Dartmoor Ponies
Emma Reynolds Excerpts(1 week, 5 days ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Emma Reynolds)
I wish to update the House on the decisive action that we are taking to secure the long-term future of Dartmoor’s iconic pony populations through a package of new protections and financial support.
Dartmoor’s pony populations and environmental land management schemes
Dartmoor’s heritage rare breeds and semi-wild ponies are a much-cherished part of Dartmoor’s landscape and cultural heritage. They also play an important role in conserving protected environmental sites, including sites of special scientific interest, on the moor. This Government are committed to ensuring that their numbers do not fall below current levels
From today, we are going beyond recommendation 27 of the Fursdon review of protected site management on Dartmoor in 2023 to delink ponies and cattle for the calculation of agri-environment scheme stocking rates. Dartmoor’s ponies will be completely removed from stocking rate calculations in new environmental land management agreements, so that farmers do not face a choice between keeping ponies and maintaining sheep or cattle. Pony numbers will also be monitored across the moor to ensure that they remain at least at current levels. As part of the overall grazing management approach on protected sites in Dartmoor, I have asked Natural England only to consider where existing populations of ponies graze, rather than their overall numbers.
New ELM agreements on Dartmoor will be negotiated on an individual basis, reflecting the needs of the sites they are managing. I want to make it clear, however—by affirming our commitment to maintaining current pony populations on Dartmoor—that if any reductions in the existing pony populations were to occur, this will not release any capacity to increase levels of sheep or cattle grazing on the moor agreed under ELM schemes.
Dartmoor’s resident ponies will continue to remain exempt from being included in any seasonal livestock removal requirements in the shepherding actions within the sustainable farming incentive and the countryside stewardship higher tier—CSHT ELM—scheme offers.
We also intend to introduce a separate pony supplement into SFI and CSHT scheme offers to ensure that there is no economic incentive to reduce pony populations as a result of participating in DEFRA schemes and provide additional support to allow ponies to continue their vital conservation grazing role on the moor.
We will also review the native breed actions in these schemes to see whether the approach could enhance support for “at-risk” native breeds, working with interested parties.
Making a real change to the condition of protected sites on Dartmoor
Dartmoor is one of England’s most important and distinctive landscapes, home to internationally important habitats, wildlife and SSSIs, but large parts of Dartmoor are in long-term ecological decline. Achieving the right balance of grazing is essential to supporting both nature recovery and the long-term future of the moor’s farming communities.
There is broad agreement that grazing approaches on Dartmoor need to change to improve the condition of the valuable habitats found on Dartmoor. DEFRA remains committed to finding flexible and nuanced approaches to grazing on Dartmoor and to doing so through the work of the Dartmoor land use management group—DLUMG—set up following the Fursdon review.
The DLUMG is bringing together a land use framework for Dartmoor and undertaking trials to demonstrate what works to improve condition of its protected sites. Subject to agreement of a clear workplan for DLUMG work going forward, I have asked the group:
to help ensure that their trials complement projects under development on Dartmoor through landscape recovery. I want this work to help to build the evidence base, test adaptive grazing approaches and inform improvement of protected site management.
to develop a Dartmoor-wide management framework that allows for approval of a whole Dartmoor set of grazing principles for ponies, cattle and sheep. This framework will take time to develop but I see it as essential to enabling improvements to the environmental condition of the moor so that future generations can enjoy the wide diversity of species and habitats Dartmoor offers.
Agreeing proposals for ELM agreements on Dartmoor
Finally, I want to ensure that ongoing discussions around landscape recovery projects, new CS higher tier and continuing higher level stewardship agri-environment agreements on Dartmoor demonstrate an openness to flexible and adaptive approaches to grazing on the moor while we await the results of the DLUMG trials. With respect to ponies, these discussions will also be conducted fully in line with the principles set out above.
While we await results from the DLUMG trials, I have asked Natural England that any proposed changes to grazing on Dartmoor through ELM schemes should be approached sensitively. To support their negotiations, DEFRA will work closely with Natural England, with support from the DLUMG, to collectively agree:
short term grazing management on Dartmoor under ELM schemes;
any transitional approaches that might be required to bring existing stocking rate levels in expiring agreements to those required to support improvements in habitat condition under new CSHT agreements; and
the evidence used to support grazing management, working with Defra’s chief scientific adviser and her team.
Conclusion
I believe the approach I have set out here will help us ensure that collectively we are able to agree a balanced approach to help improve management of protected sites on Dartmoor, maintain pony populations and to support farmers and commoners who play a vital role on Dartmoor’s landscape.
[HCWS274]
Zane Gbangbola Inquiry
Emma Reynolds Excerpts(2 weeks, 1 day ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Emma Reynolds)
Today I am announcing the appointment of Dr Sandie Okoro OBE as chair of the independent, non-statutory inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the death of Zane Gbangbola.
Zane Gbangbola tragically died at the age of seven in February 2014 at his family home in Chertsey, Surrey. The Prime Minister and I have both met with Zane’s family, and we listened carefully to their concerns about what happened, the response of public bodies at the time, and the treatment they received in the years that followed.
We have decided to commission an independent inquiry to examine the circumstances surrounding Zane’s death. This will include how public services and relevant authorities worked together during and after the incident, and how Zane’s family were treated by those organisations. It will be forward-looking in its approach, identifying any lessons that can be learned and making recommendations to improve practice in the future.
The chair will act independently of Government and will be supported by access to appropriate subject matter and technical expertise. The Government expect all public bodies and individuals engaged by the inquiry to co-operate fully, openly and candidly. Once in force, the Public Office (Accountability) Bill—otherwise known as the Hillsborough law—can be drawn upon by all live inquiries, including this one.
The inquiry’s full terms of reference will be published shortly, and I will place a copy of these in the House Library at the earliest opportunity. The Government are committed to responding publicly to any recommendations made by the inquiry.
I would like to place on record my heartfelt condolences to Zane’s parents for the loss of their beloved boy, Zane. I also wish to thank them for their continued engagement and reaffirm my commitment to ensuring that this inquiry is conducted thoroughly, independently, and with the seriousness and care that this tragedy deserves.
[HCWS216]
Oral Answers to Questions
Emma Reynolds Excerpts(2 weeks, 5 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Anna Gelderd (South East Cornwall) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Emma Reynolds)
My hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth South (Stephen Morgan), the new farming and food Minister, and I published our new farming road map, which is the first ever long-term strategy for farming. It sets out a vision for a more productive, profitable, sustainable and resilient sector. The primary purpose of farming, as set out in the road map, is food production, which goes hand in hand with improving the environment. We are driving towards a lower-input, more nature-friendly farming system.
Dave Robertson
Farmers across Lichfield, Burntwood and the villages know that one of the most important things for them to make their businesses work is access to fertiliser at a price that allows them to be profitable. What can the Government do to ensure that fertiliser prices do not spike, as we have seen in the last couple of years, and remain stable in the long term?
Emma Reynolds
My hon. Friend is right to raise this issue. We are engaging with the National Farmers’ Union on this; we know it is a great concern for farmers. We have asked the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board to increase fertiliser price reporting, so it is now doing that weekly rather than monthly. We have already consulted on suspending tariffs for certain fertilisers, and we have rolled out an online tool to help farmers use fertilisers more efficiently.
Anna Gelderd
Food producers in South East Cornwall, including our farmers and fishermen, are at the heart of our community, economy and food security, so I really welcome the work the Government have done to develop the new farming road map in partnership with farmers and the recognition that profitable farm businesses are essential to food security. As I will be meeting farmers at the Liskeard show later this week, will the Secretary of State set out immediate opportunities in the road map and explain how the Farming and Food Partnership Board will ensure that farmers like mine continue to shape its implementation, giving them clarity and confidence to invest in the long-term profitability and resilience of their business?
Emma Reynolds
I pay tribute to the work my hon. Friend does representing her local farmers, and I hope the Liskeard show goes well later this week. The Farming and Food Partnership Board, which has already been established, is working on two sector growth plans, starting with poultry and horticulture, to bring down barriers to growth. We are taking forward the road map’s vision to ensure that farmers are more productive and profitable; that is how we will proceed.
Rishi Sunak (Richmond and Northallerton) (Con)
Attracting the next generation of farmers is key to the long-term sustainability of the sector. I recently visited Great Smeaton young farmers’ club, and it was wonderful to see both their contribution to the local community and their commitment to farming. Groups like that are vital to engaging young people in farming. Will the Secretary of State join me in paying tribute to Great Smeaton YFC and the National Federation of Young Farmers’ Clubs for their important contribution to our national life?
Emma Reynolds
I could not agree more. I absolutely pay tribute to the right hon. Gentleman’s local young farmers’ club. As he knows, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs supports the National Federation of Young Farmers’ Clubs, and we engaged with it on the drafting of the farming road map. We always have young farmers in our minds when we are designing policy, because we are committed to ensuring that the next generation can enter the sector. We are looking particularly in the road map at encouraging longer-term tenancies, which we know is an easier way to get into the sector. We have also asked the Law Commission to review legislation on farming tenancies. Like him, I am committed to ensuring that the next generation has a voice in our policies.
Caroline Voaden (South Devon) (LD)
The NFU is concerned that the £240 million allocated for new sustainable farming incentive agreements in 2026 does not match the scale of farmers’ environmental ambitions and will not allow all farmers with expiring agreements a reasonable opportunity to access ongoing environmental land management schemes funding. How will the Government support farmers like mine in South Devon, who are keen to protect the environment while producing food but are unable to secure a new SFI agreement under this limited budget, to continue their valuable environmental work?
Emma Reynolds
I reassure the hon. Lady that those farmers whose agreements are coming to an end towards the end of this year or early next year—there are obviously thousands—will be able to apply in the second window. We have made the technological advances necessary to ensure that that can happen. I know that issue has been raised with me in previous DEFRA oral questions, and we have taken it forward since then. We have a record farming budget for sustainable farming of £11.8 billion over the course of this Parliament. This is obviously not just about public funding; it is about how we work with the sector and how parts of the sector collaborate with each other. That is why we have put £30 million into a farmer collaboration fund and why we are also backing agritech.
Robbie Moore (Keighley and Ilkley) (Con)
Delinked payments dramatically reduced; SFI stopped and started and ultimately made competitive; targets to dramatically reduce livestock numbers recommended; the state given more power to buy farmland below market value; the fertiliser tax; the double cab pick-up tax; the introduction of family farm and family business tax; Natural England given more power; an EU realignment deal that is set to cost our farmers thousands and result in job losses; and the annual grant for young farmers removed for the first time—oh, but beavers have been released. Which one of those measures that the Secretary of State has introduced in the last two years does she think will support the long-term financial sustainability of our farming businesses?
Emma Reynolds
I would take our record over the hon. Gentleman’s record any time. The Conservatives could not even be bothered to spend the farming budget when they were in power. They sold farmers down the river on various trade deals, but we have not; we have protected farmers in our trade deals. We have set out the first-ever long-term road map and vision for the farming sector, and we have worked closely with it. We commissioned Minette Batters, the former president of the NFU, to do an independent profitability review, and we are taking forward the vast majority of her recommendations. We are working in close partnership with the sector. That is all in stark contrast with what happened under the hon. Gentleman’s Government.
Steve Race (Exeter) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Emma Reynolds)
Dartmoor ponies are a vital part of our landscape and history. As the Environment Secretary, I have a duty to protect our native species, which obviously include Dartmoor ponies. I want to see the number of Dartmoor ponies maintained and the condition of Dartmoor improved.
Steve Race
I recognise the work that the Secretary of State and Ministers have done on this issue, and I thank them for their engagement. While the Conservatives rejected recommendation 27 of the Fursdon review, will she reassure me that this Government will find a solution that works for all the communities on Dartmoor and ensure a thriving population of Dartmoor ponies? Will she join me on Dartmoor in the coming weeks to see these beautiful native creatures and the organisations that care for them?
Emma Reynolds
I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for his work on this important issue. I know there is a lot of concern in his local area and beyond about Dartmoor ponies, but I reassure him that under this Government, there will be no planned reduction in the number of Dartmoor ponies. I am working on solutions to support this fantastic native species, and I will set out further details on that soon. I would love to visit and see the ponies for myself.
Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)
Natural England proposed that overall livestock grazing limits should be reduced to reduce overgrazing, and it was not specific to ponies—it was about overgrazing by sheep and cattle. Ponies can help to graze invasive grasses and promote biodiversity. The people who developed the Change.org petition were doing the right thing, but does the Secretary of State share my view that it was cynical of the Conservative party to develop a shadow petition to gather voter intention data?
Emma Reynolds
I agree. Given that the Conservatives created this mess by rejecting some of the Fursdon recommendations, it is a bit rich of them to have a go at the current Government, as we are trying to clear up their mess on this issue and many others. I reassure the hon. Gentleman that I am well aware of the different issues on Dartmoor. A third of the moor is a site of special scientific interest, and we must ensure that we put measures in place to better enable the moor to recover, particularly during the winter. We must ensure that the grazing is more widespread, rather than concentrated in the SSSI. I have recently met with the Dartmoor Land Use Management Group to discuss these issues, and, as I have said, I will continue to pursue a solution that protects Dartmoor ponies and restores the environmental condition of the SSSI.
Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)
Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Emma Reynolds)
Innovation and productivity go hand in hand, and the Government are backing British agri-tech with real investment. Innovation is central to our farming road map, and I recently announced that we are boosting the farming innovation programme to £123 million this year. We are also working across Government—for example, with the Department for Business and Trade—to open up new export opportunities and drive growth, productivity and jobs across the sector.
Josh Newbury
The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee recently had the privilege of visiting New Zealand. We met an Innovate UK delegation promoting incredible British agri-tech innovations like cups that enable substrate-free hydroponics, vegetables that have 40 times the iron content, and AI analysis of drone, satellite and sensor data. Does the Secretary of State agree that agri-tech will be a key growth area for the UK? Will she work with counterparts in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology and DBT to accelerate the success of British agri-tech start-ups?
Emma Reynolds
My hon. Friend is right to say that the Government absolutely recognise the potential of agri-tech as a high-growth sector. That is why it is included in the Government’s industrial strategy. The UK is already a world leader in agri-tech, but we want to ensure that we maintain that leadership. Under this Government, we will continue to bolster our position and boost global exports, as he suggested. We are supporting British agri-tech innovations, such as automated fruit pickers, which are already being used around the world. We should be proud of our strong research base and our culture of farming innovation.
David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)
I encourage the Secretary of State to visit the Roslin Institute, just outside Edinburgh. It is most famous, of course, for the cloning of Dolly the sheep, and it is one of the world’s leading agri-tech centres. Although it is in Scotland, it is extremely important that it is regarded as a UK asset, and I hope that she will promote it in that way.
Emma Reynolds
I could not agree more with the right hon. Gentleman that the centre is a UK national asset. I or the Minister of State, my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth South (Stephen Morgan), would be pleased to visit to learn more about what it is doing.
Catherine Fookes (Monmouthshire) (Lab)
Callum Anderson (Buckingham and Bletchley) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Emma Reynolds)
Since our last oral questions, we have recently published England’s first long-term farming road map, as I mentioned earlier, and we have opened the first application window for our reformed sustainable farming incentive. I visited the Groundswell agricultural festival to see regenerative farming in action, and I will be at the Great Yorkshire show next week.
Our water delivery taskforce has recently unlocked the infrastructure needed to support nearly 20,000 new homes in East Anglia, and we are taking action to ensure that products on British supermarket shelves such as coffee and cocoa are not linked to illegal deforestation overseas. Like the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry East (Mary Creagh), I spoke at London Climate Action Week about our bold action to restore nature, and I welcomed the UN Secretary-General to Kew Gardens. Yesterday I announced the biggest ever investment in species recovery.
Finally, we are a nation of animal lovers, as you know very well, Mr Speaker. I have today published the Government’s plans to reform the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966 in order to deliver better outcomes for this great profession—the Act has not been updated since 1966—and our much-loved pets.
Callum Anderson
Farmers in north Buckinghamshire have raised queries with me regarding the transition from environmental land management agreements that expired this year to the funding available through the much-welcomed sustainable farming incentive 2026. Will the Secretary of State set out how the Government are supporting farmers through the transition, so that there are no unintended funding gaps for those who want to deliver positive environmental outcomes?
Emma Reynolds
I thank my hon. Friend for raising this issue. We have worked in close partnership with farmers and stakeholders to shape the new SFI. I can reassure my hon. Friend, and Members across the House, that those farmers who have soon-to-expire ELM revenue agreements will be able to apply in the second window of SFI later this year, in September.
Victoria Atkins (Louth and Horncastle) (Con)
In recent weeks, DEFRA’s quangos have made headlines: the Environment Agency is failing to prosecute waste criminals, instead going after virtuous volunteers who are cleaning up the rivers for it; Natural England is demanding more madcap fish schemes at Hinkley Point C, on top of its recommended £700 million fish disco policy, all of which will be paid for by our constituents; and Natural England’s threat to Dartmoor ponies was the quickest U-turn yet by this Government. Does the Secretary of State feel she has control over these quangos?
Emma Reynolds
That is some brass neck, given that the whole issue of the Dartmoor ponies was created under the right hon. Lady’s Government. They rejected several of the Fursdon review recommendations and put the future of the Dartmoor ponies in doubt. We are having to clear up their mess, so I shall take no lectures from the right hon. Lady.
Victoria Atkins
Oh dear. This may be the last time the Secretary of State gets to give such an inadequate answer to what is a reasonable question about her grip on her Department. But let us look at Labour’s wider chaos. After two years of record-breaking tax rises and the highest number of farm closures, the next version of a Labour Government are coming back for even more, with rumours of a brand-new tax on land value, which will target rural residents from their gardens to their farms. Has Labour learned nothing from its family farm tax fiasco, which every Labour Member voted for?
Emma Reynolds
The right hon. Lady lectures us about regulators. We have a tighter grip on our arms-length bodies than the Conservatives did when they were in Government. I issued strategic policy statements to all ALBs earlier this year, writing to the chairs of those organisations to tell them about the Government’s direction of travel. Under her Government, the reason we saw record levels of pollution in our waterways was that they took their foot off the gas and took a blind eye to water companies polluting rivers. And they introduced a system of self-monitoring that was equivalent to Ofsted not sending anybody out to do any inspections of schools.
Joe Powell (Kensington and Bayswater) (Lab)
Emma Reynolds
I can reassure my hon. Friend of that. He will have seen that I wrote to Ofwat setting out my early concerns that the creditors’ current proposal does not do enough to protect customers and the environment. The protection of consumers and the environment is at the forefront of all my thinking. I reassure him that we will always act in the national interest. We stand ready for all eventualities, including applying for a special administration regime if that becomes necessary.
Mr Will Forster (Woking) (LD)
Dr Danny Chambers (Winchester) (LD)
I welcome the Secretary of State’s mentioning an update to the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966; after 60 years, it is much needed to make the Act fit for purpose to regulate new business structures and paraprofessionals such as physios, and to protect the title of veterinary nurse. Could we have an assurance that, with the change of Administration, the update will remain a priority and will not be kicked into the long grass? It is much needed right now.
Emma Reynolds
I can reassure the hon. Gentleman that it is a priority for the Government. I visited the University of Surrey’s veterinary medicine school yesterday, and we have been engaging with the sector, which wants to modernise the legislation. It is not fit for purpose—there are plenty of things available now that were not around in 1966, such as scans for animals. We are absolutely committed as a Government to modernising the legislation to the benefit of the profession—ensuring that we continue to drive up standards, celebrate good practice and root out bad practice—and to the benefit of pet owners, too.
Melanie Onn (Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes) (Lab)
From sea to plate, fisheries need the same long-term certainty as farmers in order to strengthen our food security, encourage healthy, high-protein diets and help to build jobs and skills pipelines that coastal communities need. Will the Minister consider committing to adopting the all-party parliamentary group on fisheries’ national action plan?
Mr Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab)
The biggest cause of river pollution is agricultural run-off. Will the Secretary of State ensure that, through the sustainable farming measures, she is prioritising farms that are taking action on agricultural run-off? Will she confirm that in the clean water Bill the issue of agricultural run-off will be considered alongside taking action on failing water companies?
Emma Reynolds
I can reassure my hon. Friend that agricultural pollution is top of mind for me as Secretary of State and for the Water Minister, and the issue will form part of the clean water Bill. We need to crack down on water pollution from agriculture in partnership with farmers, making sure that they have the tools that they need to do the right thing, because agricultural pollution accounts for around 42% of overall river pollution.
Adrian Ramsay (Waveney Valley) (Green)
At the Environmental Audit Committee yesterday, the Minister for Nature did not have a clear answer for why the national security assessment on ecosystem collapse has not been released in its full form to MPs. I got the impression that it was not her decision to withhold the full unredacted report from MPs. Whose decision was it?
Veterinary Sector
Emma Reynolds Excerpts(2 weeks, 5 days ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Emma Reynolds)
I can today inform the House of the publication of a White Paper outlining the Government’s vision for supporting a thriving, modern veterinary sector through reform of the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966.
We are a country that cares deeply for animals, whether they are our pets and companions, our farmed animals or our wildlife. Veterinary professionals do incredible work to uphold our high animal health and welfare standards, safeguard our biosecurity, support animal disease control and maintain food security and public health, as well as enable trade agreements.
To continue to deliver this, the veterinary sector needs a modern, fair and effective regulatory system that reflects the realities of today’s veterinary practice and supports a sustainable workforce. The White Paper sets out the Government’s vision to achieve this through reform of the VSA.
It responds to our recent public consultation, which gained over 6,000 responses, demonstrating the significant support for VSA reform. This reflects the years of calls from the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, the profession and the public to reform the VSA.
The White Paper also sets out the Government’s response to the market investigation into veterinary services for household pets undertaken by the Competition and Markets Authority. It confirms that our proposed reforms will address competition concerns and support innovation, consumer choice and economic growth.
Since the current VSA came into force 60 years ago, the profession has changed beyond recognition, as have our views about animals and their welfare. The current legislation is inflexible and no longer fit for purpose. It does not recognise the incredible work that is undertaken by veterinary nurses or allied veterinary professionals, and nor does it take into account changes in business ownership across the sector. It does not reflect best practice with regard to managing fitness to practise or the governance of the regulator, and it does not do enough to protect consumers.
Reform of the VSA would address all of this to ensure that the veterinary sector remains fit for purpose, flexible and future-facing.
This White Paper sets out four broad areas of reform:
Regulation of all veterinary professionals;
Regulation of all veterinary and animal healthcare businesses;
Support for consumers; and
Structures and governance of the regulator.
One of our key aims in this reform is to ensure that we continue to uphold animal health and welfare by strengthening our veterinary workforce through recognition of all members of the veterinary team. This would ensure that animals receive the best and most appropriate care from qualified and licensed professionals. This will be key to increasing our resilience to exotic and endemic disease threats, playing a vital role in strengthening our food security and biosecurity.
Our economy would be supported by breaking down barriers to opportunities, regulating all veterinary businesses and increasing competition for consumers. We are proposing introducing new licensing options to increase access to the professions, especially for those with disabilities, and bringing all veterinary professionals under the same regulatory umbrella. Increased responsibilities for veterinary professionals would go hand in hand with increased support to new and returning veterinary surgeons and nurses in order to strengthen the workforce and address the challenges of recruitment and retention.
Finally, our proposals seek to rectify the issues identified by the CMA through proportionate business regulation, increased access to information and price transparency, to support this Government’s commitment to help people with the cost of living.
The proposed UK-wide changes in the White Paper are crucial to transforming legislation in order to maintain high standards of animal health and welfare, protect the public and consumers, and uphold public trust in the veterinary professions.
[HCWS203]
Farming Road Map and Profitability Review
Emma Reynolds Excerpts(1 month ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Emma Reynolds)
With permission, I will make a statement on the Government’s farming road map, which the Farming Minister—my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth South (Stephen Morgan)—and I have published today. This 25-year farming road map is the first ever long-term plan for farming in this country, giving farmers the clarity and confidence that they need to make investment decisions. The plan backs farming, strengthens profitability and food security, and sets out a clear direction of travel for a thriving future for farming. The Government are also laying our detailed response to Baroness Batters’ independent farming profitability review.
Farmers feed our nation. They produce over 65% of our food, manage 70% of our land, and support an agrifood sector worth £153 billion every year. I know that many hon. Members on both sides of the House will have seen at first hand farmers’ dedication to feeding our nation and protecting our natural environment, and the farming sector has a long tradition of adapting to change over generations. It has survived war, disease, trade shocks and extreme weather—
Emma Reynolds
And Conservative Governments.
For too long, farmers have been asked to navigate profound change without a clear sense of the Government’s plan for the future. The pressures of fast-moving technological change, geopolitical instability, volatile global markets and climate change are real. I have met farmers across England, and they are not asking for protection from change; they are asking for the tools, the stability and the genuine partnership with Government that will allow them to adapt, grow and thrive. The Government have heard that message. The farming road map sets out our plan for farming up to 2050 and reflects immediate Government action to support our farmers to feed the nation.
I offer my huge thanks to Baroness Batters for her farming profitability review, which was published in December. We have benefited hugely from her incredible experience and expertise as a farmer, but also as a former president of the National Farmers’ Union. Her analysis was extremely clear, and her recommendations have shaped our road map.
The farming road map answers the farming industry’s calls for clarity over the long term. It brings together the most important policies and commitments under one coherent plan, because we understand that farmers have long planning timescales. For example, a farmer planting an orchard today will not see its full yield for a decade. That is why the road map is so crucial: it will allow farmers and land managers to invest in their businesses with confidence.
The road map is organised around three outcomes that we need to deliver together with the farming sector. The first is profitable and productive farm businesses. Food production is the primary purpose of farming and a matter of national security. The road map backs our farmers to grow, invest and compete, delivering year-on-year productivity growth; Government support to invest in innovative approaches; fairer supply chains that do not leave farmers carrying disproportionate risk; better market access, so that British food can reach more customers at home and abroad; smarter regulation that reduces the burden on farmers; more collaborative models, such as co-operatives, to help lower costs, spread risk and support stronger returns; and, most of all, the stability and certainty that investors and farm businesses need to invest with confidence. To that end, I can confirm today that we will launch a dedicated task-and-finish group to unlock private finance in sustainable farming. The new Farming and Food Partnership Board has started work on the first sector growth plans for horticulture and poultry, with more sectors to follow.
The second outcome is a sustainable farming sector. Healthy soils, clean water and thriving ecosystems are the foundations of strong food production. We will support the shift to lower-input, lower-emission farming, not by directing every decision on farms but by ensuring that the right incentives, advice and regulation are in place. Our environmental land management schemes, backed by £11.8 billion over this Parliament, are already delivering sustainable and profitable farming, now and for the future. This is the biggest budget for nature-friendly farming in our history. I can confirm that next week we will reopen the sustainable farming incentive for small farms and those without existing agreements. The total budget for this year will be £240 million, with £60 million ringfenced for those eligible in window 1. We will continue to refine our schemes in partnership with the sector. The road map gives equal importance to food security, profitable farming and a healthy natural environment, because they are all critical to protecting our national security.
Thirdly, and finally, we need a resilient farming sector that is ready for whatever comes next. We live in a volatile world. The pressure on fertiliser and fuel prices underlines why we need farming systems that are less exposed to global shocks. At the same time, climate change is reshaping growing conditions and technology is moving fast. The road map sets out how we will strengthen our climate resilience, ensuring that farmers are able to adapt and to tackle the impacts of droughts and flooding.
Today I can confirm that we are investing an additional £53 million in the farming innovation programme to help farmers harness new technology that can improve productivity, reduce reliance on inputs and increase long-term resilience. That brings the total investment in innovation funding to £123 million, which, along with £50 million in equipment funding, puts British farmers at the forefront of agricultural advancements.
To further secure the future of farming, we will invest in the skills and people the sector needs by supporting training and new entrants, so that farmers’ hard-earned knowledge is passed down to the next generation. Tenant farmers manage around a third of England’s farmland, and tenancies play a key role in supporting new entrants. We want a vibrant tenanted sector, and the road map commits to making schemes, policies and tenancy agreements work for tenants.
Upland farmers are also vital to our food production, land management and rural communities. They often operate in challenging physical and economic conditions. The road map sets out how we intend to improve access to schemes and support for upland farmers, and we have asked Dr Hilary Cottam to identify opportunities for upland communities to flourish.
The road map was not written in Whitehall and handed down; my team in the Department and I have visited many farms across the country, and many more farmers have travelled to speak to us at regional events, and we have listened. The road map reflects our extensive engagement with farmers, growers, land managers and the wider food sector. As I mentioned at the start of my speech, farmers have asked for a Government who create the conditions for farmers to succeed, rather than directing every decision. The road map sets out clear roles for the Government, farmers, supply chain actors and the wider sector to make that vision a reality. Where new approaches are untested or deliver a wider public good, we will put Government investment behind them—in skills, data, innovation, technology and infrastructure.
The road map has been developed in partnership with the industry, and we want to continue to work in partnership as we implement it. This Government are proud to work with British farmers as we grow the future of farming. Together, we are building a more profitable, productive, sustainable and resilient farming sector, and I am confident that there is a bright future ahead. I commend this statement to the House.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
I call the shadow Secretary of State.
Victoria Atkins (Louth and Horncastle) (Con)
I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of her statement, and I repeat my sincere thanks to Baroness Batters for her thorough report.
The Secretary of State presents a document for farming for the next 25 years, but this Government will not last even 25 days. Instead of using their 14 years in opposition to create this document, they have dithered and delayed for the past two years, but they did not dither and delay in making life harder for rural businesses. One of the first acts of this Government, of which Labour Members are all so proud, was to target family farms and family businesses with their death tax. As Labour MPs and Ministers in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs voted repeatedly for the family farm and family business taxes, DEFRA Ministers shut down farming payments without notice, including the SFI.
Sadly, the record of this Government is rising food prices and a record number of farms closing. They broke the trust of farmers, and they have only themselves to blame. Yet the Secretary of State stands here today wanting to be thanked by rural communities for producing a document that could be shelved quietly by whoever comes next, just as the Government seem to have shelved the 10-year plan for the NHS. For all the talk—[Interruption.] Mark my words! For all the talk of the new SFI scheme and budgets, the fact is that they have cut the farming budget by £100 million.
In another leap from reality, the Government’s negotiations with the EU get barely a mention in this document, despite the enormous consequences they will have for farming businesses. CropLife UK has estimated that this EU reset could drain £810 million from UK farms and sacrifice almost 9,000 jobs from our rural constituencies. The Food and Drink Federation states that the wholesale handover of our food laws to the EU will lead to at least 400 regulations needing to be changed. So how will the Government ensure that UK farmers, including our tenant and upland farmers, can compete against heavily subsidised EU farmers? This matters because food security is critical in this increasingly volatile world. What reassurance can the Secretary of State provide that the next Cabinet will prioritise farming and food production?
We Conservatives view DEFRA as a vital economic Department, so we agree with its efforts to recalculate farming and food producers’ contributions to the economy. By the way, I note that Reform calls itself the farmer’s friend, yet there is not a single Reform MP in the Chamber.
Had the Secretary of State attended Cereals 2026 at Diddly Squat, she would have seen for herself that the sector is already driving innovation. The Government are therefore playing catch-up, but we hope that the intention to work with the Department for Business and Trade to deliver reductions in compliance costs and to focus on innovation and technology will actually happen. The plan to bring DEFRA farming services into one integrated service is much needed, and this reflects Conservative calls for quangos and the Department to be overhauled.
There are many questions still left unanswered in this report, and I hope that the Secretary of State will try to answer them rather than deflect, because that has been noticed. The plan looks to double the funding for Environment Agency inspections. Why are this Government focusing on bureaucracy rather than helping farmers survive? What does she say to the tenant farmer of a well-run dairy herd who has been told by the Environment Agency that they must invest up to £750,000 to guard against a “risk” that there “may” be a pollution event in 50 years’ time. As that tenant farmer said to me, there will not be a farm there in 50 years’ time, as they simply cannot afford that payment.
There is also no mention of closing the flag loophole on food packaging to help our constituents to buy genuinely British food and to back British farmers. Why not? The report says there will be no cut to food production, but it also says there will be a reduction of 9% in the land available to produce food. How can the Secretary of State guarantee that our food production will be protected when key tools, such as gene editing to develop drought-resistant crops, are at risk in the negotiations with the EU.
In her final act in this Department, will the Secretary of State please advise the right hon. Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham) that the first thing he must do is axe the family farm and family business taxes completely? Otherwise, sadly, this will be a road map to nowhere for struggling farmers and food producers.
Emma Reynolds
Oh, gosh, how do I follow that? Well, the first thing to say is that that the shadow Secretary of State is not in charge of reshuffles on the Government side of the House.
Let me outline where I do agree with the shadow Secretary of State. I agree that DEFRA is a really important economic Department of Government, and I have been focused on that since I was appointed to this role on 5 September. I also agree that Reform Members do not seem to care about agricultural farming, because they do not even bother turning up to such an important statement. So there are some things that she and I agree on, but that is probably where they end.
The shadow Secretary of State accuses us of dithering and delaying for two years, but her Government dithered and delayed for 14 years. We did not see any action such as this road map during the whole time that the Conservatives were in office. They sold farmers down the river with their Australia and New Zealand trade deals, and they could not be bothered to spend their own farming budget on the farmers who needed it, so I will take no lectures from the right hon. Lady.
The SFI scheme will reopen next week. I am proud that we have taken forward the recommendations in Baroness Batters’ review on reforms to SFI, including making it simpler and more cost-effective, and introducing a minimum hectarage requirement. We on this side of the House are serious about engaging with the farming sector, and we commissioned Baroness Batters, who has such great expertise—that was never done under the previous Government—to advise us on how to make the sector more profitable.
The shadow Secretary of State asks about the sanitary and phytosanitary deal, and I say to her that we are working very closely with the National Farmers’ Union and other farming stakeholders, because that deal is all about bringing down the barriers put up by the previous Government at the border that make it so much harder both to export raw ingredients and food, and to import.
I thank the shadow Secretary of State for what she said—this is one thing we do agree on—about both Baroness Batters and my saying that we must make sure the farming sector is more accurately measured. I think we need to reassess that, so that we do not just assess what is done on farm, but look at this from farm to fork, and therefore see the vital role of the farming sector in our economy.
The shadow Secretary of State asks about the Environment Agency. I will make no apologies for increasing the funding of the Environment Agency, which was so harshly cut under her Government. I will also make no apologies about having a plan, in this document and more broadly, for how we work with farmers to ensure that agricultural pollution is a problem we tackle together.
The shadow Secretary of State asks about gene editing and the SPS deal, and those negotiations are ongoing. However, we want to ensure that our farmers are able to use the best technology. We lead in agricultural technology in our country, and we want to make sure that it is harnessed by our sector. That is why there is such a big emphasis in the road map on the importance of innovation, and why we are dedicating Government funding to innovation, and on farmers sharing best practice so that they can become more profitable over time.
Mr Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab)
First, I echo the Secretary of State’s thanks to Baroness Batters for this excellent report. She is also right to observe that Reform MPs have not bothered to turn up for this statement. She might also note that no Green MPs have bothered to turn up. They used to be interested in the environment, but sadly those days are long behind us.
On the sustainable farming incentive, can the Secretary of State tell us any more about how she will make sure that its new iteration not only is spent and gets to where it is needed, but is available for a wide range of farmers, including the family farms we speak so much about, and is not all snaffled by the major farm companies?
Emma Reynolds
That is precisely why window 1 will be open next week to small farms and those farms without an existing agreement. It is also why we have capped the agreement level per year to £100,000. We want smaller farms to benefit from the SFI.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Emma Reynolds
I hope to give the hon. Gentleman some brief answers, but I would be very happy to have a discussion with him after the debate, because he has put forward a lot of different questions. Food production is the primary role of farmers, but in the road map we also talk about the transition to more sustainable farming and regenerative farming, so I do not agree with his analysis. Actually, the focus of the road map and some of our SFI actions on healthier soils will help to ensure that farms are more productive and less reliant on expensive inputs such as chemical fertilisers.
The hon. Gentleman talks about unfair charges. We are bringing the Groceries Code Adjudicator under DEFRA and we are looking at what more we can do to make things fairer for farmers, including in the road map, bringing down barriers and helping more co-operatives to be established, because that redresses the power imbalance he talked about.
I absolutely agree with the hon. Gentleman on the importance of uplands to the farming sector and to our countryside—I know he has a very beautiful constituency. We have increased the payment rates for upland farmers for some SFI actions and the road map talks about our plans to make it easier for upland farmers to access schemes. I am happy to have a longer conversation with him about that, including about commoners. As he knows, we have commissioned a review by Hilary Cottam. I think he has been working with her too, which is welcome.
A third of land is tenanted; it is a really important sector. We want a vibrant sector. I appointed the country’s first ever Commissioner for the Tenant Farming Sector, Alan Laidlaw. We know that a lot of tenants are very anxious about the shift away from long-term tenancies to shorter-term tenancies, so he is right to raise that. We have also commissioned the Law Commission to look at agriculture tenancy law. We are working with the sector to see what more we can do to ensure longer and more secure tenancies.
Daniel Zeichner (Cambridge) (Lab)
I commend all the hard work that has gone into both the road map and the profitability review by the civil servants, the ministerial team and so many people across the sector, including Baroness Batters. Does the Secretary of State agree with me that in the interests of food security we really need to think hard about how we boost food production in this country? That, I think, will need an embracing of new technologies. It will also need the ability to build new facilities. In the poultry sector, the investment is there, but we need to explain to the public that new investment would not only boost food production but improve animal welfare, biosecurity and environmental outcomes.
Emma Reynolds
May I take this opportunity to thank my hon. Friend for all the work he did as Farming Minister? Indeed, some of his fingerprints are on the road map, so I want to thank him for that. He is right in what he says about food security and about innovation being central to it. That is why I announced extra funding of £53 million for the farming innovation programme today. At the second meeting of the Farming and Food Partnership Board, we talked about the two sector growth plans we are working on, horticulture and poultry. He mentioned poultry. We had a really good discussion on the barriers to further investment in poultry. Planning is one of them, but there are others too. That is a sector where we can make really good progress to ensure that we boost the production of poultry in our country.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I call the Chair of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee.
Mr Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland) (LD)
I remind the House of my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests.
I welcome the publication of the farming road map. It may not have been rushed, but it is welcome none the less; all we need now is a revised food strategy, and the Secretary of State’s homework will be up to date. Is the implementation of the Batters review still being pursued as a discrete piece of work, or is it being subsumed into the farming road map? In as far as that relates to the operation of the market, why is she not involving farmers’ unions from Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland? The Secretary of State refers to DEFRA as a growth Department. Agriculture accounts for 0.6% of UK GDP at the moment, so if we follow the road map and she gives leadership to the industry, what would she want that figure to be in the future?
Emma Reynolds
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for marking my homework, and I look forward to having it marked in even more detail when I appear before his Committee. There is a separate document in which we have published our response thematically to the 57 recommendations of Baroness Batters’ profitability review. We are already working closely with the sector to take forward those recommendations. In December, we accepted a number of her recommendations: first, the Farming and Food Partnership Board; secondly, the sector growth plans; and thirdly, the trade missions. I suspect that I will be able to answer the right hon. Gentleman’s questions in more detail when I come before the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee.
Chris Hinchliff (North East Hertfordshire) (Lab)
For many years we have expected farmers to steward our environment and at the same time deliver food at rock-bottom prices to make up for the failure of politics to secure an affordable cost of living across the rest of society. That has made agricultural profitability increasingly difficult. Now, with the crisis posed by climate change to our national food security, we must pull every available lever to reverse that trend. At the general election, the Labour manifesto committed to a target of half of all food purchased across the public sector being locally produced or certified to higher environmental standards. Will the Secretary of State provide an update on progress towards that target?
Emma Reynolds
Farmers face lots of different challenges, one of which is volatile global commodity prices, along with some of things my hon. Friend mentioned. On public procurement, we are working to establish an accurate baseline of what percentage of the public sector gives contracts to our farmers. We are also looking at what more we can do to enable farming co-operatives to access those public contracts.
Sarah Bool (South Northamptonshire) (Con)
The UK-EU SPS agreement is going to be vital, and we need to understand its terms, particularly about the implementation period, as it will have an impact on our trading deals with other nations. Given that it is due to be implemented next year, and time is ticking, can we have more detail on the agreement, or can the relevant Minister come in front of the EFRA Committee to explain further details?
Emma Reynolds
As the hon. Lady knows, I am always happy to appear before her Committee. There is an ongoing discussion with the EU about implementation timelines. I cannot give her a running commentary, but I can say that we are working closely with the National Farmers’ Union about the implementation timelines. We want a smooth transition to what comes next. As I said in my statement, we know that farmers plan along longer timescales, and they are using products now that they have in the ground. We are looking at transition timelines, being careful about them, and engaging closely with the sector.
Markus Campbell-Savours (Penrith and Solway) (Lab)
I welcome the publication of the road map, and note from the section on environmental land management schemes that in 2027 there will be a need to support farms with legacy countryside stewardship and higher-level stewardship agreements in the transition to new schemes. However, many in this House, the EFRA Committee, the National Audit Office and farmers have questioned whether Natural England is sufficiently resourced to support that. Will the Minister reassure me that behind the words in this important report there will be the trained staff to support my farmers with the challenging transition?
Emma Reynolds
I think my hon. Friend is asking about the expiring agreements, because there are obviously many thousands coming to an end this year. As I have said in DEFRA questions previously, it is the Department’s intention that those whose agreements expire this year will be able to apply in window 2 of the SFI, which will start in September. It is just a technological change that we need to ensure we have pinned down so that farmers can do that through the Rural Payments Agency.
Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (North Cotswolds) (Con)
I think I am right in saying that the document, which is 70 pages long, mentions profitability just twice. Without profitability, which involves a hard-hearted look at agricultural economics—outputs less inputs—it will be much more difficult to achieve a number of the aspirations in this large document. Will the Secretary of State assure me that when she considers any changes to farming, she will at least consider profitability? By the way, I hope that she survives the reshuffle when it comes.
Emma Reynolds
That is very kind of the hon. Gentleman. I thank him for his best wishes, which were a little different in tone from the comments from the Opposition Front Bench. I reassure the hon. Gentleman that we have a separate document that responds to Baroness Batters’ review. Profitability is absolutely at the heart of the road map. There is a lovely diagram on page 18 of the road map—perhaps the words in it were not picked up in his search—showing what we are trying to do, which is to work towards a profitable, productive, sustainable and resilient farming sector. I absolutely agree with him that we need a more profitable sector, and that is the focus of this document.
Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)
The road map is a very welcome step forward that will give our farmers certainty for the future. I particularly welcome what the Secretary of State had to say on co-operatives, which could go a long way to redressing the current power imbalance in our food system. I hope we can begin that work at pace. We hear consistently from farmers that they feel that the planning system—made so much worse by the Conservatives—is stacked against them. Broiler chicken farmers, for instance, are expected to lower stocking densities but cannot get permission to expand their sheds to compensate, while farms in water-stressed areas are having to go through years of bureaucracy to build reservoirs. Does the Secretary of State agree that reforming the planning system will be key to freeing up trapped investment and getting us to the sustainable, prosperous future for British farming that this road map sets out?
Emma Reynolds
The short answer is yes—I could not agree with my hon. Friend more. That is why I am working closely with the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government on planning reform to ensure that those planning barriers are not holding back investment into the farming sector.
Charlie Dewhirst (Bridlington and The Wolds) (Con)
The Secretary of State seemed to ignore the question from my right hon. Friend the Member for Louth and Horncastle (Victoria Atkins) about the use of land and increasing food production, so I will ask specifically again: how are our farmers expected to increase food production if we are taking 9% of agricultural land out of productive use?
Emma Reynolds
As we set out in our land use framework, our intention in working with the sector is to ensure that we have more productive and profitable farms and multifunctional land use so that we maintain, if not increase, food production levels, alongside the land use changes that we need to secure a sustainable farming transition.
Jenny Riddell-Carpenter (Suffolk Coastal) (Lab)
Over the next 20 years we are set to see a 30% reduction in water availability for farms and producers across the country, much of which will affect Suffolk Coastal. I was glad to see that the road map talks about applying lessons from water management pilot schemes to help farmers to manage those water challenges. I want to flag the managed aquifer recharge trial in Suffolk Coastal, which has recharged for irrigation 20,000 cubic metres while complying with stringent Environment Agency conditions. I know that the Minister responsible for water and flooding is keen to visit my constituency to learn more about the scheme. I hope that the Department will look at these examples as an opportunity that could help to deliver water ambitions as set out in this very welcome farming road map.
Emma Reynolds
The extreme weather conditions we are facing at the moment bring into sharp relief the need for the sector to have access to better sources of water. I thank my hon. Friend for working closely with my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary on these issues and look forward to hearing more about the initiatives in my hon. Friend’s area.
Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)
Instability in the middle east is a stark reminder that food security cannot be taken for granted. British farmers are the best in the world and they get up every single day to put food on our tables. While I welcome the farming road map, it lacks real ambition for farmers and food security. Will the Secretary of State commit to a good food Bill that backs British farmers and puts long-term food security at the heart of Government policy?
Emma Reynolds
I agree with the intent of the hon. Lady’s question, which is that we need a focus on food production and to ensure that our farming sector is more resilient to global shocks, such as the kind she spoke about. That is why we are doing serious work on how we can help farmers to use fertiliser more efficiently and move away from chemical fertilisers towards more organic fertilisers. We have introduced a nutrient management tool, and many farms have now taken that on, which is helping them make more efficient use of fertiliser. I agree with some of the things that she said, but perhaps not the recommendation.
Several hon. Members rose—
Lee Pitcher (Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme) (Lab)
I wonder if the Secretary of State agrees that for far too long farming has been undervalued because we have focused only on what goes out of the farm gate. We should focus more on the holistic contribution of farming—that is when we get good policy and can take our success forward for farmers.
Emma Reynolds
I could not agree more. We have to look at the agrifood sector overall. It is a huge part of our economy, employing 4.1 million people, and its gross value added is equivalent to the automotive sector. My hon. Friend is right that there has been a tendency to underestimate the value of farming. We have to look at it in the wider agrifood ecosystem and in the context of the GVA that the sector brings to the economy.
Sir Geoffrey Cox (Torridge and Tavistock) (Con)
Once upon a time, it would not have been necessary for a Secretary of State for farming to come to the House to say that the primary purpose of farming was food production. The central recommendation of Minette Batters’ report was to make food security a national strategic priority. Does the Secretary of State not realise that unless her road map contains a commitment to make food security a national strategic priority, everything she says in that report will simply be like trying to fill up the bath with plug out? At a time when the generals are telling us that we could be at war in 10 years, surely it is time for the Government to commit to real, precise targets.
Emma Reynolds
Can I gently remind the right hon. and learned Gentleman of the previous Administration’s Brexit deal and the move away from basic payments to environmental land management schemes? The shift that he is talking about, which has led us to have to stress that food production is the primary focus of farming, was precisely because of the move that happened under his Government.
Rosie Wrighting (Kettering) (Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State for coming to the House and showing her commitment to domestic food production. Supporting farmers should not just matter to those of us in this House who represent rural or semi-rural constituencies; it should matter to everyone, because it is so crucial for our national security. With that in mind, what support can we give to our farmers to ensure that they can buy equipment such as tractors from UK manufacturers and not have to rely on production elsewhere?
Emma Reynolds
I thank my hon. Friend for her comments. We do have capital grants to help farmers procure the kind of equipment she mentioned.
Robin Swann (South Antrim) (UUP)
The Minister said that the road map was not written in Whitehall and handed down, but it is an England-only document, despite Baroness Batters receiving submissions from Northern Ireland. All family farm structures in Northern Ireland are impacted by Treasury decisions, from the family farm tax to the cost of fuel. What engagement have the Government had with the devolved Governments to ensure that all UK farmers benefit and are supported?
Emma Reynolds
I recently visited the Balmoral agricultural show with members of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, and the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee was there too. We had a good old chinwag. I also met Minister Muir and the Ulster Farmers’ Union. We are engaging closely with stakeholders in Northern Ireland. We have close relationships with all the devolved Administrations and are already engaging with them about our road map, but as the hon. Gentleman says, the road map is for England.
Jim McMahon (Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton) (Lab/Co-op)
Food security is national security, and the effort that the Government have put into this report is very clear. As chair of the Co-operative party, I am pleased that page 27 has a commitment to co-operatives and mutuals as part of the answer to this country’s food security.
Does the Secretary of State agree that one of the most significant things in this report will be allowing farmers to farm? Farmers say that so much of their time is spent trying to navigate a complex system of Government agencies, so the single system that is talked about could be a game changer.
Emma Reynolds
I agree with my hon. Friend. The focus of the road map is on reducing the burden of regulation and making sure that we have a simpler system, which is something Baroness Batters asked us to do.
As a Co-operative party member, I am delighted that we have references in the road map to the increased role of co-operatives. In other countries—I know the EFRA Committee was recently in New Zealand, which sounds like a nice trip—co-operatives play an even stronger role than they do here. I want to see what more we can do as a Government to boost the role of mutuals and co-operatives in agriculture.
Simon Hoare (North Dorset) (Con)
I, too, hope that the right hon. Lady remains in place, and I thank her for bringing forward the road map. On behalf of the livestock and arable farmers in North Dorset, Blackmore Vale and Cranborne Chase, what should they be looking for in this road map to support and enhance livestock farming and to lead to further investment in agritech, which will boost production while leaving a far lighter environmental footprint on their farming?
Emma Reynolds
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his kind words.
There is a focus in the road map on innovation and on reducing the use of inputs and therefore the costs in farming, so that we can maximise profits for the farming sector. The farming sector faces huge challenges, as I have set out, whether from extreme weather or volatile markets. We all know the challenges, but the Government are here to smooth the path to a more innovative and productive sector.
Luke Myer (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland) (Lab)
We welcome the focus in the road map on fertiliser resilience and getting away from volatile global fertiliser markets. North Yorkshire is home to the world’s only supply of polyhalite, a highly effective low-carbon fertiliser. Will Ministers look seriously at this in order to scale up our sovereign supply and back British fertiliser?
Emma Reynolds
We will, and I thank my hon. Friend for bringing this issue to the House. We need to be less reliant on imported fertiliser, and sustainable low-carbon fertiliser is to be welcomed. I look forward to working with him on that.
Adam Dance (Yeovil) (LD)
What steps is the Secretary of State taking now to help farmers manage the impact of this extreme heatwave on food production and prices for consumers in Yeovil? What steps are we taking in the long term to be more ready for such weather?
Emma Reynolds
The hon. Gentleman is right to raise that question. This week’s weather brings into sharp relief the Climate Change Committee’s report from a couple of weeks ago on the risks of extreme weather—not just higher temperatures but more flooding.
As Secretary of State, I am in charge of not only farming but climate adaptation. I reassure the hon. Gentleman that the Government are looking at what more we need to do in response to that report and ahead of the national programme that we need to bring forward in 2028, including at how every Government Department can make sure that we are adapting the public estate to the levels of extreme heat that we are seeing this week and the increased levels of flooding that we have seen in recent years.
Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)
Will the Secretary of State provide more detail on the innovation fund, particularly on how it will support increased profitability while, at the same time, driving reductions in the emission of carbon dioxide, methane and other dangerous, climate-damaging gases?
Emma Reynolds
We have announced additional funding for the farming innovation programme, bringing total innovation funding to £123 million. This is to back practical technology, including robotics, soil health and water management. It is about the shift to sustainable farming practices.
Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)
Wiltshire farmers listened to Ministers at the Oxford farming conference and heard the Government’s pledge to support farmers during difficult harvests and supply shocks. They now find that they are in the middle of a supply shock, with many considering whether to plant their fields right now because of the price of fertiliser, about a third of which comes through the strait of Hormuz. If the pledge was more than rhetorical, is the Secretary of State able to say what practical measures the Government will be executing right now to assist the people I have just described?
Emma Reynolds
I will come to fertiliser, but let me first say to the right hon. Gentleman that we are cutting red diesel duty by a third, bringing it to the lowest level in more than 20 years. We are taking measures to help farmers with the increased costs of energy and fuel—[Interruption.] Gosh, there is a wall of sound here, such is the excitement on the Opposition Benches.
We have asked the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board to look at more frequent official fertiliser price reporting. We are also doing all that we can to help farmers move away from such high use of fertilisers to more efficient use, along with a longer-term plan to change fertilisers so that British farming can make use of more innovative practices.
Catherine Fookes (Monmouthshire) (Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State for the excellent farming road map that she has laid out. I am really glad to see that supply chain fairness is at front and centre of the new road map, and I welcome the moving of the Groceries Code Adjudicator from the Department for Business and Trade to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, as this will make things more joined up.
Farmers in Monmouthshire have raised with me so many times the issue of unfair practices; in fact, five dairy farms there—yes, five—have recently had their milk contracts cancelled. Does the Secretary of State agree that processors and supermarkets have far too much power, and that that power imbalance must be remedied?
Emma Reynolds
I do agree that we have to get much fairer contracts, which is why we are extending the fair dealing regulations that already cover dairy and pig farmers to other sectors. As she said, we are also transferring the Groceries Code Adjudicator from DBT to DEFRA to make sure that there is a more joined-up grip on food chain fairness.
Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)
On-farm reservoirs can really help to reduce flooding and the need for water extraction, yet the Minister for Housing and Planning was rather dismissive of this during the passage of the Planning and Infrastructure Bill. Will the Secretary of State commit to taking steps to review permitted development rights, and can she give us some timescales?
Emma Reynolds
We consulted on that issue—obviously, this falls under the MHCLG—in December. The Ministry is considering the responses, but I am working with the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government to ensure that we make it easier for farmers to establish on-farm reservoirs in order to give them more resilience.
Noah Law (St Austell and Newquay) (Lab)
I really welcome the ambition of the road map, particularly the focus on buying British and the nod to honest food labelling. We must now make that ambition real and focus steadfastly on the drivers of farm profitability, so that farmers are making more money from their core business of farming by the end of this Parliament than they were when it started. In that spirit, the Labour rural research group continues our calls for honest origin labelling for food. I hope the Secretary of State will back those calls and commit, as did her predecessor, to meeting the LRRG to discuss this issue further.
Emma Reynolds
I am always happy to meet my hon. Friend and the Labour rural research group, and I thank him for what he said about the road map.
I have an update for the House. The hon. Member for North Cotswolds (Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown) is no longer in his place, but somebody has done some work for me related to question: “profitability” is mentioned in the road map 17 times, the word “profitable” is mentioned 27 times and “profit” is mentioned 52 times.
Stuart Anderson (South Shropshire) (Con)
South Shropshire farmers wanted to see an action plan that prioritised food production. The road map does not do that, and it will not happen unless the Government decide to do all food procurement through supply chains that prioritise South Shropshire farmers and other farmers around the country. Will the Secretary of State commit to prioritising British farmers in the Government procurement process?
Emma Reynolds
We do want to see more British food in our institutions. As I said in response to a previous question, we are establishing a baseline—which was not established under the hon. Gentleman’s Government or ever before—to see what percentage of public sector contracts are going to British producers. That is the first step. May I also say that I am a big fan of the hon. Gentleman’s constituency? I spend some time there because my parents live in his patch.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I call Callum Anderson; he has gone. I call Jack Robertson—[Interruption.] You know when you stare at something and you can see it, but you are incapable of reading it? I call Dave Robertson.
Dave Robertson (Lichfield) (Lab)
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is a long name; there are lots of letters in the second bit.
The farming road map that we have seen today sets out a long-term plan for fertiliser. That will be really welcome for farmers across Lichfield, Burntwood and the villages because, due to actions way beyond this Government’s control in the strait of Hormuz, we are seeing real cost pressures. Can the Secretary of State give us an idea of when that long-term plan might be ready, and whether it will consider strategic reserves and diversifying the sources of fertiliser? Can she tell us what that will do to ensure that we have the fertiliser we need?
Emma Reynolds
I think my hon. Friend’s name is very striking, Madam Deputy Speaker.
We are consulting on longer-term plans to change fertiliser rules so that we can diversify the sorts of fertilisers that farmers can use. We are also looking to see how we can ensure that fertiliser markets function more fairly, in the way that I have suggested in previous answers.
Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con)
When can we expect a resolution to the problems that are preventing payments in respect of commoning?
Emma Reynolds
It is in the road map, but I want to say, first, that I look forward to going on holiday in the right hon. Gentleman’s constituency at some stage—sounds like we get a great service! I will let him know when I am on my way. He is right to mention this issue. It is something that we are looking at, and it is mentioned in the road map. I know that there are real problems for commoners getting access to some Government schemes, so that is something he will see in the road map. Upland farmers and others really need to ensure that they can access the schemes that we have.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I fear that that is more about the bottles of champagne than the right hon. Gentleman’s constituency.
Jon Pearce (High Peak) (Lab)
I very much welcome the fact that this farming road map recognises the importance of upland farmers like mine in High Peak. Will the Secretary of State set out what support will be put in place to support my farmers, and will she meet me to discuss access to the SFI for those farming on common land?
Emma Reynolds
That is very similar question to that of the right hon. Member for New Forest West (Sir Desmond Swayne). I am always happy to meet my hon. Friend and other hon. Members. Upland farmers play a vital role. We have increased payment rates for upland farmers, and in the road map we talk about how we can make it easier for upland farmers and commoners to access schemes. As I said to the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron), we have also commissioned Hilary Cottam to do some work on how we ensure that the communities in upland areas thrive.
Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)
Every farmer I speak to is angry and, at times, desperate. None of them thinks that anything has got any better over the last two years. Everyone thinks things are worse—whether it is the taxes, the grants or the allocation of non-farming lands. Members do not need to take my word for it: a recent poll showed that 0% of farmers would now vote for the Labour party. Has the Secretary of State genuinely reflected on why that may be the case?
Emma Reynolds
I have spent every minute of every day since I have been appointed rebuilding the relationship with farmers. I acknowledge that there have been problems, but I think we are in a much better place.
Caroline Voaden (South Devon) (LD)
The Secretary of State says we need “better market access, so that British food can reach more customers at home and abroad”, but we know that they continue to face unnecessary trade barriers. It is a shame that the UK-EU summit is now being reorganised due to the Prime Minister’s resignation. Farmers and food producers are relying on this SPS agreement to reduce costs and bureaucracy, so can the Secretary of State commit that the summit will take place this year and give us a timeframe for when that will happen?
Emma Reynolds
It is kind of the hon. Lady to think that I am so powerful that I could have a hand in that. One person in the House wants me sacked, but I am glad that she thinks I have that power. I do not have that power, but I do want to see the summit take place. I agree that it is really important to reduce the costs and the bureaucracy that we were left by the last Government.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
Farmers have been innovating since the dawn of time, and they really do not need a word salad document to tell them that it might be a good idea. I have listened carefully to the Secretary of State’s answers on fertiliser, both in terms of the current price shock and the impending additional shock, made by this Government, of carbon taxes on fertiliser. Surely, while there is lofty ambition for long-term innovation, there needs to be a direct answer and relief now on the shock that is going to come in January.
Emma Reynolds
If the hon. Gentleman looks at fertiliser prices, he will see that they have levelled off.
Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)
If the Government really believe that food security is national security, that must mean shortening supply chains and increasing local food production. The Secretary of State referred earlier to field to fork, but what new concrete steps will be taken under this plan to increase the proportion of food eaten in the UK that was grown here?
Emma Reynolds
In response to Baroness Batters’ independent farming profitability review, we have already established the Farming and Food Partnership Board, and are already working on sector growth plans for horticulture and poultry. In horticulture in particular, we have seen a reduction in the amount of domestic-grown fruit and veg that we consume in England. We are working out what more we can do to boost the production of horticulture and, indeed, poultry.
John Lamont (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) (Con)
I was at the Royal Highland Show last week and farmers from across the UK were in their usual high spirits, but there is a real concern about the profitability and the future of farming. The SPS agreement, the price of fuel, red tape, the family farm tax and fertiliser are all big concerns. What specifically are the Government doing to address those concerns?
Emma Reynolds
I thank the hon. Gentleman for what he said about the show. I was not able to attend, but it is good that he and other Members were there. We are addressing all those different issues. On the SPS deal, as I said to the hon. Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden), we are very aware of the concerns of the NFU and, indeed, the farmers’ union in Scotland. I engaged with them only last month. We cannot give a running commentary, but I do want to see a smooth transition so that farmers are ready for that change.
Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)
The Great South West pan-regional partnership produced an agrifood growth plan which I commend to the Secretary of State. It was launched by Baroness Batters back in February. The south-west region accounts for one third of England’s dairy farms and makes an outsized contribution to the UK food system. How will the Government’s farming road map affect farmers in the south-west in particular?
Emma Reynolds
The farming road map is a plan for the whole of England. Obviously, each different sector of farming faces different challenges. I was glad to visit a dairy farm in my own constituency on Open Farm day—Lacey’s farm. I thank Will Lacey for showing me and my two young boys around. The road map is about helping farmers across England, including in the south-west.
Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)
While I welcome the farming road map, farmers in Somerset will be sceptical that this Government will deliver for them given their imposition of the family farm and family business taxes, which have undermined confidence and reduced investment in the rural economy. The Government closed the last SFI without notice, causing chaos for farmers. Will the Secretary of State undertake now not to do that again?
Emma Reynolds
I thank the hon. Member for welcoming the road map. We have certainly learned a lot of lessons from what happened last summer, and I would absolutely like to see no sudden stops to the system. We are learning the lessons, but also with the capital grants programme, we ensured that there were not the same issues. I cannot always predict the future, but I would like that to be the case.
Farming Profitability Review: Government Response
Emma Reynolds Excerpts(1 month ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Emma Reynolds)
I shall be making an oral statement on this subject later today.
[HCWS142]
Deforestation Regulations
Emma Reynolds Excerpts(1 month ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Emma Reynolds)
The UK has a leading role to play in supporting global efforts to tackle deforestation. Implementing an updated regime across the UK is critical to strengthen environmental protections, grow trade in sustainably produced commodities, and contribute to global efforts to halt deforestation—one of the most effective measures to address climate change and biodiversity loss.
This Government recognise that healthy forests are essential to climate stability, sustainable economic growth and the livelihoods of communities at home and abroad. Protecting and restoring these ecosystems strengthens our collective resilience, allowing us to secure supply chains, food and water resources, and long-term prosperity.
Around 90% of global deforestation is driven by agriculture, much of which is to produce internationally traded commodities. In 2023, UK consumption of agricultural commodities was associated with 29,000 hectares of deforestation worldwide and 9.4 million tonnes of associated carbon emissions.
UK companies have been global leaders in taking strong voluntary action to address deforestation in their supply chains, but they have also been clear that voluntary measures alone cannot deliver the consistency and certainty needed to tackle this global challenge.
A mandatory due diligence framework for timber has been in place across the UK since 2013. Building on this existing framework, we now intend to go further to decouple UK consumption from global deforestation.
We will therefore launch a consultation later this year to seek views on our Great Britain deforestation policy proposals from businesses, civil society and international partners.
We will consult on our aim to introduce regulations, including under the Environment Act 2021, alongside legislation that will strengthen the UK timber regulation. The aim of our proposals will be to require businesses in Great Britain with an annual turnover of over £1 million that use forest risk commodities and wood products, to carry out due diligence to ensure these are produced in compliance with relevant local laws.
In parallel, the Government are also confirming that the EU Regulation on Deforestation-free Products will apply in Northern Ireland as part of arrangements which ensure Northern Ireland’s unique access to the EU single market is maintained. The regulation is due to apply in phases from 30 December 2026.
To ensure coherence across the UK internal market, and recognising the Government’s manifesto commitment to protect the UK internal market and remove barriers to trade with the EU, we aim, subject to consultation, for due diligence requirements in Great Britain to apply to the same commodities and for businesses to be required to hold and pass down the supply chain broadly the same information as under the EUDR.
This approach is intended to avoid duplication of business burdens and disincentives to trade between Great Britain, Northern Ireland and the EU, so as to ensure that the measures announced today for Great Britain operate effectively alongside the EUDR.
In due course, the Government’s ambition is to transition to a deforestation-free standard.
The Government’s aim is to strengthen the approach to tackling deforestation, ensuring that any measures support the UK’s objectives on promoting economic growth, securing sustainable supply chains and advancing our international climate and nature ambitions.
This action also helps us deliver on the UK’s commitment under the Glasgow leaders’ declaration on forests and land use, agreed at COP26, to halt and reverse forest loss and land degradation by 2030.
[HCWS137]
Thames Water
Emma Reynolds Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Emma Reynolds)
Before I begin, let me say that this is a solemn day, as we remember our dear friend and colleague Jo Cox—I got to know her when we were living in Brussels in our 20s. I pay tribute to her formidable sister and their family for all their vital work to honour her memory.
I will make a statement regarding the position of Thames Water and the proposed recapitalisation package under consideration. This Government were elected with a clear mandate to clean up our rivers, lakes and seas, having inherited record levels of pollution incidents from water companies. Thames Water has underperformed for 15 years. It has regularly missed performance targets, it has unacceptable levels of serious pollution incidents, and the company is heavily indebted. This situation, which delivers poor outcomes for consumers and the environment, cannot continue.
To fix this, over the course of the past two years, the company has been undertaking a recapitalisation process to seek vital long-term funding. The Government have been clear throughout that any investor will need to have a credible and robust turnaround plan, the implementation of which must be monitored by regulators and must restore the company’s financial resilience and operational performance. Ofwat, with the support of Government, have been in discussions with the London and Valley Water consortium—a group of Thames Water’s creditors—regarding the terms of a proposal. On 6 March, the consortium presented its proposal for Thames Water to both Ofwat and the Government. Ofwat has been continuing its discussions with the consortium since then, and I wanted to update the House on the next stage of the process.
Ofwat is currently evaluating the consortium’s proposal and, as the independent regulator, is responsible for deciding whether to accept it. If Ofwat decides to accept the proposal, this would be subject to a public consultation and a court-sanctioned restructuring process. A recapitalisation process of this size is complex and will take time. As the Environment Secretary, I have several duties, set out in section 2 of the Water Industry Act 1991. These include protecting consumers, securing the proper delivery of water and sewerage services, and ensuring that companies can finance those services and that statutory obligations are properly carried out. Today, I can confirm that I have sent a letter to Iain Coucher, Ofwat’s chair, outlining my early views on the proposal linked to my section 2 duties. These should not be taken as, nor do they constitute, a direction from Government to Ofwat.
I do not believe that the current proposal goes far enough to protect customers and the environment. I have three particular concerns about the proposal: the unfair cost to customers, delays to vital infrastructure investments, and delays to environmental improvements. The 16 million Thames Water customers are front and centre of my consideration, and I am primarily worried about the impact on them. There is an expectation in the proposal that customers will fund—and therefore bear an undue cost for—investment in the company.
In addition, I am not convinced about the proposal’s request to reduce performance standards, nor about the significant delay to vital infrastructure investments. This would mean delays to environmental improvements, particularly those related to waste-water treatments linked to statutory requirements, as well as to projects that are important for drinking water safety and supply. I am therefore concerned that the long-term resilience of the water and waste-water systems may not be adequately protected. The Government will always act in the national interest, and my priority as Environment Secretary is protecting customers and the environment. We will stand ready for all eventualities.
I conclude by emphasising this Government’s commitment to turning around the water sector. In under two years, we have taken swift, decisive action. We have introduced the Water (Special Measures) Act 2025 to raise standards, enforce accountability, and make pollution cover-ups a criminal offence. We have banned more than £4 million in bonuses for polluting water bosses; we have unlocked £104 billion of private investment to rebuild vital infrastructure; and we have commissioned Sir Jon Cunliffe to lead the most comprehensive independent review of the water sector since privatisation. Together, those steps have paved the way for the landmark clean water Bill announced in the King’s Speech. The Bill fulfils the commitments we set out in the water White Paper earlier this year and will deliver the fundamental reforms that are so desperately needed. This once-in-a-generation Bill will create a single powerful water regulator, moving away from a system where water companies mark their own homework by putting in place stronger, active supervision. This will strengthen water companies’ financial resilience and the long-term stability of the sector, with modernised economic regulation and new powers to drive turnaround where companies perform poorly.
Additionally, the reforms will strengthen the consumer advocate, providing a more independent, authoritative voice that can challenge the system, drive improvements in outcomes and ensure that customers’ interests are put first. We will also improve water quality by cutting pollution at its source. Finally, we will avoid the situation we are discussing today happening again: our reforms will give the new regulator the powers to ensure water companies do not accumulate unmanageable levels of debt. More broadly, they will secure the long-term stability of the sector and ensure that companies are financially resilient. Put simply, our reforms will deliver better outcomes for customers and the environment.
I commend this statement to the House.
Mr Speaker
I thank the Secretary of State for coming to the House at the earliest opportunity to update Members before making announcements elsewhere. She is a shining example to her Cabinet colleagues of how this House should be treated.
I call the shadow Secretary of State.
Victoria Atkins (Louth and Horncastle) (Con)
First, I echo the Secretary of State’s comments in remembrance of her dear colleague Jo Cox. Her loss was felt across the House and across party political lines, and I send all of our very best wishes to her loved ones and friends.
I thank you, Mr Speaker, and I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of her statement and for a briefing call on this announcement. As you know, I have been trying for months to coax the Secretary of State to the Dispatch Box to explain major events within her portfolio, from the Government’s EU handover negotiations to their lack of support for farmers. Finally, she emerges into the light. We all assumed that it would be to announce progress towards resolving the many issues facing Thames Water and its customers; instead, it is to make a statement about a letter to the regulator. There is nothing new in this statement—no change in the situation of Thames Water, and still no certainty for billpayers.
Thames Water has repeatedly failed its customers and the environment with a record of pollution, leakage and chronic under-investment. The latest figures lay this bare. The company is responsible for around a third of the nation’s worst pollution incidents, even as billpayers face steep increases in their bills. These are not abstract failures; untreated sewage has been poured into the rivers and chalk streams that local communities cherish, while customers are asked to pay more for less. The priority now must be a financial arrangement that keeps the company afloat and protects billpayers and taxpayers. While the Secretary of State’s Government are in chaos, paralysed by the Prime Minister’s weakness and the Mayor of Greater Manchester’s leadership ambitions, Thames Water continues to fail. If no deal is reached, Thames Water could collapse—again, at enormous cost to taxpayers.
The Secretary of State has said that she does not want a scenario where customers
“pick up the bill for the company’s failures”,
but when the Conservatives tried to amend the Water (Special Measures) Act to prevent consumers from being on the hook in the event of a company going into special administration and tried to impose a lending ratio limit on water companies to prevent this situation from happening again, Labour voted it down. Why? I also remember that under the former Secretary of State, the right hon. Member for Streatham and Croydon North (Steve Reed), an investor pulled out of a previous rescue deal, partly due to political risk—in other words, the former Secretary of State had talked himself out of a deal. How is the current Secretary of State avoiding the failures of the now Secretary of State for Housing?
There are those who are urging nationalisation, a word that is thrown around carelessly by Labour Back Benchers and by Reform—in fact, I think I heard it just now. None of them ever explains that nationalisation would be extremely expensive, potentially costing the taxpayer up to £20 billion. For those who are wondering what that means, it is roughly equivalent to the defence funding shortfall we have heard so much about in recent days. However, there are reasonable concerns about how Thames Water’s failures will be managed during the Government’s restructuring of the sector and the abolition of Ofwat, so can the Secretary of State please confirm that the existing penalty regime will not be downgraded or diluted, which has been briefed to the newspapers? What safeguards will be put in place to ensure Thames Water remains fully responsible for its environmental and operational failures? How will the Government ensure that billpayers are not left bearing the cost of past mismanagement, and have they offered or begun any process to recommend an alternative deal? Ministers have still not explained how investment in the sector will actually be paid for. Indeed, the Secretary of State’s predecessor had to admit that so-called private water industry investment is in reality paid for by higher bills, and the Secretary of State has repeated that today. Families already struggling with the cost of living should not become the safety net for a company that rewarded its executives while letting its infrastructure crumble. This is an important moment for the Government to show that they can balance financial stability with strong regulatory oversight and put accountability and the interests of billpayers and the environment at the heart of water reform. The Government must now deliver on the big promises they made during the election for the water sector.
Public trust in the water industry is already at rock bottom.
Emma Reynolds
I am always happy to receive brownie points, Mr Speaker, so thank you for what you said.
The shadow Secretary of State rightly says that untreated sewage has poured into our waterways, and it did, in the long years that her party was in government. They cut the Environment Agency’s enforcement budget and moved to an approach where water companies marked their own homework—the so-called self-monitoring approach. She has some brass neck in lecturing us when we saw a series of failures under her Government.
We are here today, and we as a Government inherited record levels of pollution in our waterways, because of the failure by the Government of the right hon. Lady to see what was happening before their eyes. It was a failure of regulation, a failure of the regulators and a failure of the previous Government.
I am proud of what we have achieved in the two short years that we have been in power. I am proud of the Water (Special Measures) Act 2025. When did the Conservatives ever cap polluting water bosses’ bonuses? Never. The right hon. Lady lectures me about amendments to our Act. Our Act did more in less than a year than her party did in 14 years to ensure a fairer deal for customers and a better deal for the environment.
The right hon. Lady asks about nationalisation. I gently say that a special administration regime is not the same as nationalisation. [Interruption.] I am just clarifying for the House; I do not wish to have an exchange with her across the ballot box—sorry, the Dispatch Box—if I can possibly help it. The ballot box might be at some other point. There is a difference between nationalisation and a special administration regime. With nationalisation, the Government would be taking ownership of the company. With a special administration regime, the Government would finance a special administrator appointed by the courts to run the company.
The right hon. Lady talks about public trust in our water sector being at record lows. All I can say is that we are clearing up her party’s mess. [Interruption.] It was under her Government that Thames Water was plunged into unmanageable levels of debt.
Mr Speaker
Order. Can I just say to the shadow Secretary of State that I want to hear the Secretary of State? We do not need a running commentary all the way through. I made sure that those on the Government Front Bench listened to her.
Emma Reynolds
I am not surprised that there are not many Opposition Back Benchers here, given the Conservatives’ terrible record on the water industry. In our clean water Bill, which we will introduce later in the Session, we will take forward a desperately needed, once-in-a-generation reform of the water sector to introduce a powerful single regulator that holds water companies to account.
Mr Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab)
Thames Water customers are paying the price for the incompetent regulation that allowed Macquarie to saddle the company with eye-watering debts at the same time as its environmental performance was so disgraceful. That debt ultimately led to shareholders writing the equity value down to zero. Those who bought the debt are now making this proposal. I entirely understand why the Secretary of State would not want customers to receive a service that was failing in its environmental responsibilities while they paid higher bills, but what assessment has she made as to whether Thames Water is a viable business? We have been told that this is the final offer from the company. Is there a viable business there that will deliver long-term investment within a reasonable cost window for billpayers? If there is not, at what point does public administration become inevitable?
Emma Reynolds
As I set out in my letter to the regulator, Ofwat, I am concerned that the proposal will mean delays to environmental improvements and to improvements to water infrastructure, with, as my hon. Friend rightly says, unfair cost being laid at the door of Thames Water customers. He asks whether it is a viable business and about next steps. This is a stage in the process where I have given my early views on this proposal. It is now for Ofwat to decide what to do next, and we wait to see what happens.
Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD)
I start by associating myself closely with the Secretary of State’s remarks about Jo Cox. It was a privilege to serve alongside her in this place, and we still miss her deeply.
I am grateful to the Secretary of State for advance sight of the statement and for the helpful briefing that I received earlier. Since Conservative privatisation more than 35 years ago, some £85 billion of billpayers’ money has flowed out like a torrent into the pockets of mostly overseas shareholders and executives paying themselves unearned bonuses. That money could and should have gone into cleaning up our waterways and modernising infrastructure. Instead, sewage was released into our lakes, rivers and seas for 1.8 million hours last year, and more than 100,000 of those were in the Thames region alone. Some 20% of our water leaks out of its pipes before it even reaches our homes. For Thames Water, the figure is even worse, with 25% of that water wasted.
Now Thames Water’s investors are asking for more time for more opportunity to take money before they inevitably run. The Secretary of State is right, then, that the creditors’ offer is a disgrace. They get to keep making money, and Thames Water billpayers get to pay even more to keep them going, while getting the privilege of seeing long-overdue infrastructure improvements delayed for yet another decade. Thames Water is taking the mickey. The Liberal Democrats say, “No more, and no thanks.”
It is clear that Thames Water has failed in its basic performance as a water company, and that gives the Secretary of State all the reason she needs to place it into special administration, so why is she not doing that instead? Her letter to Ofwat is, I am afraid, a sign of dreadful weakness. She has to beg an equally weak Ofwat to show a resolve that it institutionally lacks. Thames has failed in its performance, so just put it into special administration and migrate the company to a mutually owned model, where the billpayers own the company and call the shots. That way, investment will be made, sewage spills will stop and water leaks will cease. By doing that, she could begin the process whereby all our water companies are owned not by private equity, overseas investors or the sluggish state, but by the people. If she did that, she would win the favour of people from Witney to Windermere. Why does she not stop faffing about and do that instead?
Emma Reynolds
I thank the hon. Gentleman, I think, for his support for my statement today, although it was slightly half-hearted. He is right to say that there have been serious pollution incidents in different water companies, but especially in the Thames, and that is of grave concern to the public and to Thames Water’s customers in particular. I point out to him that there are two types of special administration regime. An insolvency SAR is an insolvency process and is for the company directors to determine. A performance SAR would be triggered if a company was in serious breach of its statutory duties or if the company breaches an enforcement order in a way that is so serious that it is inappropriate for the company to retain its licence. The Government stand ready for all eventualities, including a SAR.
Barry Gardiner (Brent West) (Lab)
Will the Secretary of State confirm that, in the event of a special administration regime, any compensation would be based on appropriate value as set out in the case of Lithgow v. the UK, not on regulated capital value, as suggested by the shadow Secretary of State. For Thames Water, appropriate value would take account of the £23 billion in infrastructure repairs needed to meet condition P of its licence and comply with its statutory obligation, as well as the £13 billion of dividend and debt interest already paid to creditors. Appropriate value would therefore be nil. The Secretary of State said that Ofwat is responsible for taking the decision to modify the licence. I urge her to read section 12A(7) of the Water Industry Act 1991, because she has the power to overrule.
Emma Reynolds
I think there were a number of questions there. As I have said, there is obviously a difference between a special administration regime and nationalisation. My hon. Friend refers to regulatory capital value, and he is right to suggest that the price of any company is a complicated matter, but in the event of a special administration regime, the state would seek to recoup the investment it had made upon SAR exit. Nationalisation would be a different matter.
Mr Louie French (Old Bexley and Sidcup) (Con)
What assurances can the Government give my constituents across Bexley that the £88 million of investment that is under way in our community to secure our fresh drinking water supply for the next 50 years is not derailed by this Government announcement, which means further uncertainty for Thames Water and its customers?
Emma Reynolds
I think it is right that both the regulator and the Government hold Thames Water to account, and I find the hon. Gentleman’s question slightly bizarre. I can reassure his constituents, and other customers of Thames Water, that the Government will always ensure continuity of service, but I make no apology for ensuring that customers are at the front and centre of my consideration of this proposal.
Jas Athwal (Ilford South) (Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State for her statement. Thames Water is by far the worst water company when it comes to sewage spills, pollution incidents, flooding across overloaded sewer systems, customer complaints, regulatory penalties—the list goes on. The establishment of a robust, proactive regulator is a step in the right direction, but should not a company as bad as Thames Water be taken over by being put into special measures so that it can start again and work in favour of residents rather than shareholders, as an example to others that enough is enough?
Emma Reynolds
My hon. Friend is right to say that Thames Water has a terrible record going back—as I said in my statement—at least 15 years. He is also right to say that sewage spills in the Thames Water area are completely unacceptable. As I have said, the Government stand ready for all eventualities, including a special administration regime.
Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)
The Secretary of State is absolutely right to put customers at the forefront, but the problem, as she said in her statement, is that this will all take rather a long time to unwind. At present, uncertainty is the real concern for customers, especially the uncertainty about whether they will be charged extra on their bills. The Secretary of State has given a letter to Ofwat, but what specific changes does she want to see in the deal to encourage her to agree to it, so that we can move forward rather than having uncertainty?
Emma Reynolds
Quite simply, I do not want customers to pick up the bill for the repeated failures of Thames Water, but I hear the hon. Gentleman’s concerns about uncertainty, and I would like to see this situation resolved.
Emily Thornberry (Islington South and Finsbury) (Lab)
If Members google “Caledonian Road”, which is in my constituency, they might think it is a river, but it is not. Over the past decade, Thames Water has delivered to Islington seven major floods. Since privatisation, it has delivered to shareholders £7 billion. Last year, it delivered to my constituents a 31% increase in water rates. Residents are fed up, businesses are fed up, I am fed up, and I am sure that the Government are fed up. How much more do we have to take before Thames Water is finally given the boot?
Emma Reynolds
My right hon. Friend is absolutely right to emphasise the appalling record of Thames Water, and the impact that it is having not just on her constituents but on businesses in her constituency. As I have said, there are two different options for a special administration regime, and we remain open to all eventualities.
Freddie van Mierlo (Henley and Thame) (LD)
Ten months ago, the Government appointed FTI Consulting to advise them on taking Thames Water into special administration. Can the Secretary of State update the House on the outputs of that work and how much it has cost to date?
Emma Reynolds
We appointed FTI Consulting because, in the event of a special administration regime, it is right to have prepared for that eventuality and to have that contingency arrangement in place, but I am afraid that the figure for which the hon. Gentleman has asked is not at my disposal.
Danny Beales (Uxbridge and South Ruislip) (Lab)
The Secretary of State is absolutely right: Thames Water has let down my constituents and Londoners more broadly with years of chronic under-investment, while paying record levels of bonuses and dividends. I recently visited my local sewage treatment works, and saw proposed improvements to increase storm surge capacity on site and to improve filtration levels to clean up our waterways. Will the Secretary of State assure me and my constituents that those much-needed planned improvements will not be further delayed by ongoing institutional uncertainty about the future of Thames Water, so that we can finally turn the page on 14 years of Tory neglect of our waterways?
Emma Reynolds
I certainly want to turn the page on the failures of this company that have affected my hon. Friend’s constituents and those of other Members. Thanks to the Water (Special Measures) Act 2025, for which my hon. Friend voted, polluting water companies do not now receive bonuses. However, he is right to suggest that we need to resolve this situation and ensure that the improvements he has mentioned take place, and I have expressed my early concerns about this proposal because I do not want to see significant delays in such improvements.
Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)
It is tempting to say that there is a particularly bad smell about this company, but that would be a statement of the obvious. Although I am not normally a friend of nationalisation, I have a feeling that this company is on a one-way journey to bankruptcy. Am I right in presuming that if that point ever arose, there would be no question of compensating shareholders for a bankrupt company that eventually had to be taken over by the state?
Emma Reynolds
The company remains solvent, but if it were to become insolvent it would be for the directors to apply to the court for an insolvency special administration regime, and then those questions would be on the table.
Catherine West (Hornsey and Friern Barnet) (Lab)
What reassurances can the Secretary of State provide about basic customer services? For example, Turnpike Lane tube station in my constituency has been closed since last August, because Transport for London cannot reopen it owing to the leaks and other problems that Thames Water is far too incompetent to fix. Will today’s statement lead to better customer service?
Emma Reynolds
I am very sorry to hear about the circumstances in my hon. Friend’s constituency, and I will happily raise them with the regulator. We need to get that fixed as soon as possible.
Layla Moran (Oxford West and Abingdon) (LD)
In recent months, 35,000 houses in West Oxford have had their water pressure cut by Thames Water, in some cases by as much as 50%. Veronica in Osney Island says that her upstairs shower is now nothing but a dribble, and is barely usable. This is not a service; it is a scam, and my constituents are having to foot the bill for it. Their bills were put up last year. Can the Secretary of State explain to them what we are waiting for? Why can we not just let this failed company fail, and start again?
Emma Reynolds
I entirely understand why the hon. Lady and her constituents are fed up with the company’s poor performance, and I have written to Ofwat expressing my concerns. I do not want her constituents to pick up the bill for that poor performance.
Jim Dickson (Dartford) (Lab)
For far too long, Dartford residents have put up with very poor performance and high water bills. It is extremely likely that Thames Water leaks contributed to the collapse of the Galley Hill road in 2023, as a result of which Swanscombe residents have been pretty much trapped in their town over the past three years. As the Secretary of State has said, it is vital that the company does not have its performance standards diluted or receives protection from fines as a consequence of the deal that is on the table. Does she agree that any deal must put consumers and environmental protections first, and that investors should not benefit at the expense of billpayers and vital infrastructure improvements?
Emma Reynolds
As I said in my statement, customers are at the front and centre of my consideration of this serious issue. The Environment Agency will continue to investigate any pollution incident and any breach of statutory obligations of any water company, including Thames Water, and will continue to take enforcement action against those companies, including the imposition of fines.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
I have a huge list of complaints about Thames Water across Mid Buckinghamshire, and I am sure it is identical to that of the Secretary of State next door in Wycombe, so I add my voice to my hon. Friends’ calls for real detail about the plan, rather than just ambition. In the meantime, there is something that is causing Thames Water and every other water company to chase their tails: their inability to have a proper voice in the planning system. When a village such as Ickford in my constituency, which already has its sewage pumped away by road in tankers because the system just cannot cope, is told that it has to connect another 90, 100 or 150 properties, it is never going to work. Given the huge demand for house building and data centres in Buckinghamshire, what action will the Secretary of State take to ensure that the water companies can have their say and say no when they cannot connect areas?
Emma Reynolds
I thank my constituency neighbour for his question. Like him, I have had complaints about Thames Water in my constituency. With regard to his broader question, I reassure him that when we bring the clean water Bill to the House, there will be provisions for more intense regional planning, which involves water companies, local authorities and other stakeholders, so that we can avoid the sort of situation that he talks about.
Helen Hayes (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)
My constituents have been catastrophically failed by Thames Water over many years by major floods that have closed local businesses, constant leaks and bursts, traffic disruption, loss of supply and terrible support for vulnerable customers. This is the consequence of shocking negligence by asset-stripping investors, and there is no evidence that Thames Water can recover itself or that it will ever have a credible plan to deliver. I welcome the Secretary of State’s statement and ask her for further detail on the timescale for resolving the situation. When does she expect Ofwat to reach a decision on the offer from investors? How will she ensure that, following such a decision, action is taken swiftly to bring this scandal to an end and to bring Thames Water back into special administration, so that it can be run for the public good and for the good of the environment?
Emma Reynolds
My hon. Friend is right to raise the impact of this issue on local businesses as well as residents in her constituency. I spoke to the chair of Ofwat yesterday evening, as well as sending the letter, and I know that he and the board of Ofwat are considering the proposal in great detail. I suspect that we will hear from them soon.
Richard Tice (Boston and Skegness) (Reform)
Enough is enough. Frankly, the sight of US hedge funds picking over the carcase of Thames Water’s pipe network is revolting—it stinks. The plan includes three quarters of a billion pounds of payments to hedge funds, shareholders, debt holders and bankers. It is completely unacceptable. Thames Water is bust: it is insolvent. Now is the time to put it into special administration. It cannot meet its financial obligations, and it cannot meet its performance obligations. I urge the Secretary of State to get on with it, put Thames Water into a special administration regime, and then buy it out for a pound. That would be a good deal for the taxpayer.
Emma Reynolds
May I welcome the hon. Gentleman to the party? It was a long time coming. I do not remember any mention of the sewage crisis in the Reform manifesto at the last election.
Daniel Francis (Bexleyheath and Crayford) (Lab)
I think some Opposition Members are suffering from amnesia and have forgotten the asset stripping that happened, which has led to infrastructure failing across Bexleyheath and Crayford, and to the 30% increase in bills last year. We have tried every option to keep Thames Water organisationally solvent, but my patience, and that of my constituents across Bexleyheath and Crayford, is running out. Will the Secretary of State outline how ready we are as a Government if we need to take the company into special administration? In Bexleyheath and Crayford, our patience is running out.
Emma Reynolds
We have seen really poor performance over a number of years, and I absolutely appreciate my hon. Friend’s impatience on behalf of his constituents—he is right to express that. One of the problems that we have had with the regulatory regime is that the current economic regulator did not step in and stop Thames Water going into unmanageable levels of debt. As I said in my statement, our water White Paper and the clean water Bill set out that the new regulator will have new powers and responsibilities to ensure that companies do not get into that situation in the first place.
Sarah Green (Chesham and Amersham) (LD)
Communities such as Chalfont St Peter have suffered appalling circumstances in recent years, including flooding and sewage bubbling up through the drains. Thames Water has promised capital investment to address these issues. What assurances can the Secretary of State give that customers will not be asked to pay the price for years of financial mismanagement through higher bills, and that any future restructure or special administration regime will not mean that existing capital investment commitments are lost?
Emma Reynolds
I thank my constituency neighbour for her question. She is right to talk about the problems in her constituency, which I know very well. I sent my letter yesterday evening precisely because of the issue that she mentions. I do not want to see severe delays to the capital investment that is necessary to improve the situation, as she has suggested, and I do not want customers to pick up the bill for it.
Fleur Anderson (Putney) (Lab)
I echo the tributes to Jo Cox, whom I worked with when she was at Oxfam. We miss her greatly.
My constituents in Putney, Roehampton, Southfields and Wandsworth Town have been let down by Thames Water for years. The Tories lost a grip of the situation and cut back the Environment Agency. In 2025, Thames Water dumped sewage in the Thames for over 107,000 hours, but bills are rising and I get constant emails from constituents because there is nothing to show for it. They are paying the price, so I welcome the Secretary of State’s standing up for customers and the environment. What would she say to my constituents to assure them that they will not have to pay any more for this investment fund masquerading as a public service?
Emma Reynolds
My hon. Friend puts her finger on the issue. As I said in my statement, there are three principal reasons why I sent Ofwat my early concerns about the proposal, and one of those reasons is the delay of the investment that we need to ensure that there are improvements to environmental performance, which I know is an issue of concern across the House. I do not want customers to pick up the tab for that delay.
Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Your Party)
Is it not clear that 30 years of the regulatory system has absolutely failed in the face of the greed, incompetence and profit taking of Thames Water? Surely to goodness it is time that Thames Water stopped being allowed to continue with this disastrous policy. The company was brought into public ownership, but it is public ownership with a difference, because it includes local authorities, local communities and the workforce—rather than the directors—who know something about water delivery. We need an efficient supply, an end to the flooding that happens in my constituency and others, and an end to the abominable polluting of the Thames and the seas around this country, which is caused by the greed of the directors of Thames Water.
Emma Reynolds
I do not always agree with the right hon. Gentleman, but I do so on this issue. There has been real regulatory failure here—there has been a failure of the regulators, and a failure of the regulation itself. The Conservatives decided to cut the enforcement budget of the Environment Agency, and there has been a shift towards self-monitoring, which essentially means that the water companies have been marking their own homework. It is like telling Ofsted not to visit any schools—that is the equivalent of the regime that we saw under the Conservatives. The right hon. Gentleman is right to say that customers and the environment need to be at the heart of the solution to this issue.
Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) (Lab)
We all have examples of Thames Water letting our residents down. Just last week I heard from one of my farmers, who has had Thames Water discharging raw sewage into the ditch next to his fields. It has flooded his fields and contaminated the land, which is no longer in use. I welcome the progress made by the Secretary of State, but as she acknowledges, more may well be needed. Will she reassure my constituents that she will always put the interests of consumers, the environment and public health ahead of the interests of investors?
Emma Reynolds
Absolutely, and I could not agree more with my hon. Friend. As I said in my statement, customers are front and centre in my consideration of this issue. It is completely unacceptable that farmers are suffering the consequences of the raw sewage crisis in our country, and they should not have their land contaminated. That is their livelihood, and it takes a great deal of work and cost to decontaminate the land.
Dr Ben Spencer (Runnymede and Weybridge) (Con)
Will the Secretary of State guarantee that no taxpayer money will be used to bail out Thames Water or its shareholders?
Emma Reynolds
Well, we have to see. I have sent a letter to express my early concerns about the situation, and the Government remain open to all eventualities. If there was a special administration regime, which some people are calling for, then the Government would obviously be financing a special administrator to run the company. That would have to happen, because we would have to have continuity of service. If the hon. Gentleman does not want that to happen, he has to suggest an alternative.
Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State for her statement and for robust way in which she is standing up for residents and the environment on this very important issue. My constituents are appalled by the sewage pollution in the River Thames and by the poor quality of customer service offered by Thames Water. We have had numerous breaks in supply and there was an issue with subsidence that closed a road in Reading. Can she tell me more about the process that will be followed by Ofwat and the action she will take through the clean water Bill?
Emma Reynolds
The clean water Bill will introduce a supervisory regime whereby the new regulator, which will have more teeth, will have a team of people for each and every water company, really getting a grip on the performance of each water company and holding it to account. What we have seen up until now, as I said to the right hon. Member for Islington North (Jeremy Corbyn), is the shift we saw 15 years ago towards a system where companies were basically marking their own homework. That cannot be right; that is not a proper regulatory system. That is just laissez-faire and letting companies get away with the sorts of pollution incidents that we have seen.
Helen Maguire (Epsom and Ewell) (LD)
Thames Water is in crisis, so I thank the Secretary of State for not approving the deal. It is sinking under £20 billion of debt. It is like a leaky ship that cannot stay afloat. Last year, my constituents were, on average, paying an additional £203 a year. They simply cannot continue to pay the price for this failure. When will she stop pouring money into this leaky ship, put Thames Water into special administration and put everyone out of their misery?
Emma Reynolds
I thank the hon. Lady for welcoming the fact that I have sent the letter with my early concerns. As I said, there are two different ways for a special administration regime. One is insolvency, which is a matter for the directors of the company and would have to go through the courts. The other is the performance tsar.
Helena Dollimore (Hastings and Rye) (Lab/Co-op)
Thames Water is clearly failing its customers and the environment. I thank the Government for their action this week, which makes it very clear to Thames Water that it will not be allowed off the hook for fines, it will not be allowed off the hook for performance targets, and it must not be allowed to mark its own homework. I want to probe the Secretary of State on a specific aspect of its failure. We on the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee asked Thames Water how much it had spent on the legal proceedings to try to avoid a special administration regime. The company replied:
“we estimate that our legal fees for work done in connection with our liquidity extension transaction, as implemented through the interim restructuring plan at the High Court and Court of Appeal, was approximately £67.6 million”.
That was last June. I will be writing to Thames Water to ask for an update on those costs. Given that shocking amount being wasted on legal fees—almost 3% of what customers are paying in bills—does the Secretary of State agree that Thames Water must spend its money on fixing broken pipes, not bonuses and not bumper legal payouts?
Emma Reynolds
Yes, we want Thames Water’s priority to be investing in the water infrastructure needed to improve the service it gives its customers and to drive environmental improvement.
Dr Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)
As the Secretary of State pointed out, Thames Water has 16 million customers. It does not serve them; it fails them. That is nearly a quarter of the entire UK population and they do not get any choice—this is a natural monopoly. We are all stuck with the water company that supposedly serves the area we live in, but what do customers get? They get bills going up through the roof, pollution in our rivers and seas, and crumbling infrastructure. In her statement, the Secretary of State nodded towards special administration, which would be an improvement on the status quo, but is it not time to come clean with the British people and admit that the privatisation experiment has totally failed, and to take this struggling, failing company back into public ownership, where it belongs?
Emma Reynolds
The hon. Lady is right to point out that these are natural monopolies and that there is no competition. I do not think nationalisation is a silver bullet in this regard. I point out to her that the Government are facing big fiscal pressures in all sorts of other areas, but we stand ready for all eventualities.
Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)
Thames Water was responsible for a third of all major pollution incidents in 2025. Now its creditors want to jack up my constituents’ bills, delay improvements to infrastructure and dodge future fines. My constituents are being failed. I welcome the action the Secretary of State has taken today, but I urge her to go even further and put Thames Water under special measures.
Emma Reynolds
It is because of my concern about the delays to improvements in infrastructure and the environment that I sent the letter to Ofwat. Can I reassure my hon. Friend on one point? I have never even considered the idea that the Environment Agency would let this company off any fines. The agency will continue to perform its duties in holding Thames Water and all other water companies to account, and will enforce against them should they breach their statutory obligations.
Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)
My constituents are facing an average water bill of £658 a year, yet Thames Water continues to fail them. Sewage has poured into the River Mole, which runs through my constituency. The rec next to the Esher treatment works, where children play, has had sewage in it. I told the House last week that there was sewage outside the local primary school in Thames Ditton, as well as in the middle of the village. Will the Government get a grip on this regulatory and state failure, put the company into special administration, and create a public interest company that serves my constituents properly?
Emma Reynolds
I am really sorry to hear about the sewage incident outside a local primary school. If the hon. Lady would like to take that up with me separately, I would be happy to follow it up. The Government are concerned about the underperformance of the company, which is why I expressed early concerns about this proposal. She is right to say that we need a solution that delivers for customers and the environment.
Josh Dean (Hertford and Stortford) (Lab)
My residents are rightly angry that Thames Water has discharged sewage into the River Stort, one of our rare and precious chalk streams, for hundreds of hours. I have raised the issue in this House before, and Thames Water told me that its improvement plan will not be in place until 2028. That is clearly not good enough. Does the Secretary of State agree that this is the latest in a litany of failures by Thames Water? What assurances will she give my constituents that she will ensure that the need to protect our precious chalk streams will be a priority future consideration in the future of Thames Water?
Emma Reynolds
My hon. Friend is right to say there have been 15 years of failure, with the company letting down customers and businesses in his constituency. Chalk streams are an absolute priority for me, both as a Member representing a constituency in the Chilterns and as Environment Secretary.
Olly Glover (Didcot and Wantage) (LD)
The Government have been very clear in their support for Thames Water’s proposed £5.7 billion White Horse reservoir in Oxfordshire. Given that Thames Water may run out of money in months, what assessment has the Secretary of State made of the risk that a collapse could lead to the Government having to bear the cost of the reservoir?
Emma Reynolds
As a country, we have failed to build a reservoir for 30 years. That cannot be right. On the specific reservoir to which the hon. Gentleman refers, we will have to look at the details, but as it stands the company is ongoing; it is a solvent company and it should continue to complete the projects that it started.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
I thank the Secretary of State for her statement, and my hon. Friend the Member for Hertford and Stortford (Josh Dean) for raising his concerns about the River Stort, which goes past my constituency. I spend many hours running alongside it, so I know what a beautiful area it is and that it needs to be protected. Mr Speaker, I cannot tell you the number of people—not just in Harlow but everywhere I go—who raise with me their dissatisfaction with Thames Water. I thank the Secretary of State for what she is doing to raise standards, but I am dubious that Thames Water is going to be able to reach them. If it does not reach those high standards, what is she going to do? People in Harlow do not want us to prop up a company whose failures hit the pockets of the public.
Emma Reynolds
I thank my hon. Friend for conveying the concerns of his constituency of Harlow. [Interruption.] The Minister for Harlow? I did not know that we had created that position!
The Government are prepared for all eventualities, and I reassure my hon. Friend that whatever happens, the Government will ensure continuity of service for his constituents with regard to water supply and waste water services.
Several hon. Members rose—
Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)
Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. Residents in Wokingham have endured years of sewage dumping by Thames Water and ever-rising bills, while stakeholders have lined their pockets. The current ownership model is unsustainable, so will the Minister consider the Liberal Democrats’ call for water companies to be mutually-owned public benefit corporations, putting customers and the environment first, rather than prioritising the interests of creditors and financial institutions?
Emma Reynolds
When I served as the Economic Secretary to the Treasury, I worked on our plan to double the number of mutuals across the economy. More broadly, not just with regard to Thames Water, I would be happy to see more mutual ownership of water companies, but the question is how we get there.
Chris Hinchliff (North East Hertfordshire) (Lab)
The Secretary of State has made the right decision in seeking to protect billpayers and opposing giving Thames Water a free pass to continue polluting our rivers. The thousands of hours of sewage spills into chalk streams and their tributaries across North East Hertfordshire that Thames Water has continued to oversee are unforgiveable, if not technically illegal. Thames Water is failing in practically every possible way. The level of incompetence is staggering, given that it has 16 million captive customers. My constituents are not interested in Thames Water being given any more chances—[Interruption.]
Chris Hinchliff
Will the Secretary of State put an end to this unholy mess and rid us of this frankly parasitic company once and for all?
Emma Reynolds
I thank my hon. Friend for mentioning chalk streams. Like my hon. Friend the Member for Hertford and Stortford (Josh Dean), I have chalk streams in my constituency, and they are close to my heart. My hon. Friend the Member for North East Hertfordshire (Chris Hinchliff) is right to say that Thames Water is the biggest water company in the country, with 16 million customers. The Government stand ready for all eventualities, including a special administration regime. The customers are at front and centre of my consideration of this issue.
Victoria Collins (Harpenden and Berkhamsted) (LD)
My very first letter as a Member of Parliament was to Thames Water, following the unacceptable fact that thousands of hours of sewage had been released into the River Ver, one of our precious chalk streams. Whatever the future structure of Thames Water, what guarantees can the Minister put in place that the environmental obligations will be strengthened rather than weakened?
Emma Reynolds
As I have said previously, regardless of how the situation develops, the Environment Agency will continue to investigate pollution incidents and take enforcement proceedings against any company involved, including Thames Water.
Calum Miller (Bicester and Woodstock) (LD)
In March, my constituents in North Leigh and Eynsham went without water for nearly three days due to the collapse of a major waterpipe. They are angry that one third of their bill payments go towards Thames Water’s ballooning debt, and to paying vulture funds, like Elliott Associates, instead of maintaining and replacing ageing infrastructure. My hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Charlie Maynard) was right to challenge further borrowing by Thames Water in the Supreme Court. Does the Secretary of State now agree with the Liberal Democrats that Thames Water’s financial model is broken?
Emma Reynolds
As I said in answer to a previous question, through the clean water Bill the Government will seek to ensure that the new water regulator—which will be integrating the functions of Ofwat, the EA, the Drinking Water Inspectorate and Natural England—does not allow companies to get into the sorts of unmanageable levels of debt that we have seen.
Charlie Maynard (Witney) (LD)
It is clear that the creditors’ consortium has material influence over Thames Water, as it is funding the company and bilaterally negotiating with the Government. Material influence means that the consortium meets the defined criteria of being an ultimate controller. Will the Secretary of State finally acknowledge that fact and work with Ofwat to enforce it?
Emma Reynolds
We are working closely with Ofwat, which has been talking to the consortium of investors for two years. Through my officials, the Government have been in discussions with the consortium alongside Ofwat since November. I thank all the officials who have been involved in those discussions. We need to find a way forward that puts customers and the environment at its heart.
Thames Water
Emma Reynolds Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Emma Reynolds)
I wsill be making an oral statement on this subject later today.
[HCWS116]
Oral Answers to Questions
Emma Reynolds Excerpts(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Emma Reynolds)
This Government are taking decisive action to support farmers with rising fuel costs. We have cut red diesel fuel duty to its lowest level in 20 years, reducing rates by a third, and we have asked the Competition and Markets Authority to ensure that there is no market abuse.
Claire Young
During the nearly three months it took the Government to decide to cut duty on red diesel, farmers in my constituency had already had to take steps to mitigate costs for fuel, energy and fertiliser. With changing weather patterns also threatening food security, will the Department look at other reliefs for our farmers, to ensure food security is not compromised while the war continues and its impacts ripple for years to come?
Emma Reynolds
The National Farmers’ Union president, Tom Bradshaw, said:
“The government’s decision to scrap the planned rise in fuel duty is good news, and the cut to red diesel duty is a welcome, well-targeted measure.”
I think I heard the hon. Lady welcoming that measure. Of course, we are keeping all plans under review and all scenarios, given the conflict in the middle east. We are consulting on plans to change fertiliser rules, so that farmers can diversify their sources of fertiliser, and we are working with farmers to give them access to Government tools to boost the efficiency of their fertiliser use.
Emma Reynolds
I thank the hon. Lady for welcoming the cut to red diesel fuel duty. I can reassure her that we have recently published draft guidance for SFI 2026 and will be opening the first window soon for small farms and those without an agreement. We are looking at what can be done—I think she was about to ask this—about farms with agreements that are expiring either later this year or early next year, to see whether we can ensure that they can apply before their agreements expire for the coming period.
Seamus Logan (Aberdeenshire North and Moray East) (SNP)
Graeme Downie (Dunfermline and Dollar) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Emma Reynolds)
I met NFU Scotland on 6 May for a constructive discussion about the impact of the middle east conflict on input costs, food security and supply chains, alongside wider farming issues in Scotland. We remain in active, ongoing engagement with the organisation.
Graeme Downie
Given that many of the key pressures facing farmers in Scotland, such as food security, input costs and trade policy, are determined on a UK-wide basis, will my right hon. Friend commit to continuing that contact and to regular, structured and direct engagement with NFU Scotland, as well as other devolved unions, to ensure that their expertise and the distinct needs of Scottish agriculture are properly reflected in UK decision making?
Emma Reynolds
The short answer is yes. The longer answer is that the Farming Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Wallasey (Dame Angela Eagle), and I meet frequently with NFU Scotland and other representatives in Scotland, and we continue that ongoing dialogue. As my hon. Friend the Member for Dunfermline and Dollar (Graeme Downie) said, it is a devolved matter, but there are issues we deal with that are UK-wide.
John Slinger (Rugby) (Lab)
Phil Brickell (Bolton West) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Emma Reynolds)
I congratulate David Attenborough, a national treasure, on his recent 100th birthday. I also congratulate Hawkstone Farmers’ Choir on winning “Britain’s Got Talent”.
Since the last oral questions, the Farming and Food Partnership Board has met twice to commission sector growth plans for horticulture and poultry. Our landmark trade deal with the Gulf Co-operation Council is cutting tariffs for farmers and British producers. I am sure that others will be doing the same as me this weekend and visiting a local farm for the 20th anniversary of Open Farm Sunday. I recently visited the Balmoral agricultural show in Northern Ireland, and met local businesses to discuss the sanitary and phytosanitary deal. Our clean water Bill was announced in the King’s Speech. Finally, I am proud that we have reintroduced white-tailed eagles to southern England for the first time in centuries. As you know, Mr Speaker, the British people love nature and love rewilding.
Phil Brickell
The Secretary of State may know that I am a passionate white water kayaker and a firm believer in the healing power of time spent in, on and around water. England and Wales have some of the most restrictive rights of access anywhere in the world; less than 4% of inland waterways have an uncontested public right of navigation. Can the Secretary of State say a bit more about when her Department will bring forward the Green Paper on access to nature?
Emma Reynolds
I was aware of my hon. Friend’s love of kayaking. I am not a kayaker, but I am passionate about improving people’s access to nature. Earlier this year I was with the King when we opened the King Charles III coastal path, and last month we launched the first national river walk. As my hon. Friend says, we are also committed to publishing an access to nature Green Paper soon.
Victoria Atkins
Sorry—the Government have just published the documentation for a scheme that starts in the three weeks’ time, but the Secretary of State cannot tell us how much of her budget is being spent on it. Then again, we know that Labour is the party of
“Who can we tax in order to pay benefits to others?”.
From the family farm and the family business taxes to the fertiliser tax, business rates and national insurance hikes, why should hard-working farmers, pub landlords, rural businesses and communities be pushed to the brink to pay for Labour’s ballooning benefits bill?
Emma Reynolds
I will take no lectures from the right hon. Lady, given that the Conservatives could not even be bothered to spend their own farming budget. We have a record farming budget during this Parliament, and we have protected our farmers in trade deals, whereas they sold them down the river with their trade deals with New Zealand and Australia. We have simplified the SFI, in co-operation with the National Farmers Union, and farmers have welcomed that.
Graeme Downie (Dunfermline and Dollar) (Lab)
John Glen (Salisbury) (Con)
Agriculture offers enormous growth opportunities in the UK, and when it comes to precision breeding and plant protection, it is vital that the SPS deal maintains the UK’s right to diverge on the basis of its own scientific assessments, particularly in those sectors. What reassurance can the Secretary of State give such growth sectors in agriculture that that autonomy will be retained in any future deal?
Emma Reynolds
We are well aware of the concerns of the farming sector, and I can reassure the right hon. Gentleman that we are taking its very strong views and concerns into account. As I am sure he understands, I cannot give him a running commentary on the negotiations.
Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)
It is estimated that illegal waste dumping costs the taxpayer over £1 billion. Given that this activity can and does happen at permitted sites, can the Minister assure the House that the waste crime unit has access to both the permit return data to the Environment Agency and the landfill tax returns to His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, so that that fraudulent activity can be identified? Will she meet me to discuss the Hespin Wood landfill site in my constituency?