able to in more detail at those particular catchments to identify the main source of pollution in each catchment and, therefore, the best actions to take to address it.

[Matt Vickers (Stockton West) (Con)]

8. What assessment she has made of the potential impact of her policies on farming communities.

--- Later in debate ---

[Terry Jermy (South West Norfolk) (Lab)]

Merry Christmas, Mr Speaker, and I hope you get to enjoy a turkey from Norfolk.

Water availability is increasingly important for my farmers, and Conservative austerity and cuts to the Environment Agency made obtaining water abstraction licences and permits painfully slow and often expensive. Can the Minister provide an update on work to speed up that process so that farmers are not kept waiting for important decisions?

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

My hon. Friend raises a really important point. I was delighted to meet a number of water abstraction groups— who might not be the WAGs most people think of—to talk about some of the work they are doing as farmers to make farms more resilient. It is a hugely important issue, and just this week, the Minister for Housing and Planning has talked about how we are going to make the rules for farmers creating their own reservoirs simpler and more straightforward, so that we can build resilience. We know what a difficult time farmers have had, with a particularly wet winter and a very dry summer, and we want to do everything we can to help them become more resilient.

[John Milne (Horsham) (LD)]

T3.   Merry Christmas to you and your team, Mr Speaker. In just its first year, biodiversity net gain has helped restore the equivalent of 7,300 football pitches of habitat, leveraged over £320 million of private investment and supported more than 4,400 jobs. However, the Government’s intention to exempt developments under 0.2 hectares risks killing off this new industry just as it is beginning to thrive. This is a major Government U-turn, and the consequences for environmental projects in my constituency will be severe. Will the Minister reconsider?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Alex Barros-Curtis (Cardiff West) (Lab)]

Many constituents, including my own, were shocked to see that 24,000 homes and businesses in the south-east were without drinking water for two weeks. What steps are the Government taking to ensure that residents get the compensation that they deserve?

[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.

[Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)]

Last week I visited Ball Corporation, the leading global manufacturer of sustainable aluminium packaging, at its head office in my constituency. What steps is the Department taking to improve recycling of prime aluminium in the form of cans in the UK, to help support jobs in the UK’s circular economy?

Marine Recovery Fund

Emma Hardy Excerpts

Wednesday 17th December 2025 Written Statements

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

I am pleased to confirm that the marine recovery fund, one of the major reforms in the clean power action plan, has launched today.

This underlines the Government’s clear commitment to making Britain a clean energy superpower to cut bills, create jobs and deliver energy security. We are delivering cheaper, zero-carbon electricity. A key part of this mission is accelerating the deployment of the UK’s offshore wind capacity. The launch of the fund will unblock 19 GW in the immediate term, showcasing the support it can provide for future projects. Britain’s seas play host to extraordinary, diverse and precious ecosystems. We will accelerate offshore wind while protecting our marine environment, delivering on our domestic and international commitments to do so.

The MRF is a voluntary fund into which offshore wind developers can pay to deliver environmental compensation for their project’s unavoidable impacts on our marine protected areas. Clean energy is essential but so is ensuring nature’s recovery—both are needed to conserve our environment for future generations. Any unavoidable impacts from offshore wind on our MPAs must be compensated for appropriately.

The MRF is established by the Secretary of State under section 292 of the Energy Act 2023, and in accordance with the Marine Recovery Funds Regulations 2025 (SI 2025, No. 1230). The MRF operator will use the funds from developers to deliver strategic compensatory measures that can be delivered across multiple offshore wind projects and/or at scale. This represents an important shift from the current system, in which compensatory measures are assessed on a project-by-project basis.

Identifying suitable measures in the marine environment can be challenging due to limited evidence and the dynamic nature of marine ecosystems. Our intention is that the MRF will enable greater benefits for nature. Pooling contributions from developers and delivering compensation strategically and at greater scale has the potential to achieve significantly better outcomes for seabirds, marine wildlife and habitats. The fund will support the extension and designation of new MPAs to protect our seabed and could address factors impacting our wildlife, such as controlling rats to support seabirds and creating offshore artificial nests for kittiwakes. This co-ordinated approach will, therefore, help accelerate the consenting process for offshore wind projects, while providing high quality, ecologically meaningful compensation for our protected areas.

The MRF will deliver value for money and wider fiscal benefits. For developers, it will increase certainty around securing compensation through pre-approved measures, expediting decision making and reducing lengthy case-by-case negotiations. It will also discharge their liability at the point of payment into the fund through a transparent price. The MRF will be cost neutral to Government. The fund’s effectiveness will be regularly assessed including through a non-statutory review by 2032.

The MRF will operate in England and Wales. The Scottish Government will be managing their own fund to reflect their specific priorities and circumstances. We are committed to working together to help us achieve our shared goals. This collaborative approach will maintain alignment where appropriate, while respecting the distinct responsibilities and decision-making powers of each Government.

This marks a key step forward in the Government’s ambition to make Britain a clean energy superpower, unblocking offshore wind projects in the consenting pipeline and supporting future projects in our journey to net zero.

[HCWS1191]

Water Scarcity

Emma Hardy Excerpts

Tuesday 9th December 2025 Westminster Hall

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

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship for the first time, Mr Stuart. I thank the hon. Member for Horsham (John Milne) for bringing forward this debate, which has raised some important issues that I do not think have had the hearing they need in Parliament.

Water scarcity is a huge and pressing issue, and it is particularly brought to mind by the climate change that we can see happening in front of us. As has been mentioned, we have just had one of the driest spring and summers, and I have been involved throughout the year in the national drought group that brings together the Environment Agency and all stakeholders to look at the issue of drought across the country. Next year will be a special anniversary of the situation 50 years ago, in 1976, and I am mindful not to be in a similar situation as a Minister. What we do around water and how we deal with problems of scarcity are therefore very much at the forefront of my mind.

I agree with many of the points that have been made, including about the issue of leakage. In effect, customers are paying for a resource that is literally being spilled out in the wrong place. We have strong targets on leakage, because looking at reducing leakages is one of the big levers to pull in how we deal with and meet the demand for water in future. A 20% reduction by 2027, 30% by 2032 and 50% by 2050 is where we need to get to in reducing leakage, using the baseline of 2017-2018.

The hon. Member for Chippenham (Sarah Gibson) mentioned that her constituency is flooded again. I well remember visiting it with her and seeing the devastation of people mopping water out. They had done a brilliant job by the time we arrived, and I remember being very impressed at how well they had cleared it out, but it is absolutely awful. That shows why we need all the money that we are putting into flood alleviation, and why it is crucial.

I hope that this time the flood alerts and warnings system was more effective. Following last year, we looked at how we could improve that system, which has been upgraded, so I am keen for feedback. I wrote a “Dear colleague” letter—which I know you will have read in great detail, Mr Stuart—about how we can support constituents and businesses with information and contact numbers related to flooding, and I am also keen for feedback on that.

This debate is about our other water problem, however: not flooding, but scarcity. The situation for the people of Tunbridge Wells has been horrific. I have been in regular contact with the chief executive officer of South East Water and the local Member of Parliament. I have made it clear that we think the disruption in Tunbridge Wells is completely unacceptable.

On what happens next in the process, hon. Members will understand that people there are under a boil notice, and South East Water is looking at when that boil notice will be lifted. Importantly, the Drinking Water Inspectorate will do a full investigation that will include interviewing all the relevant people and drawing its conclusions. It is looking into why the problem happened, why it has taken so long to restore supply, and at the company’s important communication with customers.

[Graham Stuart (in the Chair)]

Order. Please speak through me, Minister.

[Emma Hardy]

Apologies, Mr Stuart; I should gaze upon you at all times.

Protecting customers, of course, must be one of the top priorities, so I have been chairing one of the multi-agency responses. Normally agencies talk to agencies and Government, but I felt the need to intervene personally in this matter—which I have done three times in the last week—to look at every step that has been taken to resolve the issue, and particularly the concern around communication and making sure that vulnerable people are getting the water that they need.

[Alison Bennett]

Does the Minister support Liberal Democrat calls, including those of my hon. Friend the Member for Tunbridge Wells (Mike Martin), for the chief executive of South East Water to resign over this issue?

[Emma Hardy]

At the moment, the chief executive needs to focus on getting the boil water notice removed and getting drinking water back into everybody’s house. Of course, the Drinking Water Inspectorate will be doing a full investigation into exactly what has caused the problem and why it has taken so long to resolve. South East Water is responsible for compensating customers. The changes that we introduced to the guaranteed standards scheme mean that for the first time compensation can be given to people who are under boil notices. Under the previous Government someone under a boil notice did not receive any compensation; we have introduced compensation. Customers will be compensated not only for not having water but for the duration of their boil water notice.

On water scarcity, I agree with many of the points that have been raised. My hon. Friend the Member for North East Hertfordshire (Chris Hinchliff) talked about the over-abstraction of chalk streams and he is absolutely right that that is crucial. Over-abstraction and pollution are the main causes of problems for our chalk streams. One of the reasons that we have such a demand for future water is because we are committed to reducing abstraction, particularly from our chalk streams. He is right to say that we cannot think just about having the reservoirs; we need more actions, including strong and stringent targets to reduce leakage, and we need to look at all our water needs going forward. He was right to highlight—although there seemed to be some amnesia in the Chamber—the years of under-investment in water and in infrastructure more widely. We are getting on with doing many things that should have been done in the last 14 years.

[Chris Hinchliff]

Briefly, may I encourage the Minister to come to my constituency and see the incredible work being done by the RevIvel campaign, which is trying to restore the Ivel chalk stream? It has a brilliant proposal for a chalk stream-first approach that would restore not just that chalk stream but the whole chalk aquifer and help the Cat Ditch flow again. It would be great to see her there.

[Emma Hardy]

I thank my hon. Friend for that lovely invite. Visiting a chalk stream sounds beautiful—perhaps in springtime, when it is looking particularly gorgeous, or in summer.

I agree with so many of the points made—even those made by the shadow Minister—about farming, what we can do to support farmers and how we can make it easier for them to store water on their land. At this moment, I cannot commit to saying exactly where my thinking is on this, but I can say I am looking at it extremely closely: how can we make it easier for farms to become more resilient and for farmers to store water when it rains, so that it is there when they need it? I have also been looking closely at the interestingly titled WAGs—I thought that meant something else entirely, but as we all know stands it for water abstraction groups. I have been looking at how they have been doing some of that work.

[Robbie Moore]

Landscape recovery schemes are a great way of dealing not only with water quality schemes, but with water resilience strategies. Will the Minister commit to working with her colleagues to look at removing the one-year break clause that now exists within landscape recovery schemes, because it makes it very difficult for anyone willing to get involved to sign up?

[Emma Hardy]

I commit to taking that to the farming Minister to have a thorough look at it. I am acutely aware of how difficult farmers have had it this year. The flooding in the winter and the drought in the summer have been devastating for them, so I am really keen to see what we can do.

There was a call for a campaign on the preciousness of water, but one already exists: the water efficiency fund campaign, the chair of which will be announced in the new year. It is a fund by Ofwat looking into the communications we need around water and how precious it is.

The Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron), keeps wanting me to give him spoilers, but I will continue to refuse to give spoilers on exactly what will and will not be in the White Paper. As has been announced—he knows this already—we are going to look at having one powerful regulator and a joined-up, comprehensive approach to regulation across the whole of the industry.

I completely agree with the point that was made about fragmentation; there are so many different plans involved in how much water we need. We need to look at how we can streamline this, make it more straightforward and hold people to account for who is delivering what and when. There is much more to come in the White Paper, as well as the legislation following it.

[Anna Dixon]

I commend the Minister for all she has done so far to address the problems in the water sector, and look forward to the forthcoming water White Paper. I realise she cannot give away too much, but I urge her to look again at some of the recommendations of the People’s Commission on the Water Sector, particularly the idea of a SAGE for water—having an expert advisory panel—and stronger democratic oversight, particularly of catchments. I urge her to look at those ideas again before she finalises her paper.

[Emma Hardy]

I thank my hon. Friend for the work she has done on the People’s Commission. I have read it, and thought there were some interesting suggestions in it. There is so much consensus on this issue; everyone fundamentally wants the same thing—enough water, including for farmers, growth and the general public. Furthermore, everyone wants to do that in a way that does not damage the environment or too expensive for customers. There is so much consensus on which we can all build when we tackle this issue.

On the issue of performance-related pay, in a report on 5 November, Ofwat highlighted the broader issue of a lack of transparency when it comes to executive remuneration across the water sector. It noted in particular the examples of Yorkshire Water and Thames Water, which made retention payments from the parent company. Due to that, Ofcom will consult on requiring companies to publicly report in full the details of all executive remunerations, including explanations of what the remuneration relates to. This is intended to apply to company accounts in 2025-26. In a nutshell, it will get a better grip on the situation.

Lots of Members mentioned canals. I spoke with the Canal and River Trust and I hear the difficulties it has had, mainly because of the drought. When water becomes more scarce, of course that creates a problem for canals. I acknowledge that it has been a particularly difficult year. Many Members talked about chalk streams. One of the best things we can do to support chalk streams is to reduce over-abstraction.

There were lots of comments about how we will deal with future water use and make sure that we have all the water we need. There is some good news that I think everyone here might become very excited about, as I have. It is the building regulations consultation, which is happening at the moment and lasts until 16 December. If any hon. Member has not responded to that consultation, I encourage them to do so. It is considering how we can make homes more water-efficient, including the use of grey water, water reuse and what potential future standards could be. The outline proposal is for the minimum standard to be reduced from 125 to 105 litres per day and there are even options for a tighter standard, which range from 110 to 100 litres a day.

The consultation is also looking at evidence on water reuse systems in new developments, so there is quite a lot in it. That is really exciting, because these ideas will enable customers to save money on their water bills and on their energy bills, because they will not have to use as much energy to heat their water. They also support the environment and our house building targets. As I say, the consultation is quite exciting, and it closes on 16 December.

We also intend to introduce mandatory water efficiency labelling to help customers to make informed choices about different appliances when they buy products for their home. We believe that intervention alone will save 23 billion litres of water over 10 years. Building new houses to the highest potential for water efficiency leaves room for further growth in the future. There are quite a lot of exciting things happening in this sector. [Interruption.] I am now being coughed at, which I think means that I should shush.

I again thank the hon. Member for Horsham for securing this debate. I am sure it will not be the last time that we talk about the importance of water scarcity. We all have a role to carry the message that water is a precious resource, which is necessary not just for us but for farmers and the environment. I look forward to continuing the debate on this subject in future conversations about water after Christmas. Merry Christmas.

Veterinary Medicines: Northern Ireland

Emma Hardy Excerpts

Wednesday 3rd December 2025 Westminster Hall

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

It is such a pleasure to serve under your chairwomanship, Dr Allin-Khan, and to respond to the debate. I thank the hon. Member for South Antrim (Robin Swann) for securing this debate on a highly important matter and for his continued commitment to the veterinary medicine supply in Northern Ireland. He might have noticed I am not the farming Minister, but I am pleased to be here to respond on her behalf.

I recognise how important this issue is to the people of Northern Ireland and all the communities the hon. Gentleman represents. He has raised many important issues with me today; I will endeavour to address as many as possible. Baroness Hayman was in Northern Ireland just last week meeting the hon. Gentleman and many of our organisations. She met vets, the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, the permanent secretary, and the Northern Ireland Business Brexit Working Group to demonstrate how important the issue is to the UK Government. Those channels of dialogue remain open.

I thank industry stakeholders for their ongoing support and work to make the changes necessary to continue supply to Northern Ireland. We have done extensive work with industry, which has given us the confidence in the arrangements we have put in place to manage a smooth transition into 2026. Before responding to specific questions raised in the debate, I want first to outline the Government’s view on veterinary medicine in Northern Ireland.

Safeguarding the supply of veterinary medicine in Northern Ireland after the grace period ends remains a core Government priority. We are committed to ensuring that the health and welfare of all animals is maintained in all circumstances. We are aware of concerns raised about pack size, discontinued products and the potential for increased costs, and we take those concerns extremely seriously. We have engaged extensively with stakeholders on those issues. Based on the evidence available to us through this engagement, our view remains that disruption at the end of the grace period will be limited and the arrangements we have in place will manage supply into 2026.

[Gavin Robinson]

I am grateful to the Minister for taking the intervention. Does she accept that the fundamental flaw in the Government’s approach is to accept the premise that the European Union controls what access there should be from one part of our United Kingdom to another and that we are accepting that there should be a chink in the UK internal market? Does she understand that when the grace period comes to an end, the European Union cannot and will not be able to demonstrate any detriment to their single market because of the ongoing availability until the end of this year. There has not been any detriment to their single market because of the availability of veterinary medicines from GB to Northern Ireland; and nor will there be, so all this is wholly disproportionate and unnecessary.

[Emma Hardy]

I thank the right hon. Member. He will recognise that it is important for the UK to be legally compliant with all of our international agreements. We take seriously the Windsor framework and the rules that it gave our country. I would not want to be part of a Government who disregard international agreements, but I completely understand his concerns around veterinary medicines.

We expect 10% to 15% of currently licensed veterinary medicines in Northern Ireland to be discontinued, but most are either dormant and not sold in Northern Ireland or have multiple alternatives available. We have analysed each discontinuation against multiple criteria to determine the position. However, we appreciate we can never have perfect data and that situations change. That is why we have also announced the veterinary medicines internal market scheme and the veterinary medicine health situation scheme: to help to address any gaps, should they arise.

The veterinary medicines internal market scheme removes administrative burdens from vets moving medicine that are not vaccines from Great Britain to Northern Ireland when, in their clinical judgment, that is needed. It is based on the existing cascade procedure, with which vets are very familiar. These simplifications allow the scheme to be as responsible as possible when managing supply issues.

The veterinary medicine health situation scheme allows the Government to temporarily authorise an alternative medicine when a discontinuation is expected to lead to a health situation. It is designed to provide a dedicated supply mechanism to address supply issues, should they arise.

[Jim Allister]

Sadly, we live under EU law, and the EU law that governs these matters says that only where there is exceptional breakdown can there be alternative arrangements. Have the Government obtained permission from their EU masters for the two schemes to which the Minister refers? According to the Government, they are going to be routine, rather than for exceptional breakdowns.

[Emma Hardy]

I thank the hon. and learned Gentleman; of course, I reject the phrase “EU masters”. These schemes are really important to make sure that the vets or those who require the medicine have the medicine that they need in Northern Ireland.

I want to take this opportunity to make a few further remarks about our assessment on discontinuations. In June, the Government said that “fewer than 20 products” are expected to be discontinued where there was risk of “significant adverse impacts” if not addressed through our schemes. I am pleased to announce that further analysis has reduced that figure to six. Following extensive engagement and detailed analysis, we are now satisfied that none of these discontinuations would lead to a health situation or other significant adverse impacts.

In some cases, the products will no longer be discontinued; in others, there are sufficient alternatives available in Northern Ireland or from the EU. However, we will of course continue to monitor the list and any new discontinuations, and we welcome stakeholder feedback. On divergence, the veterinary medicines regulations for Great Britain were updated in 2024 to reflect the comparable EU regulations 2019/6 and 2019/4, thereby basically bringing Great Britain and Northern Ireland into closer alignment.

These are the regulations that will apply in Northern Ireland from the end of the grace period. Divergence between Great Britain and Northern Ireland veterinary medicine regulation is minimal, and is something that the Veterinary Medicines Directorate monitors closely in considering where alignment may be beneficial.

I will now address some of the other concerns raised. We have heard that stakeholders are concerned about insufficient pack sizes being available and about that leading to cost increases and issues with dispensing veterinary medicines. However, based on our extensive engagement, we have no evidence that pack size changes are a systematic issue. Where pack size changes occur, we expect the most popular sizes to remain, but of course, if the situation changes or if new evidence comes to light, we will look to use the schemes we have in place.

More broadly on costs, we have had positive reassurance from a number of pharmaceutical companies that they will not increase prices, but we will closely monitor the situation into 2026.

[Robin Swann]

With regard to market surveillance to look at costs, what powers do the Government have, should a pharmaceutical supplier decide to increase costs? That would be interfering with the commercial market, and I do not see where the Government have the powers to do what they say they want to do, or may do, in that instance.

[Emma Hardy]

The hon. Gentleman raises an important point. We would of course look at whatever powers we have at our disposal, but as a Government we do not want to see costs unfairly increased for Northern Ireland customers. That is the important principle that we are trying to address by doing this. We hope that that will not be the case, but if it is, we would need to work closely and carefully with all stakeholders in Northern Ireland, and we would of course follow up with meetings with representatives from Northern Ireland about that.

We are not complacent. The Government’s position is based on our assessment of the best possible evidence available, and we take stakeholder concern extremely seriously. As I mentioned at the beginning, Baroness Hayman was in Northern Ireland just last week for a couple of days, meeting with people about this very issue. I know that it is something she cares about and sees as incredibly important.

Our view is based on what we can see. The transition to new arrangements at the end of the year will be manageable, but if there are unexpected problems, we have our two schemes to manage that. I also note that there will not be a cliff edge on supply at the end of the year. All medicines supplied to Northern Ireland before the end of this year will remain available, and some of those products have long shelf lives. We have advised businesses to take prudent action, but that is just in case. We have put in many different mitigations to try and resolve this issue. We will continue to monitor the situation closely, and we will respond rapidly if issues arise. As I mentioned at the beginning of my speech, we want to continue and maintain open dialogue with all representatives.

[Robin Swann]

The Minister has been gracious in taking interventions. One issue that she has not touched on yet is pet owners with a prescription who buy medication online from GB suppliers. What reassurance can she give us there? I have heard everything that she has said to date, but I have not heard her address that issue.

[Emma Hardy]

Through our engagement, we are aware of multiple companies that are either being established in Northern Ireland or planning to set up as online retailers there. That is expected to ensure that medicines will remain available through online channels. The Government appreciate that access to online retailers for pet owners to obtain veterinary medicines for their pets is of great importance, so this is something we are monitoring closely. Of course, it would be a positive outcome if those companies were setting up as online retailers in Northern Ireland. As a pet owner myself, I recognise how important it is for pet owners to be able to get the medication their beloved pets need.

We will continue to monitor the situation closely and will respond rapidly. We welcome feedback from stakeholders on specific issues and will continue to work with industry as we have done.

[Carla Lockhart]

Forgive us for not looking at this through the rose-tinted glasses that the Minister has presented today. I feel that what we have heard is another Minister with their head in the sand, utterly tone deaf to what industry, manufacturers and distributors are saying in the public domain. They have put their heads above the parapet. Will the Minister today commit to publishing the list? No one has seen it or has any understanding of it. Will the Minister actually engage with those industry leaders and not just the Department in Northern Ireland, which also seems to have its head in the sand? These industry leaders are saying that we will be at crisis point come the end of this year.

[Emma Hardy]

With respect to the hon. Lady, I refute the idea that this Government have their head in the sand. If we had, we would not have just sent a Minister, Baroness Hayman, to Northern Ireland for two days to meet with everybody there and speak to them, and maintain the extensive engagement that we have. I completely recognise that this is an issue that the hon. Lady is concerned about, and I know how important it is to her. I do not want to be seen to not be taking it seriously, when we absolutely are taking it seriously. As I have tried to outline—because I know that this is an important issue—if there are things about which the hon. Lady remains concerned after the transition period ends in 2026, then the door is open to continue those conversations.

[Carla Lockhart]

Will the Minister give way?

[Emma Hardy]

I will just answer the hon. Lady about the list and then I will.

As to why the list has not been published, it is because of commercial confidentiality. We are unable to share businesses’ supply intentions. Businesses are increasingly providing clarity to their customers, and we encourage those who have not done so to do so.

[Carla Lockhart]

The Minister just talked about what to do if I need to continue to raise my concerns. We need the message to go back very clearly that there has been a veterinary medicines working group and it has been absolutely useless when it comes to raising concerns. No concerns are taken on board by the very same Minister who this Minister just said went to Northern Ireland in the last few days. They have listened but not acted. There is no mechanism to raise concerns or for them to be taken seriously.

[Emma Hardy]

I hold the Minister, Baroness Hayman, in the highest of regard, and I am sure that she is doing absolutely everything she can to listen carefully to concerns and will continue to do so.

I thank the hon. Member for South Antrim for securing this debate and allowing us to discuss the importance of medicine in Northern Ireland. Let us continue to discuss this and continue to talk if any issues are raised. I hope that will not be the case, but if issues are raised, let us work together on that as representatives of our fantastic United Kingdom.

Question put and agreed to.