Flood Risk and Flood Defence Infrastructure: North-west England
Debate between Emma Hardy and Andrew Murrison(1 day, 6 hours ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Emma Hardy
That is very exciting. I was offered beer by my hon. Friend the Member for Stockport (Navendu Mishra), so perhaps I can come for a visit on the way.
The issue of forecasting was raised. We have improved our flood warning and informing system, with a new system going live on, I think, 21 October. The maps allow people to zoom down for more detailed information. Constant work is going on to make our forecasting more accurate. I encourage all hon. Members to talk to the specialists at the Met Office about how they do this work. It is more art than science, because they have to look at different predictions. If there are heavy downpours concentrated in one area, as we had last year, it becomes difficult to judge exactly, but they are continually working to improve the forecasts. Our flood forecasting in this country is some of the best and most accurate in the world, but there is always more that we can do.
Many hon. Members raised the issue of insurance. We had an insurance roundtable. As I have explained before, the floods resilience taskforce is a huge group of people who meet together, before creating action groups that go away and focus on particular issues. We have just had an action group to look into insurance—who is getting it, who is not getting it, how affordable it is and what information is out there. There is also the flood insurance directory, which I am happy to circulate among Members; it allows people to find something that is affordable. I have been pushing insurance companies to offer the Build Back Better scheme, which gives people an extra £10,000 to make their properties more flood-resilient, to as many as possible. Greater Manchester combined authority is doing great work, taking a combined look at how we tackle flooding: it is one of the best examples of that holistic working around the country. The authority sits on the floods resilience taskforce to offer advice.
I thank all hon. Members for their contributions. It was lovely to visit Leigh and Atherton and talk to people there. I have met the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) to discuss watercourse maintenance, and I stand by my promise to visit next year.
On insurance—I apologise if everyone knows this—I want to flag something about how Flood Re works. It puts a levy on everybody else who pays insurance, so every time someone asks that the scheme be increased or widened, or that more people benefit from it, I want to sound a note of caution, because that would result in people who are not at risk paying more for their insurance. That is how it works: it is a levy system. It would be wonderful to have lots more money for everything, but I hope that everyone who is asking me for extra money will support our Budget next week.
Finally, let me thank my hon. Friend the Member for Warrington South for securing this debate on the incredibly important issue of flood risk and defence. We should all encourage our constituents to sign up for flood alerts and warnings, have a flood plan and know what to do if there is a flood emergency. A pack has gone out to every Member of Parliament and was circulated again just last week with a “Dear colleague” letter. Will Members please use that information and share it as much as possible, so we can ensure that everybody is prepared for the winter ahead?
Dr Andrew Murrison (in the Chair)
I call Sarah Hall to wind up extremely briefly.
Illegal Waste: Organised Crime
Debate between Emma Hardy and Andrew Murrison(2 days, 6 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Emma Hardy
My hon. Friend raises an important point. It is appalling to see in the pictures how the pollution is right next to the river, and it is very concerning. Obviously criminal investigations are ongoing, and work is happening on the ground. The Environment Agency is working closely with all local partners, but my hon. Friend is right that we need to make sure that this is joined up across all the different authorities. I can assure him that that is happening. I can also offer him a meeting so that he can get more detail on what is happening in this particular case.
Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)
On the dumping of waste across the countryside, what assessment has the Minister made of the ability and capacity of the Environment Agency to adequately control and regulate the dumping of toxic emissions by wholly unwanted and unnecessary waste incinerators that are being foisted on our communities, including in Westbury in my constituency?
Emma Hardy
As I understand it, all waste incinerators are tightly permitted. If there are problems with permitting or if the right hon. Member believes that permits are being broken, I encourage him to contact the local Environment Agency office so that it can be urgently investigated.
Draft Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Regulations 2025
Debate between Emma Hardy and Andrew Murrison(7 months, 2 weeks ago)
General CommitteesRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Emma Hardy
I thank my hon. Friend for his contribution, which was thoughtful, as always, and demonstrated our care for other countries around the world. We have talked about resistance to pests and changes owing to climate change, and this is generally a good and innovative technology that can be used to benefit many people. As I said, although the EU seems to be moving in this area, we are diverging and we do not have time to wait.
Emma Hardy
I will try to answer the right hon. Gentleman’s question and then he is welcome to intervene. A report by the Breakthrough Institute and Alliance for Science estimates that the EU’s current regulations on gene editing could result in an annual economic opportunity cost of $182 billion to $356 billion for the EU. That is why we want to act now to place English scientists and breeders at the forefront across Europe to make the most of opportunities presented by precision-breeding technologies.
Dr Murrison
The Minister has pretty much answered the question I was going to put to her, which was: what assessment has she made of the competitive advantage? I am trying to be helpful to the Government. I know that they say they want lots of growth, and this is an opportunity to get growth, is it not? But to get growth we need competitive advantage, not just with the States, but with the EU. So my question really is: how much does she think we will be advantaged by the legislation? She has given me a figure, which sounds like a lot of money. I encourage her to go further and, as Europe becomes more and more restrictive in the technologies that it appears to be fighting scared of, the UK must be able to be rational in how it positions itself. In this area, that means being encouraging to our science base, of course, as well as our ability to exploit the findings of that research here in the UK.
Emma Hardy
As I said, there is an opportunity of $182 billion to $356 billion that we can perhaps not exploit—that is maybe the wrong word—but utilise, or take advantage of.