Water: National Grid Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateDepartment: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Lord Pearson of Rannoch
Main Page: Lord Pearson of Rannoch (Non-affiliated - Life peer)Department Debates - View all Lord Pearson of Rannoch's debates with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
(12 years, 1 month ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Taylor of Holbeach
The noble Lord made a valuable contribution to last night’s debate. The point I was making concerned the construction of new reservoir capacity, rather than taking water from existing reservoirs, and I think I should make that clear. I am not fully briefed on how the Barnett formula might apply in respect of the Bill which this House passed last night and any arrangements that might be made with Wales, so I cannot help the noble Lord on that point. However, I shall write to him if he will allow me to do so.
Lord Pearson of Rannoch
My Lords, is not one of the more obvious benefits of our EU membership the fact that we have been forced to spend at least £65,000 million, or £65 billion, on three EU water purification directives when there was nothing wrong with our water before? No one was getting tummy ache. Would not that sum now be useful for infrastructure and supply?
Lord Taylor of Holbeach
No, I cannot accept the noble Lord’s premise. The Government owe it to all consumers to make sure that the water is of the highest standards and there can be no derogation from that obligation. The noble Lord is quite right that infrastructure costs money, but the water companies can be incentivised to provide just that.