(1 week, 1 day ago)
Commons ChamberI agree, but I think those on our Front Bench go one step further, which is to get rid of the whole damn thing in the first instance, as that solves the problem at a stroke.
I urge the Government to do what they did slightly with the family farm tax. There seem to be noises off from the Treasury, the Department for Business and Trade, and others, about potential changes here there and everywhere, and that they are listening. Businesses are at the brink, and they need certainty now. Stop playing cat and mouse with rural businesses on these policies. Take a decision, announce it. If it is a screeching U-turn, perform it. Do it elegantly, but for the love of God, just do it.
I will not, if the hon. Member will forgive me.
My second point is for the Government to please restore the listed places of worship scheme, which is vital for our rural churches. I echo the point that has been made: it is daft to merge sections 1 and 2 with regards to shotgun licensing—I declare an interest as a holder of one. As we know, a very serious issue happened in Devon a few years ago, but this is a draconian response to that and there are other ways to deal with shotgun licence safety.
Drop the family farm tax. It was the wrong policy. It was suggested by officials to Conservative Treasury Ministers every Budget cycle, and Conservative Treasury Ministers said no. It was never going to raise the amount of money that the Government told us before the changes, and it will now raise even less because of the changes to the threshold. Pull the plaster off that provision—and again, do it quickly. I say to those on the Treasury Bench that it is not worth the pain to continue to torture small family farms. North Dorset is the “Vale of the Little Dairies” to quote Thomas Hardy, and there are lots of family farms. They will go to the wall even with the changes to the threshold that the Government have announced. Everybody within the dairy sector will be aware of the unsustainable fluctuations in milk price, and we need a Government-led dairy strategy to secure that vital part of our agricultural sector.
We need to restore funding for neighbourhood plans, because that will deliver the local vernacular housing that local communities wish to see. Finally, we need a fundamental ruralisation of the formulas that underpin important funding decisions, whether for schools, the police or Environment Agency projects. If they get all that right, the Government might begin to restore their reputation within the rural community; continue as they are, and they are on a hiding to nothing.
Mike Reader (Northampton South) (Lab)
I wanted to contribute to this debate to celebrate the brilliant food producers in Northamptonshire and across the UK, some of which you sampled on Northamptonshire Day, Madam Deputy Speaker. As chair of the all-party group for food and drink, I have seen first-hand how rural communities play a critical part in our supply chain, and set the standard for global food quality.
When preparing for today, I thought I might do as many Opposition Members have done: go and buy myself a fresh Barbour jacket and some shiny wellies, and film a social media video ranting about protecting farmers, completely tone deaf to the hammering that they got under 14 years of Conservative Governments. But no, I will be collegiate, Madam Deputy Speaker; instead, I will focus on supporting food producers, and particularly on how we support growth and prosperity in rural communities.
Many will know that my background lies in the construction sector. I am a proud yimby, and a supporter of this Labour Government’s necessary policies to correct the catastrophic and sustained failures of the last Government to “build, baby, build.” While many Opposition Members see development as a threat to communities, if they spent more than five minutes talking to farmers and rural landowners, they would know it is really important that we support sustainable development, which is critical to the prosperity of rural Britain.
I commend the hon. Gentleman. He is putting forward good points about agriculture and how the economy can build off it. Northern Ireland has £6 billion-worth of manufacturing and exports, and it is critical for it to do well, as well. One thing that holds us back is veterinary and medicines, and the Northern Ireland protocol. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that in order for us go forward with the rest of the United Kingdom, the Northern Ireland protocol should be addressed? Perhaps when the Minister responds to the debate she can give us some ideas on that.
Mike Reader
I am not familiar with the Northern Ireland protocol at all, but I am learning more about the SPS agreement in my role as the chair. I hope that Nick Thomas-Symonds will come to see us very soon to explain—
(1 week, 2 days ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
I beg to move,
That this House has considered the future of Thames Water.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairpersonship, Mrs Harris, and I thank the Minister for attending this debate to listen to my constituents’ concerns. What better way to start the year than to debate the future of Thames Water? But—let me be frank—I do not believe this company has a future. If Thames Water had been genuinely subject to market forces over the years, it would have collapsed many, many decades ago, but instead, a broken regulatory system and chronic mismanagement have repeatedly let businesses and customers down.
Consider this: last year, Robert, aged 81, from Abingdon, received a water bill for—wait for it—£39,000. Thames Water later revised it to £37,688.64. He and his partner Patricia said, quite understandably, that they had become ill from stress because of the bill. It took two months, an intervention and a BBC story to cancel the absurd charge. That case epitomises the incompetence and disregard for customers that has eroded public trust in this company.
Another example is 70-year-old Morna from Botley, who suffered repeated floods in her house due to a blocked Thames Water drain. I visited and saw for myself the strain it took for her to fight for over a year with Thames Water for it finally to unblock it. The delays and inaction are just unacceptable.
I have one last example: Len and Jenny are in their 80s and in frail health, and they lost basic sanitation to their home in 2023. A blocked pipe caused sewage to enter through air bricks and they were left with no toilet, no washing facilities and no power. All they had was a portaloo in their garden and a tanker to pump out sewage. Foul waste continued to bubble up through the basin in their bathroom. We are now in 2026, and Jenny and Len still do not have the recommended non-return valve, a firm date for the maintenance or compensation. If Thames Water cannot even do those basics, what can it do?
I thank the hon. Lady for bringing this debate to Westminster Hall. Thames Water is £20 billion in debt, and it needs £20 billion to service the investment that is necessary. The chief executive has had substantial payouts and dividends. Is it not time for the Government to intervene, take over and get the job right?
Thames Water’s repeated mismanagement is why the Liberal Democrats have long called for all of the water company bosses not to receive that level of payout. We will continue to campaign in that vein.
Locally, we have been campaigning on the issue for many years. Along with Safer Waters, Thames21 and local activists, we secured bathing water status for Port Meadow in Oxford, only the second inland site in the country. That has forced Thames Water to monitor and report on water quality there, but for the last three years, that rating has been “poor”. Residents in Oxford, like others across the country, continue to risk their health every time they swim.
One would think that poor quality would logically lead to action, but it seems not to have done. In a debate just two years ago, I called for legally binding targets on sewage pollution, so I was pleased when the Government promised last July to halve sewage pollution by 2030. Today, I urge the Minister and the Government to move faster and to take all legal and financial steps necessary to make that change happen, because, as we have heard, Thames Water customers experience poor service, flooding, sewage in their homes and sewage in their rivers, and for this, they are being asked to pay more—indeed, 31% more in 2025-26 than the year before.
(4 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberOur future circular economy growth plan and interventions will seek to go beyond recycling and drive circularity in our waste streams, reducing the amount of waste that is sent for incineration and, crucially, to landfill. That is on top of the reforms we are delivering to simplify recycling for all households and businesses, including introducing food waste collections from next April and encouraging reduced and recyclable packaging.
The Minister referred to wood stoves. Many people use wood stoves, especially those living on farms, where trees fall. It seems logical to give them the opportunity to use that resource in a sensible way. The policy that is being followed may not be fair to those who have committed themselves to using wood stoves. Has the Minister any thoughts on how their concerns can be addressed?
The hon. Member is absolutely right; wood burners are an important way for some households to heat their homes. Our upcoming consultation will focus on tighter standards for new wood-burning appliances to help reduce health impacts.
(1 month ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
It is always a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stuart. I particularly thank the hon. Member for Horsham (John Milne) for setting the scene so incredibly well and giving us all a chance to participate through his choice of debate today. It is always a pleasure to see the Minister in her place; I always look forward to hearing the Minister’s response. I know that she has no responsibility for Northern Ireland—she will be glad to hear that—although I will explain the differences between what is done here and in Northern Ireland. The Minister always gives us reassurance in her responses, and we appreciate that very much. I thank her for that.
I like to attend these debates to give a local perspective from back home, with our own water service, Northern Ireland Water. Through my constituency office, I am in frequent contact with Northern Ireland Water—almost daily and certainly twice a week. Many constituents have raised issues with me regarding pressure, no water, or access to water for new developments, so it is indeed important to be here to discuss just this. Northern Ireland Water—as the Minister and hopefully others will know—is controlled by a Government Department; it is not beholden to any water company. Therefore, the responsibility lies on the shoulders of that Department, through the Northern Ireland Assembly.
When I listen to all the stories that hon. Members have told me around here or contributed in debates, and the regular questions on this issue, it is clear to me that the Lib Dems are very strong on this subject and that they understand the issues and put forward solutions. But for us back home, there is no big chief executive getting a six or seven-figure bonus for not doing his or her job right.
Anna Dixon
As the hon. Gentleman may know, the chief exec of Yorkshire Water, while publicly not taking her bonus, took quite a large sum of money from the Kelda Holdings company. Given that lack of transparency at Yorkshire Water, does the hon. Gentleman agree that companies such as Kelda Holdings should not be involved in water, leveraging debt and handing out large secret bonuses to their chief execs?
I certainly do. I know the Minister is equally concerned about that, and I am hoping that the Minister’s response will give reassurance to the hon. Lady, and indeed to all of us, in relation to that. I think there is something obscene and immoral about these executives getting large sums of money—whatever Department it comes out of and whatever way it is manipulated to get that through—and it is good to know that the Government will be taking some measures to address that.
Jess Brown-Fuller
Will the hon. Member join me in asking the Minister to share her thoughts on the Southern Water boss having an incredible pay rise to get round the fact that bonuses for chief executives have been banned? These private companies will always find workarounds unless we change the structure of the water companies themselves.
I think the two words “immoral” and “obscene” sum up the issues that the hon. Lady has referred to, and we look forward to the Minister’s response.
In 2024, Northern Ireland Water published a new water resource plan, extending its long-term planning horizon from 25 years to 50 years, so it has in place a structure to look forward at what will happen in Northern Ireland. Our population has increased by, I think, more than 200,000 in the last 10 years. The increase has been quite significant. There have been large developments. My constituency of Strangford has experienced that. There is a development coming through in the east of the town. There will be 750 new houses, and that will add stress on the infrastructure, including the water system and all the roads. But we have to address population growth, housing demand, water usage and climate change. The plan recognises that future weather patterns are likely to include more frequent extreme events, and pledges to build resilience so that the water supply remains secure.
Dr Danny Chambers (Winchester) (LD)
This is the first time I have intervened on the hon. Member—it is normally the other way round. He mentioned climate change, and I was alarmed to read that last year Hampshire and Isle of Wight Fire and Rescue Service attended 197 outdoor fires and wildfires, which was one of the highest numbers in the whole of the UK. We are seeing water scarcity and abstraction from rivers against the backdrop of having had the 20-odd hottest years on the planet—year after year after year. It has to be acknowledged that that is affecting water scarcity as well.
The hon. Member highlights another issue in relation to climate change and the dry spells that we are having, which lead, ultimately, to the fires that take place, whether deliberately or by accident.
Spelga dam supplies most of the water for the Greater Belfast area, and that takes in the area that I live in, Strangford, and North Down, and goes down as far as South Down. I also want to refer to Lough Neagh in a few minutes. Water usage per person in Northern Ireland is rising—the hon. Member for Horsham referred to this issue in his introduction—and has exceeded 160 litres per day. The system is sensitive to dry spells. I am recalling the summer that we have just had and the Twelfth of July—this is a very important year for us Orangemen—when the weather was outstanding. So much more water was used for children’s play pools, sprinklers and watering plants. The weather should not be taken for granted and neither should the amount of water that we are using. That is what this debate is all about—how we use water better. The situation was similar to one a few years back in Northern Ireland. I remember that there was actually a hosepipe ban, involving restricted hours, to limit the amount of water that was being used. We have had drought spells in Northern Ireland in the past, but we do not really have much shortage of rain, by and large.
Water quality is also a big issue back home. Environmental concerns have been released by the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs on the safety of some of the water that it manages. Large bodies of water such as Lough Neagh, the UK’s largest freshwater lake—this has been in the headlines all over the United Kingdom, but especially in Northern Ireland—have repeatedly experienced toxic algae blooms. The issue is not isolated to just that location; it happens in other locations as well. Northern Ireland has also witnessed a risk to infrastructure and investment, which could have a direct impact on our drinking water supply. Funding constraints are always an issue, to the point that Northern Ireland Water has actually halted new wastewater connections for many new housing developments. It puts the onus on the developer to come up with the sewerage systems, come up with the water supply—come up with the infrastructure that it would normally put in—and the developer pays for that.
There are real issues regarding water scarcity back home. I always have great faith in the Minister in relation to her discussions with the relevant Minister in the Northern Ireland Assembly. I am always encouraged by the Ministers who come to these debates and whom I speak to, because when it comes to contacting the Ministers back home, by and large they have all done that. If this Minister has had that opportunity, what has been the outcome?
Water is not scarce in Northern Ireland, but there are many contributing factors that imply that the situation could get worse. On water condition and water access, more needs to be done to repair the damage and ensure that agencies such as Northern Ireland Water have the money that they need to improve our services. I look to the Minister to tell us what discussions and conversations she has had with the Ministers back home to ensure that we can address this issue centrally here at Westminster, but for the benefit of all the regions.
(1 month, 1 week ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Robin Swann
I agree. The potential loss of veterinary medicines in Northern Ireland threatens animal health and welfare. Essential vaccines and treatments may become harder to obtain, increasing disease risk and undermining herd and flock health. Our vets and farmers would be forced into reactive treatment, adding strain to veterinary capacity and raising the risk of avoidable animal suffering and public health impacts.
Pet owners will also be negatively impacted, particularly in filling veterinary prescriptions from online veterinary pharmacies, which are currently based in Great Britain and, for many, are more cost effective.
While it is always lovely to see the Minister here, there is a role for the Secretary of State, who seems to be avoiding all the questions and letters that we sent him. I have been contacted by some of my constituents about the online pharmacies, regarding not only veterinary medicines, but specific types of dog food that their pets must eat. There is no doubt that greater clarity is needed on this subject. Does the hon. Member agree that there must be greater understanding of how dog food will be impacted and of the exact provisions surrounding online pharmacies?
Robin Swann
The hon. Member raises another valid point. Northern Ireland is exposed because of the divergence caused by the terms of the Windsor framework. Our supply chains, unlike those elsewhere in the United Kingdom, are subject to the additional EU rules.
(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
It is a real pleasure, as always, to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I thank the hon. Member for Gower (Tonia Antoniazzi) for setting the scene so well, as always.
EPR is a UK-wide strategy aimed at addressing issues with waste and improving recycling. I often give a Northern Ireland perspective, and we are part of this because the EPR applies to Northern Ireland too. We have been doing our best with our local councils to encourage better recycling strategies and to get our waste management under control. EPR is a decent and progressive strategy that aims to do that. It is good to be here to give a Northern Ireland perspective to the debate, as always.
In Northern Ireland, recycling rates vary wildly between councils. I am pleased that Ards and North Down council has taken significant steps to improve waste figures across the borough where I live. Northern Ireland households produce some 1 million tonnes of waste annually, with packaging a substantial fraction of that. Before I was elected to Parliament, I was in the Assembly and on the council back home. I am going to age myself by saying that I remember when the council brought in recycling, with the introduction of the blue bins. I was not quite sure what it meant, and neither were my constituents, but now we are all focused on what we can recycle. I have my son, daughter-in-law and two grandchildren staying with me—wee Freya is seven and wee Ezra is three. At that age, they know what is to be recycled. It is incredible that at that age they are working for the future. Whenever granddad goes to put something in the bin, if I have not put it in the right bin they will tell me which the right bin is—out of the mouths of babes and sucklings does the wisdom flow.
Under EPR many producers in Northern Ireland that were previously outside heavy regulation must register and report packaging data. It is important that we have the data, because that is how we can show improvements. The Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs in Northern Ireland has suggested that many smaller businesses were unaware of or confused by the guidance around EPR, and sometimes that is the case.
I have three asks for the Minister. I welcome her to her place—I should have done that earlier; I apologise. I think we all know that she is totally committed to this, so we will get very helpful answers later in the debate. On the financial costs—packaging fees and the cost of compliance schemes, for example—small businesses often have limited liquidity. It is important that we make that point. Even modest annual EPR fees can cause strain if margins are tight or the volume of packaging is not the same. That needs to be looked at, to ensure that small businesses are not forced into closure because they cannot keep up with EPR costs. Will the Minister ensure that we can work alongside small businesses and navigate the roles that they have to play within the financial restrictions that they have?
I think of the small businesses in my constituency, which are the backbone of the community. I would hate to think that the transitional support is not there to guide them through this change, so I again ask the Minister to make sure that that support is there; I know that she has discussions with DAERA in Northern Ireland. Government must make allowances and ensure that the EPR process is as accessible as possible.
Recent data show that UK households produced around 5.6 million tonnes of packaging waste in 2023—a massive environmental burden—due to single-use packaging and over-packaging. This scheme shifts the cost of dealing with vast quantities of packaging waste from local councils and taxpayers to the producers who generate the waste in the first place, but there are also concerns about whether our recycling and waste management infrastructure is ready to cope with the increased volumes and the more stringent sorting. We have reached targets, but we want to do better, and we need a wee bit of Government help to ensure that that gets across.
There is a proportion of businesses, including some in Northern Ireland, facing disproportionate burdens under EPR, from increased costs to reporting complexity. The Government need to work alongside DAERA and the Northern Ireland Assembly to ensure that there is a pathway to accessibility and that the viability of our small businesses is not undermined. I am very grateful to the hon. Member for Gower for raising the issue today, and I look forward to engaging further. I know the Minister will engage with us all, and with the Assembly, and that is really important.
There are two things at play here. One is the recycling assessment methodology. The proposed changes for year two of the scheme are on the website already, and we will be legislating for them. I held a roundtable with packaging producers in July, and we spent the summer looking at different options. People have mentioned the different fees in Germany. Germany has a very large reliance on bring sites, so people bring their glass bottles to a place; they are not collected from the home. It is our household waste collection that makes our fees necessarily higher.
We have looked at dual-use packaging, and various proposals have been put forward, but not a single proposal had unanimous agreement. We are trying to hold the ring between packaging producers, microbreweries, supermarkets and local waste authorities. There is no simple solution to this complex problem—[Interruption.] It is hard. The previous Government devised and put forward legislation on this, and, of course, as soon as that is brought in, all the issues with it come out. We are working on that and we are meeting with them. In my box, I have a submission on proposals for how we carry on looking at that, so today’s debate will genuinely feed into my decision making on it.
In my contribution I referred to DAERA in Northern Ireland. Can the Minister engage with them—I know she probably does already—so that we can work together on progress going forward?
I thank the hon. Gentleman for reminding me of that. I know that one of the issues in Northern Ireland is doing the behaviour change and driving up recycling rates. Communication is one of the most important things, and I take on board the official Opposition’s comments about the communications on this issue. It is incredibly complicated; civil servants are dealing with a massive change programme and everyone is trying to say what matters and how it changes.
Through the simpler recycling reforms, we are asking for everyone to be able to recycle the same things in every local authority and every workplace across the country. That is a massive system change, so there will be some confusion. There will need to be management and communication of that change, and for that we are essentially reliant on our local authority partners to get those messages across. I think I am meeting with Minister Muir shortly—we meet quite a lot to discuss these issues.
The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) told a story about his grandchildren. In 2002, when we brought in the landfill tax, we had one bin—it was a black bin, and everything went in it—and the question was, “Is this ever going to work? Will recycling ever happen?”. I take great encouragement from the fact that when we tell people, “This is your bit. This is what you can do locally in your home and your kitchen to help to tackle climate change and reduce carbon emissions,” the vast majority of people want to do the right thing—even, like the hon. Gentleman, by going and picking out the things out of the bin that should be recycled; and if he has not done it, then his grandchildren will do it for him. There are a lot of encouraging stories of hope that we can tell here.
We are looking at the German model and the Austrian model as part of how we might develop on these issues in the future. This package of measures will be the foundation for unlocking the transition to a circular economy in the UK. We hope to publish our circular economy plan in short order. Everything that is in our bins affects us, but we need to look at textiles, construction and waste electricals—there are huge volumes of materials flowing through the economy that we are not capturing.
(1 month, 4 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberFly-tipping is a serious crime. It blights local communities. It blights both our beautiful countryside and, as we have heard, our urban environments. Dealing with it costs taxpayers and businesses a huge amount of money. We are supporting councils to seize and crush the vehicles of fly-tippers, forcing fly-tippers to clear up their own mess and taking steps to provide statutory fly-tipping enforcement guidance to help councils to make full and proper use of their enforcement powers.
I thank the Minister for her answers. Nobody in this House doubts her commitment to addressing this issue, and we very much welcome that and thank her for it. The discovery of the Mobuoy illegal dump in Londonderry in 2013 revealed an enormous operation involving criminals who buried vast amounts of waste. It showed the scale of the problem and the finance available. It is clear that the Northern Ireland Environment Agency has been historically underfunded and so cannot thoroughly investigate reports of incidences, which leads to more environmental waste crime. Indeed, illegal waste has been dumped in Northern Ireland through cross-border organised crime. The matter is devolved, but will the Minister commit to liaising with the Northern Ireland Assembly on how better to work together with the investigatory bodies for these crimes throughout the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland?
I thank the hon. Member for, as ever, raising an important issue for his constituents. I am sure the nature Minister meets the Northern Ireland Assembly regularly and that she can get back to the hon. Member and update him on those conversations.
(2 months ago)
Commons ChamberMr Speaker, you and I—and many others in this House—will remember that when we were younger, nothing was ever thrown out. When the cheese had blue mould, we cut off the edges and ate it. If food was coming near to the end of its time, the dog got it. Nothing was ever wasted. “Best before” dates on fresh food encourage judgment to be exercised before food is thrown out. Has consideration been given to making them law, to ensure that we do not throw away good food for no other reason than the date, which has no relevance to the quality of the food?
To be fair, the previous Government did something on food labelling and “best before” dates. There are certain rules around items such as eggs, about which we have to be much more careful. However, I share the hon. Gentleman’s view. We need to remove some of the packaging, so that people do not over-buy. We also need to teach people more about how to tackle food waste in their home, so that they do not buy more than they need, and they understand that they can freeze things like butter and cheese when they want to buy in bulk and save money.
(2 months, 1 week ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Gordon McKee (Glasgow South) (Lab)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered inequality of access to fresh and nutritious food.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Mundell, and I thank the Minister for being here today. Castlemilk is a proud and resilient community, built in the ashes of the second world war. It was first built to combat inner-city housing pressures in Glasgow. The development offered indoor plumbing, heating and what was then a vastly improved standard of living. The people who lived there built something that bricks and mortar could not: a community—a place where neighbours looked after each other’s weans, as we say in Glasgow, took in messages for grannies and coached football for the teenagers. That community spirit has built local organisations, rebuilt social housing and renovated a football stadium.
However, there is one challenge that Castlemilk has not yet overcome: the lack of a supermarket. That might sound like a simple ask, but to understand why Castlemilk does not have a supermarket, we have to take a step back. Let me paint a picture of what life is like for the 15,000 people who live in Castlemilk. It is one of the most isolated areas in Glasgow. Despite being just five miles from the city centre, there is no train station, just unreliable buses, and the nearest supermarket is three miles away. In an area where most people do not have a car, the options are a £6 return bus fare, if the bus turns up, and as a regular user of Glasgow’s buses, I can assure hon. Members that it often does not; a six-mile walk with heavy bags in the wind and rain, which I can also assure hon. Members there is lots of in Glasgow; or spending £20 on a return taxi journey.
For many people, that £20 is the choice between accessing healthy food and turning the heating on. For old people, young parents or people with disabilities, that journey can be impossible—imagine having a pram, a toddler and three shopping bags and having to get two different buses just to get fresh food.
I am sorry to hear the story that is unfolding in the hon. Gentleman’s speech. In the area he is referring to, which I do not know, are there church groups or people of faith—whatever faith that might be—who would be willing to help? Has he been able to ascertain whether they could do something for the area?
(2 months, 2 weeks ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Fleur Anderson (Putney) (Lab)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered the potential merits of banning plastic in wet wipes.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Roger. I thank colleagues across the House who have supported my campaign to ban plastic in wet wipes. I am also grateful to: the Marine Conservation Society; Thames21; World Wide Fund for Nature; Green Alliance; Water UK, which brings together all the water companies in the country; and Surfers Against Sewage, for their campaigning on this issue.
I thank the Minister for being here and for sharing my passion for cleaning up our rivers and driving this policy forward. I congratulate her on the progress she has made and look forward to hearing more about that later. After years of delay and indecision from the previous Government, it is refreshing to see real momentum. The previous Government talked about this issue since 2016, launched consultations and made promises, but failed to deliver. This Minister has shown determination and clarity, and I commend her for taking action where others stalled.
Since November 2021, I have campaigned relentlessly to ban plastic in wet wipes. I have introduced three bills in Parliament: two private Member’s Bills in 2021 and 2022 and a ten-minute-rule Bill in 2022. I raised the issue directly with the Prime Minister during questions at that time. I am proud the subject was in the Labour manifesto and I hope to hear from the Minister when the ban will be brought in for England.
All four UK nations have notified the World Trade Organisation of their intention to legislate, and Wales leads the way. Congratulations to Wales as the first country in the world to pass a ban on plastic in wet wipes, which will come into force on 18 December 2026.
I commend the hon. Lady for bringing this forward. She is right to mention the four regions. Back home in Northern Ireland, wet wipes are a major cause of what are referred to as fatbergs of non-biodegradable waste in local sewers, which leads to pollution and costly clean-ups. Although the regional Administrations should do something and legislate, there is also an onus on individuals and households to do something. Does the hon. Lady agree that a joint partnership is needed to address this issue?
Fleur Anderson
The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) has put his finger on the button, because this is about not flushing wet wipes, no matter what they are made from. Banning plastic in wet wipes is one step forward, but we need to do more. This is a UK-wide issue; no part of the UK is unaffected.
What is the problem? Why am I talking about it so obsessively? First, microplastics from wet wipes pollute our rivers, lakes and oceans. They are ingested by marine animals, from plankton to whales, disrupting feeding, growth and reproduction. Microplastics cause internal injuries, digestive blockages and reduced nutrient absorption. They leach harmful chemicals such as bisphenol A, phthalates and flame retardants. They also absorb pollutants from sea water, such as heavy metals and persistent organic pollutants, which are then released into animals’ tissues upon ingestion.
Those substances can cause hormonal disruption, immune suppression, developmental defects and death. Filter feeders, such as oysters and baleen whales—from very small to very big—are especially vulnerable. Microplastics can also alter sediment composition, affecting bottom-dwelling species, and they can destabilise entire marine ecosystems. They are very small, but they have a huge effect.
Secondly, wet wipes block sewers and drive up water bills. They form fatbergs, trigger storm overflow spills, and cost a lot. In my water company area of Thames Water, it costs £40.7 million every year to clear the blockages. That is £200 million over the current five-year investment cycle.