(1 week, 6 days ago)
Commons Chamber
Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)
I am pleased that the Liberal Democrats are leading from the front for our rural communities by having this debate. Norfolk is a rural county and a farming county. It is also a county right at the forefront of the climate and nature emergency. Right along our coastline, which is the fastest eroding in north-west Europe, we see residents facing the loss of their homes and villages facing the loss of their identity as rising sea levels increase the speed of erosion in villages such as Happisburgh and Trimingham. Our precious natural environment with rare chalk streams and species found nowhere else in the country is at risk of collapse without action on the emergency facing them.
One of our strongest allies in tackling the climate emergency is farming, and that is why the SFI is so important. Farmers are custodians of the natural environment; they care for it, they look after it and they will pass it on to generations after them. They want our natural environment to be protected and our climate to remain stable, not just for the greater good but because it is vital to keep their farms viable.
The importance of the scheme cannot be overstated. It is a crucial part of keeping our rural environments healthy and protected, and of enabling farmers to do so too. How on earth, then, can it be right that the process for securing the funding was such a catastrophe? A mad rush, online queuing and effectively a sell-out event in a matter of hours. I know the Prime Minister is keen on Manchesterism for the whole country, but I do not think my farmers knew that meant making SFI applications follow the same system as getting Oasis tickets.
That farce speaks to a much deeper issue. I strongly believe that there is a lack of understanding of the workings of rural life and rural communities because they do not fit neatly into Whitehall’s prescribed models or spreadsheets. Securing funding for sustainable land management might make the difference between a farm being able to employ someone to work the land and not. If that person is not employed, they will not bring their family to the local village to live. That means that perhaps their children do not attend the village school, which then cannot make the numbers work within the funding formula. Those young people would not be able to stay and start a family themselves even if we were to tackle the cost of living crisis, which is significantly sharper the further from a city someone is. When working-age people cannot afford to live and thrive in rural and coastal areas, everybody loses.
As things stand, our communities are as vulnerable to erosion as our coastline, and we need powerful representation at the heart of Government to stand up for them. Just like in our natural environment, our rural communities are deeply interconnected. We are an ecosystem: we rely on symbiotic relationships, on food chains and on a stable environment. When the science of rural life is disregarded and the knock-on effects are ignored, we end up with calamitous decisions such as this.
So much of this situation is down to how Whitehall works, or does not. Food security, climate change, coastal erosion, flooding, farming policy, environmental protection, rural communities—in North Norfolk all our affairs are rural. Yet real change on these issues cannot be handled by DEFRA alone. Those are the things that matter to people, to the lives we lead, and they cut across the silos of Government. I firmly believe that if we had a better understanding of rural life across Whitehall, disasters such as the one we saw with the SFI scheme would just not be allowed to happen. An urgent, fundamental reassessment of how the state is supposed to work for rural communities is needed, because at the moment it simply does not.
I call John Cooper, after whom we will drop the time limit to three minutes.
(4 months ago)
Commons ChamberMy hon. Friend raises an important point. We are continuing to work with the Government, the regulator and industry to review the scheme eligibility criteria, including considering options to better support leaseholders.
Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)
Flood Re does need change. However, the Minister has not announced a key change that would make a difference for thousands of households in my North Norfolk constituency: establishing a “Coast Re” scheme for those homes at threat of erosion. They find themselves at huge risk and have no financial backing if the worst happens and they lose their home. My call is supported by the cross-party report of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee. There is not much coastal erosion in Manchester, but can the Minister please make a pitch for “Coast Re” with her new boss in the coming weeks?
I thank the hon. Gentleman and the EFRA Committee for their work. He will have heard our commitment to the £30 million coastal fund, which is looking at what we should do about managing coastal erosion and the risks of coastal flooding.
(4 months, 1 week ago)
Commons Chamber
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?
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.
(10 months, 3 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
Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stuart. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Horsham (John Milne) on securing a debate on this vital issue. The fact that I previously secured a debate in this place on flooding in Norfolk and our problems with too much water, and now I am complaining about the places with not enough, just highlights the range of challenges that North Norfolk faces. In a rural community such as mine, there is an ongoing battle with a range of environmental factors just to keep livelihoods and businesses functioning as they are.
Water scarcity is a big issue for the farming community, which is large in North Norfolk. Farmers I speak to tell me of the significant challenges they face with water abstraction, and how it is impacting our food production and, importantly, our food security. As with greater flooding, the root cause of greater water scarcity is the climate emergency.
Climate change is making our rivers and watercourses more unpredictable, leading to changes in the patterns that have served farmers well for decades. As a result, many farmers want to build small on-farm reservoirs to give them greater surety of access to water, which would also ensure that our rivers do not become over-abstracted. However, for many farmers, that is incredibly difficult to do. Permitted development rights in this regard are outdated and unhelpful; they need to be urgently reviewed to assess how we can make it easier and simpler for farmers to secure access to water.
This issue was raised as part of the discussions on the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, and an amendment was sent back to us from the other place to ask us to consider it again. The Minister in the Lords told the other place that
“We recognise the need to look at those permitted development regulations, and we will return to them.” —[Official Report, House of Lords, 20 October 2025; Vol. 849, c. 520.]
In the debate on those Lords amendments, I raised the concerns of my farmers with the Minister for Housing and Planning, and asked him whether we could expect a timeline for the Government to return to and review the regulations. Hansard reported that he “indicated dissent”, which is a rather diplomatic way of describing the fact that he shook his head vigorously.
I hope that the Minister responding to today’s debate will be slightly less dissenting than her colleague. On matters of water, I know that she is well respected in the House and in my community, too, so we look to her for some clarity and guidance.
Water attenuation also helps us to manage the other end of the spectrum, flooding. It is farcical that some of the same farmers who struggle with abstraction are then also hit by floods in other parts of the year, but cannot do anything about them. Attenuation on farmland also prevents floodwater from running off into the residential communities nearby, reducing flood damage to homes and businesses.
We could tackle two great issues here, but the Government will have to act. Farmers already face many challenges in keeping their businesses afloat and keeping our communities fed, but this is a burden that can be relieved, and it is in the power of the Government to do so. For once, I am not even asking for money—I am just asking for the Government to look again at the current regulations to see what they can do to help our farmers out.
However, it is not only farming businesses who find water scarcity limiting their development. Over the county border in Suffolk, we have seen some areas slapped with a ban on new non-domestic connections due to water scarcity, and we are incredibly fearful of the same thing happening in Norfolk.
I have spoken at length about the steps that we need to take to unleash the rural economic powerhouse; such limitations are so damaging to expanding businesses in rural communities, and yet another challenge that drives a wedge between rural businesses and urban businesses. That challenge would not present itself to someone expanding their business in London or Manchester, but in rural areas we are subjected to draconian restrictions on free enterprise because of years of water sector mismanagement. The situation cannot be allowed to continue—or, by the time restrictions are eased, there simply will not be any more rural businesses trying to expand.
As a rural and a coastal MP, much of my community is built around water: our precious coastline, the chalk streams running through our villages and the beautiful broads that attract so many visitors to Norfolk. Climate change now threatens to turn that water from an asset into a struggle. I hope the Government recognise the severity of the issue we face and take the necessary steps to protect my community in the years to come.
(11 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberOn 9 September, the Serious Fraud Office secured £1.1 million from the sale of a Lake district house in an investigation involving its first use of an unexplained wealth order, connected to the assets of the wife of convicted fraudster Timothy Schools. This innovative use of the legislation showcases the SFO’s resolve to pursue criminal assets wherever they are hidden and explore new methods to recover funds for victims and the public purse.
Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)
One way the Serious Fraud Office can be made more effective is through access to more registers of beneficial overseas interests. We know that fraudsters, tax dodgers and crooks are exploiting the financial secrecy in those territories to hide their ill-gotten gains. Does the Solicitor General agree that this would empower the Serious Fraud Office to secure more prosecutions for economic crime, get dodged taxes back to the Treasury and let us invest more in public services in North Norfolk?
I am grateful for that question. The Serious Fraud Office is constantly looking at ways to clamp down on fraud and economic crime. For example, the SFO is committed to working more closely with French and Swiss partners through the international anti-corruption prosecutorial taskforce, to ensure that we are robustly tackling cross-border economic crime, and to protect our future prosperity as part of our plan for change.
(1 year, 5 months 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
Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)
I congratulate the hon. Member for Mid Norfolk (George Freeman) on securing the debate. As in much of the country, we in North Norfolk have been told by the Government that we need to identify significantly more sites for housing. Let me be absolutely clear: we do need more homes, including homes that local people can actually afford, so that they are not stuck waiting endlessly on housing lists or left in temporary accommodation, but rushing to build homes without proper provision for flood alleviation or sustainable drainage would be a bad idea and incredibly costly. Let us imagine a young couple who, after years of saving and planning, finally moving into their first home, but it floods because corners were cut and developers were not held to account. That is not just a policy failure; it is a failure of basic fairness.
That failure does not just affect new homeowners. If we add more pressure to our creaking infrastructure without investment, we risk backed-up drains and flooding for the people who have lived in those communities for years. The previous Government promised to implement schedule 3 of the Flood and Water Management Act 2010, which would require developers to include sustainable drainage systems, but they never delivered.
One place that would benefit hugely from such a system is Ludham where, following the Government’s new mandated targets, a development proposal for 12 houses has expanded to 60 houses. That has caused significant concern for locals due to the history of flooding in the area. If it were to go ahead, it could be feasible only with real action on the surface water and drainage issues that the area faces.
Although North Norfolk district council does an excellent job of pushing developers as hard as it can, it needs the Government to provide it with the legislative teeth to achieve more. I hope that the Minister is in conversation with her counterparts at the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government about how we make sure that there is joined-up thinking about flooding in future planning legislation.
Mike Martin (Tunbridge Wells) (LD)
Hawkhurst parish council and Southern Water recently came to see me to complain about a number of developers in my constituency who have mixed surface run-off with foul water, which is illegal. Does my hon. Friend agree that, although we of course need big housing developments, if developers are proven to have illegally mixed surface run-off and foul water when building them, they should have to make good what they did?
Steff Aquarone
Unquestionably, and a slightly more sympathetic approach should be taken to historical instances in which householders’ surface water drains have been connected to foul water systems, which they may not even realise. For developments that have been built since that law, it is absolutely unquestionable that developers should do that.
Finally, we must consider seriously the impact of man-made climate change on flooding. When we place responsibilities on developers, we must make sure that new developments do not deal just with the floods of the past or those of today, but with the worst floods that are yet to come. Henry Cator is chair of the Norfolk Strategic Flooding Alliance, which my constituency neighbour, the hon. Member for Mid Norfolk, mentioned. His voice is given deserved reverence in Norfolk when speaking about these issues, and he has said that climate change will create a new level of extremes that we must be ready for. Simply planning for the current levels will be wasted in years to come.
I look forward to working with hon. Members on both sides of the House on this issue. It needs proper cross-functional work from the Government if we are to ensure that the much-needed homes of tomorrow are built sustainably and that the circumstances of the communities that those houses will serve and join are protected and improved.
Several hon. Members rose—
(1 year, 7 months ago)
Commons ChamberI am sure that my hon. Friend’s cats, who I am told are called Clem Cattlee and Mo Meowlam, will be delighted to hear that the Government are looking very closely at the Animal Welfare Committee’s opinion on the welfare implications of current and emergent feline breeding practices. I can assure them that we are carefully considering the committee’s recommendations.
Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)
The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. Looking ahead, the future can be very exciting for farming, but as the Secretary of State said, we have to establish farming as a profitable sector. We will work with the hon. Gentleman’s farmers to ensure that vision is realised.
(1 year, 7 months ago)
Commons ChamberIt should have been clear to people for a long, long time that this transition was coming. It was the move away from a system based on entitlements for every farmer through the basic payment scheme to a system that relied on people applying to what was essentially a fixed budget. I agree with the hon. Lady and many other Members that the way the system was set up did not allow for proper prioritisation or fairness in allocation. That is what we would like to change in future, but it is the system that we inherited, and I am afraid that that is where we are at the moment. The House should remember that the majority are already in schemes, and to those who have not yet come forward, I gently say for the future that the advice in these kinds of schemes is that it is better to apply early rather than to wait.
Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)
The sudden completion of the SFI scheme will be a worry for many farmers and local people. I am also very concerned by reports that the NFU was given only 30 minutes’ notice on such a huge change. To give my local farmers the confidence that they need, can the Minister assure them that DEFRA will learn lessons from the poor communication and lack of clarity that have plagued this and past initiatives?
Let me repeat the point: this is not about communication. If we suddenly say that a scheme with a fixed amount of money in it will close in two or three weeks, we would get a surge in applications and have to close it the same day. That is a flaw in the way the scheme was originally designed, and we want to do better in future.
(1 year, 8 months ago)
General Committees
Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. I will make some brief remarks, which I hope the Minister can respond to. My constituency of North Norfolk suffers heavily from flooding. Many of my constituents have benefited from the Flood Re scheme, so I wholeheartedly welcome this measure, which will increase the funds available to it. I hope that the Minister, in her closing remarks, will update us on her confidence that risk-reflective pricing will be delivered by the time Flood Re exits the market and her plans to ensure that that is the case over subsequent years.
The key thing that drove me to speak in the debate is an omission from the regulations that relates to those affected by coastal erosion. I will be very brief. The Flood Re scheme is providing many tangible benefits to those affected by flooding in North Norfolk, but the residents of villages such as Happisburgh, Trimingham and Overstrand have no similar protections from the threat of coastal erosion. I hope the Minister might consider bringing forward provisions to set up a coastal reinsurance scheme, to ensure that those affected by coastal erosion have insurance protection from the impact of erosion on their property. It is a problem affecting only a few thousand households, so it is far from a huge undertaking for the Government and industry, but for all those it impacts it causes daily worry and fear for the future.
If the Minister cannot make such a commitment to the Committee today, which I would understand, I would be delighted if she would be willing to meet me and residents in my area who are facing the challenges of coastal erosion, to discuss what we can do to ensure they are well protected. I would be delighted to welcome her to one of those villages to see the impact of erosion at first hand.
I am grateful to you, Ms Vaz, for allowing me to make these comments, and I look forward to hearing a positive and reassuring response for the Minister.
(1 year, 10 months 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
Anna Sabine
I am sorry to hear about what is happening in Ilminster; it sounds very frustrating. I will talk a little more about banking hubs and why they are a good thing that we need more of.
Prosper Frome, an organisation in my constituency that focuses on improving financial accessibility, had been advocating for a banking hub for over a year before it was announced by Link and Cash Access UK in September. That was a great relief to residents, who were about to see their final bank close, but Jean and Sam at Prosper Frome believe that the scope for banking hubs is too narrow, and have been lobbying hard to get a banking hub included as part of a much wider community project, enabling the hub to be multi-purpose. Making banking hubs more diverse widens their appeal and can make banking and financial inclusion the anchor of the kinds of community third spaces that many towns currently lack.
Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)
I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this important debate. She is right to say that banking hubs are about more than just access to cash. In the market towns of North Norfolk, our small businesses need access to banking services, which full banking hubs can provide. Does my hon. Friend understand why residents of North Walsham are so frustrated that the outcome of their recent cash review was simply to give them a cash and deposit machine located in the local fried chicken shop?
Anna Sabine
That sounds very frustrating; I am sorry to hear it. I will talk about the importance of face-to-face contact in banking.
Shutting branches and opening banking hubs is currently financially efficient for banks, but there is a real risk that those banking hubs could close after a few years once the banks stop saving money and see the hubs as a drain on their profits instead of a benefit. We need reassurance about the long-term provision of banking hubs and a requirement on banks to keep funding them on an ongoing basis.