Independent Water Commission

Steve Reed Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd June 2025 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Steve Reed)]

Today, the Independent Water Commission has published an interim report setting out its preliminary conclusions on water sector reform.

In October 2024, the UK and Welsh Governments appointed Sir Jon Cunliffe, former Deputy Governor of the Bank of England, to chair the commission and make recommendations to reset the water sector in England and Wales.

The Government set the Independent Water Commission a considerable task in reviewing the water sector in its entirety. Our water system must serve both its customers and the environment, but we inherited one that did neither. I thank Sir Jon for his interim report.

Today’s report focuses on five key areas:

Strategic direction and planning

Legislative framework

Regulatory reform

Company structures, ownership, governance and management

Infrastructure and asset health.

I remain of the view that transformative change across the water sector is needed. We need to create the conditions to attract future long-term investment, ensure resilient finances and contribute to economic growth, while supporting affordable customer bills.

The Government will review Sir Jon’s interim findings in detail and look forward to receiving his final recommendations later this summer.

We will respond in full later this year following the commission’s final recommendations. This will include a detailed transition plan for the water sector. This will form the basis of further legislation to reset the sector and attract the investment we need to ensure its resilience for decades to come.

[HCWS677]

Thames Water

Steve Reed Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Victoria Atkins (Louth and Horncastle) (Con)]

(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if he will make a statement on Thames Water’s financial situation.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Steve Reed)]

I thank the right hon. Lady for securing this urgent question. I want to begin by making clear that Thames Water remains stable, and the Government are carefully monitoring the situation. Customers can be assured that there will be no disruption to water supply.

Thames Water is a commercial entity currently engaged in an equity raise, and KKR pulled out of that process earlier today. As Thames Water has said, the company will continue to work with its creditors as part of the equity raise to improve its financial position. There remains a market-led solution on the table, and we expect the company and its directors to continue the process that is under way and fix the financial resilience of the company in the interests of its customers. I want to be clear that the Government are prepared for all eventualities across our regulated industries and stand ready to intervene through the use of a special administration regime, should this be required to ensure the continued provision of vital public services.

The situation facing Thames is taking place within a wider context. Only last year, we saw record levels of pollution in our rivers, lakes and seas. It is clear that our water system is broken. We have already passed legislation so that the regulator can ban the undeserved multimillion-pound bonuses that so outraged the public, and we have further strengthened accountability through the introduction of up to two years in prison for polluting water bosses who break the law. We have increased the regulator’s resources and launched a record 81 criminal investigations into water companies, and we have followed the “polluter pays” principle, meaning that companies that are successfully prosecuted will pay for the cost of that prosecution so that further prosecutions can follow. We have worked with the water companies to secure £104 billion of private sector investment to rebuild our broken water infrastructure. That means new sewage pipes, fewer leaking pipes, and new reservoirs across the country, as we work to end the sewage scandal that we inherited from the previous Government.

I launched the Independent Water Commission, under Sir Jon Cunliffe, so that it could outline recommendations for a once-in-a generation opportunity to transform our water industry and ensure that it delivers the service that the public deserve and our environment needs, and today Sir Jon published an interim report setting out the commission’s preliminary conclusions. The Government will respond in full to the commission’s final report in due course, and will outline further steps to benefit customers, attract investment and clean up our waterways.

Whether we are talking about Thames Water or about other companies serving other parts of the country, the era of profiting from pollution is over. This Government will clean up our waterways for good.

[Victoria Atkins]

Thank you, Mr Speaker, for granting this urgent question. May I begin by correcting the Secretary of State? When he refers to private sector investment, he is in fact referring to the bill increases that each and every one of us will pay—£31 a year—so when he talks about private sector investment, he means bill payers’ investment.

Some 16 million residents and bill payers will have been concerned by this morning’s news that the private equity firm KKR has pulled out of its rescue deal with Thames Water. According to a source close to KKR, one of the reasons it pulled out was its concern about negative rhetoric directed at Thames Water and the rest of the industry in recent weeks by the Secretary of State and other Ministers. In other words, the Secretary of State and his Ministers have talked themselves out of this rescue deal. I am bound to say, if only they could do the same thing with the Chagos islands deal.

On which date did the Secretary of State discover that KKR was thinking of pulling out of this deal, and what involvement did he have in the phone calls over the weekend between KKR and No. 10 spads to try to rescue it? I ask because in recent weeks there have been briefings to the press that he is considering temporary renationalisation. The Treasury has apparently instructed him that he will need to find up to £4 billion from the budget of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to cover the cost of this manoeuvre. Let me put that in context: the entire farming budget for this year is roughly £2.5 billion.

Can the Secretary of State therefore explain the options to which he has just referred, and do they include a plan for temporary renationalisation? From which budget would a temporary renationalisation come: DEFRA or central funds? That question is particularly relevant in view of the upcoming spending review, on which there has been detailed briefing, including the suggestion that the DEFRA budget is to be slashed.

The Secretary of State referred to the Cunliffe report, which we will of course look at very carefully, but can he confirm—this recalls yesterday’s shambolic defence review announcement—that there is no funding for this latest review, and that it will do nothing to resolve the immediate issue of Thames Water’s solvency, which he has mishandled, just as he has mishandled the family farm tax, the fishing industry and the sustainable farming incentive?

[Steve Reed]

I am grateful to the shadow Secretary of State for making it clear to the House that she does not understand the principles of private sector investment, and neither is it particularly clever to stand at the Opposition Dispatch Box and make up figures to attack.

This Government stand ready for all eventualities, but I will make no apology for tackling the poor behaviour of water companies and water company executives that took place under the previous Government and that we are correcting. We even heard stories, which have been confirmed to me by water companies, of previous Conservative Secretaries of State shouting and screaming at water company bosses but not actually changing the law to do anything about the bonuses that they were able to pay themselves. This Government are taking action, working with customers, water companies and investors to ensure that we have a successful water sector that works for the environment, customers and investors in a way that it completely failed to do under the previous Conservative Government.

[Clive Lewis (Norwich South) (Lab)]

Let me begin by drawing Members’ attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests.

Let us be clear that the collapse of KKR’s rescue deal is not a blip; it is a reckoning—a moment that exposes the complete bankruptcy of the privatised water model. This morning’s interim Cunliffe review of the water sector confirms the scale of the crisis. It describes our water system—a regulated statutory monopoly—as being too risky for investors now. It did not seem to be too risky when shareholders were siphoning off billions in dividends while letting the pipes rot, the rivers choke and the debt pile up. The only people truly at risk now are bill payers, who face a 35% real-terms price hike in the next five years—and not just to fund clean water or climate resilience, because half of it is to boost investor return. So I ask my right hon. Friend again: when will the Government stop fiddling, put Thames Water into special administration, strip out the debt, and begin the job of returning our water system—not just Thames Water—to public ownership?

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Mr Lewis, I was very generous in bringing you in so early, but I did not expect you to make a statement yourself.

[Steve Reed]

I thank my hon. Friend for his question. I reassure him that the Government stand ready for any eventuality and will take action as required. We are not looking at nationalisation because it would cost over £100 billion of public money, which would have to be taken away from other public services, such as the national health service, to be given to the owners of the water companies. It would take years to unpick the current model of ownership, during which time pollution would get worse. We know that nationalisation is not the answer, because we need only look at the situation in Scotland to see that.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD)]

Under the Conservatives, Thames Water was allowed to pile up nearly £20 billion of debt while pumping sewage into rivers and lakes for 300,000 hours just last year, but rewarding its shareholders with £130 million of dividends. Today, Thames Water’s customers have been left in the lurch, and the Conservatives seem to think it is because we have all been a bit too mean about Thames Water.

The price must not be paid by the customers. Will the Secretary of State ensure that those who were responsible for making dreadful decisions rightly bear the cost instead? Is it not right for the company now to go into special administration, and to emerge from administration as a public interest company? Is it not also right that all water companies, including the likes of United Utilities in the north-west, move to a public interest model, so that caring for the environment matters more than profit?

My hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Charlie Maynard) has done more to hold Thames Water to account than Ofwat, this Government or their predecessor. Does that not prove that regulation has failed, and that Ofwat should be abolished, with a new, powerful clean water authority given the power to clean up our lakes and rivers, and our industry?

[Steve Reed]

I thank the hon. Member for his question. There is a procedure to be followed for special administration, and we stand ready should that be required, in this case or any other case involving the regulated industries. He may have had a chance today to look at the interim report, on which Sir Jon Cunliffe is inviting comments ahead of the final report in about a month. That report will form the basis of future legislation to fix the regulatory mess we inherited from the Conservative party.

[Clive Efford (Eltham and Chislehurst) (Lab)]

Only the Conservatives could come here and defend Thames Water. The rest of the country has seen what an appalling performance this company has given during the 35 years since privatisation. I think it is time we put this company out of its misery, but we must do so in a way that does not bring the debts it has run up on to the taxpayer or the bill payers. Can my right hon. Friend say whether one of his options is preparing for that eventuality?

[Steve Reed]

I thank my hon. Friend for his question. We are prepared for every eventuality, as I have outlined, and we will take whatever action is necessary to ensure the continuing supply of water to customers in the Thames Water region and elsewhere.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee.

[Mr Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland) (LD)]

Under the £3 billion loan that Thames Water has negotiated, the first drawdown of £1.5 billion will be on 30 June, which is less than four weeks away. That is contingent on Thames Water having a lock-up agreement in respect of a recapitalisation transaction, but it now has no partner to provide that. It of course chose to proceed with just one option, which has now walked away. Who does the Secretary of State think that Thames Water will now turn to—it is not exactly going to be negotiating from a position of strength—and what are the Government going to do if it cannot meet that 30 June deadline?

[Steve Reed]

There remains a market-led solution on the table, and we expect Thames Water to follow through with the process to ensure it is able to fix the problems it is currently facing.

[Dame Meg Hillier (Hackney South and Shoreditch) (Lab/Co-op)]

My constituents and other Thames Water users are fed up to the back teeth with having to pay more to help this company, which has failed them so badly. Obviously, the Secretary of State has to have special administration on the table, but we know that would be hugely costly to the taxpayer. I know it is hard to talk about hypotheticals, but if he does go down that route, will he have the cost to individual customers front and centre, so they do not actually have to pay more for that process?

[Steve Reed]

Yes, I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. I share her anger at the fact that bill rises were so high this year, but that is because the Conservative party did not take the necessary action to ensure that the water system was properly maintained. As anyone who has ever owned or lived in a house will know, if people see a crack in a wall and leave it for 10 years without fixing it, the problem gets much worse and the cost of repairing it is much more. In a very real sense, the public have been left to pay the price of Tory failure.

[Joy Morrissey (Beaconsfield) (Con)]

Will the Secretary of State confirm that the Government will ensure that Thames Water stands by its commitment to upgrade our sewage network in South Buckinghamshire? Specifically, will he ensure that the upgrade promised for the Little Marlow sewage treatment works in my constituency is delivered on time?

[Steve Reed]

I am happy to give the hon. Member that reassurance. The Government expect Thames Water to carry through on the full range of programmes agreed as part of the last price review process.

[Helen Hayes (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)]

My constituents have been comprehensively failed by Thames Water for many years. We saw the catastrophic flood in Herne Hill in 2013, when many local businesses had to close permanently. Vulnerable customers were let down during the “beast from the east” freeze-thaw event, being left without water for days and days at a time. There are endless roadworks in the same locations where it has repeatedly failed to invest adequately in its infrastructure. Now my constituents are seeing bills go up by way more than the Ofwat determination. It is clear that this organisation is not fit for purpose. What options is my right hon. Friend considering to bring this misery to an end, and to put customers back at the heart of Thames Water’s operations?

[Steve Reed]

I thank my hon. Friend for her question. I am sure that she will have seen today the interim report from Sir Jon Cunliffe’s water commission, which outlines his initial thoughts on how to fix the broken regulatory system. The Government have also increased compensation from what we inherited from the previous Government, so her constituents who suffer from the kinds of problems she outlined can expect far better compensation as a result of this Government’s actions.

[Richard Tice (Boston and Skegness) (Reform)]

I declare an interest as a Thames Water customer. The reality is that Thames Water is bankrupt. It cannot pay its debts and it cannot meet its legal obligations to Ofwat, the state and its customers. Therefore, surely the right thing to do is to put it out of its misery, and put it into special administration for £1. The shareholders and the debt holders know—caveat emptor—that they have all blown their dough. If the Government buy it for £1, which would be a good deal for the taxpayer, it will not have to pay huge, egregious rates of interest and taxpayers and customers will be the beneficiaries.

[Steve Reed]

I respectfully point out to the hon. Gentleman that Reform cares so much about the problems facing our water system that it did not mention it even once in its general election manifesto. What he is proposing—nationalising the water sector—would cost in excess of £100 billion, which is money that Reform would have to take away from the services, such as the national health service, on which his constituents rely. I think they would be very ill-served by him if he were to take away that funding, and push up the waiting lists we have just started to see coming down as a result of this Government’s investment.

[Liam Conlon (Beckenham and Penge) (Lab)]

As a neighbouring MP, the Secretary of State will know the level of outrage in my constituency at the continuous failures of Thames Water, including the five-day period earlier this year during which residents were left without water. Given that this Labour Government have introduced measures to make polluting water company executives criminally liable and to ban unjustified bonuses, does he agree that we are finally seeing accountability brought back to the water sector?

[Steve Reed]

I thank my hon. Friend, and indeed neighbour, for his question, and I know what a strong water champion he is on behalf of his constituents. His constituents, much like everybody else’s, will now benefit from increased compensation when there are failures. I agree with him that one of the problems we inherited from the previous Government was having a failing system with no accountability at all, so it is quite right that we have introduced new criminal liabilities and potentially prison time for polluting water bosses, and that we have given the regulator the power to ban the unfair and undeserved multimillion-pound bonuses they got away with under the Conservatives.

[Charlie Maynard (Witney) (LD)]

Does the Secretary of State agree with Thames Water’s own expert adviser Teneo—on page 193 of the expert advice report—that the ultimate cost to the Government if the company goes into special administration will be zero?

[Steve Reed]

The point is that there is a market-led solution on the table and I expect Thames Water to follow through on that.

[Yuan Yang (Earley and Woodley) (Lab)]

It is possible for an American private equity company to walk away from Thames Water, but my constituents cannot. When water company bosses fail, it is our residents who pay: in sewage discharged into rivers and in their crumbling pipes and drainage. I am therefore glad that the Government have taken bonuses off of failing bosses, but what more can the Government do to tilt incentives towards investment in our infrastructure so that my constituents get some relief?

[Steve Reed]

The problems that my hon. Friend points to are to do with a lack of investment throughout the entire period of the previous Government, so I was delighted that just before Christmas we secured a commitment to £104 billion of private sector investment. That is the single biggest investment in our water sector in its entire history and will be the second biggest private sector investment into any part of the economy under this Government. We are serious about clearing up the Conservatives’ sewage mess.

[Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)]

Thames Waters is a massive stakeholder in my constituency, and the biggest landowner. We have half of London’s drinking water in four raised reservoirs and we have a fair chunk of the Thames, from Staines to Sunbury. For 11 months now, I have been trying to get a meeting with Thames Water. I appreciate that it has had one or two other things on its mind recently, but can the Secretary of State use his good offices to encourage Thames Water to meet me?

[Steve Reed]

I agree with the hon. Gentleman; the water companies—Thames Water and all the others—should of course engage with MPs who are seeking to represent the interests of their constituents. I would be very happy to approach Thames Water on his behalf to ensure that he gets the meeting he seeks.

[Daniel Francis (Bexleyheath and Crayford) (Lab)]

My constituents, like those of my colleagues, are gravely concerned about the increase in their water bills, but I am also as concerned as them about the impact on business. Crayford town centre was closed again last month—the third year on the trot—because of rotting infrastructure. What assurances can the Secretary of State give to my constituents that no matter what happens, we will continue to invest in infrastructure to ensure that those kinds of closures finally end?

[Steve Reed]

My hon. Friend will be aware of the action we have taken through the Water (Special Measures) Act 2025 to give the regulator the power it needs to ban the unjustified bonuses that water bosses were able to pay themselves under the previous Government. The era where they could profit from pollution ended when that Government ended.

[Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

The Green party has campaigned for the public ownership of water since the year dot, unlike certain cynical opportunists behind me on the Reform Benches. We know allowing privatised monopolies to control water leaves infrastructure crumbling, waterways running with sewage, sky-high bills, and shareholders laughing all the way to the bank. Given this obscene and fundamental failure, why will the Government not even consider bringing water back into public hands, where it belongs?

[Steve Reed]

The problems facing the water sector are to do with failures of governance and regulation. We need to tackle the actual problems, not the imagined ones. If we were to seek to nationalise the water sector, that would cost in excess of £100 billion that would have to be taken away from services such as the national health service or education. It would take years to unpick the current model of ownership, during which time there would be no investment and water pollution would get worse. From the example of Scotland, we know that nationalisation is not the answer, because there are also problems with pollution there. We will ensure that our priority is pure water, not the purity of the hon. Lady’s ideology.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

As Thames Water dumped sewage into the Cut and the Blackwater in my constituency, the Conservative Government washed their hands not in it, but of it. This Government are acting to ban bonuses, to issue the biggest fine we have seen from Ofwat and to bring in criminal liability. As we seek more action to get to grips with the Thames Water crisis, will the Secretary of State commit to putting two things at the forefront of his mind: first, our environment and cleaning the sewage; and, secondly, making sure that customers and our constituents get a fair deal?

[Steve Reed]

I am sure my hon. Friend will be pleased to know that we have launched 81 criminal investigations into water companies for pollution and other failings—a dramatic increase on what we inherited from the previous Government. I am sure he will recall that they cut the resources to the regulator in half. Despite the appalling financial inheritance, we increased resources by 9% at the Budget and we have now introduced the polluter pays principle, so that where there is a successful prosecution of a water company, that company will pay the price of the investigation, so that further investigations and prosecutions can follow.

[Munira Wilson (Twickenham) (LD)]

Thames Water is teetering on the brink, investors are running for the hills and my constituents are paying the price for its mismanagement through soaring bills. All the while, it is spending hundreds of millions of pounds on a proposed sewage recycling project at Teddington lock on the River Thames in my constituency, which will at best be used every two years and which some cynics suggest is designed entirely to boost its balance sheet. This morning, the Secretary of State committed to my constituent Ian McNuff that he would come and visit the site to look at the impact of the proposed project. Will he reiterate that commitment today? My hon. Friend and neighbour the Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney) and I would be delighted to welcome him.

[Steve Reed]

As I said to the hon. Lady’s constituent, I would be happy to visit if my diary allows. In any case, I would be very happy to ensure she gets a meeting with the Minister for Water to discuss her concerns around Teddington.

[Jayne Kirkham (Truro and Falmouth) (Lab/Co-op)]

Does the Secretary of State agree that it comes to something when the Opposition seem to be suggesting that Thames Water should maybe not be sanctioned, because that may put its preferred bidder at risk, when it had rejected others? Jon Cunliffe suggested stronger regulation, not weaker. Is it not clear that the direction that this Government are going in must be the right one?

[Steve Reed]

I agree. The whole mess we inherited was due to the previous Government letting the water companies get away with it; people were paying themselves multimillion-pound bonuses as they profited from pollution. That ended when the Conservative Government were defeated. We are putting the water companies under tough special measures and we will focus them on serving their customers and the environment, not themselves.

[Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)]

Does the Secretary of State think that the situation might improve if Thames Water executives were obliged to sign up to performance-related pay?

[Steve Reed]

That is a very interesting proposal. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will suggest it to Sir Jon Cunliffe, who is currently looking at a better way to regulate.

[Rebecca Long Bailey (Salford) (Lab)]

I note the Secretary of State’s reluctance to entertain public ownership, but I draw his attention to research from the University of Greenwich that shows that bringing water into public ownership would pay for itself within about seven years and that, after that, it would save the public purse up to £2.5 billion a year. Is the Secretary of State aware that immediately bringing Thames Water into special administration and permanent public ownership would cut the company’s massive debt mountain in half, stop the payment of huge dividends and debt payments into the future, and within just several years actually start turning a profit for the people of this country?

[Steve Reed]

I beg to slightly correct my hon. Friend. Special administration is not nationalisation and nationalisation would cost in excess of £100 billion—money we would have to take away from other public services to hand to the bosses of the water companies who caused this mess in the first place. I do not think taxpayers would welcome that.

[Freddie van Mierlo (Henley and Thame) (LD)]

I received a note in my inbox today from the Government engagement lead for north Thames valley that says that Thames Water will run out of money in summer 2026. Will the Government commit to taking Thames Water into special administration and unburden the company of its debt via its creditors, or will Members be required to block their diaries for summer 2026 for another recess recall?

[Steve Reed]

As I am sure the hon. Gentleman is aware, there are procedures to follow that would require any regulated company to go into special administration. As things stand, Thames Water remains stable and there is a market-led solution on the table. We expect Thames Water to follow through on that.

[Josh Fenton-Glynn (Calder Valley) (Lab)]

This is another example of the previous Government’s failure to get a grip of our water system. Meanwhile, just last week this Government fined Yorkshire Water £350,000. My constituents are really upset to see their water bills going up. Can my right hon. Friend assure me that he will never let our national infrastructure get as bad as those on the Conservative Benches did?

[Steve Reed]

Absolutely; we intend to clear up the mess the previous Government made. The fine that my hon. Friend refers to—indeed, there have been others—is the result of the additional criminal investigations we have launched, which follow on from the additional resources we have given the regulator so that it can investigate what is going wrong and then take action. What a difference between this Labour Government, who are putting our water companies under special measures, and the previous Government, who let them get away with it and line their pockets.

[Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Ind)]

I find it deeply depressing to hear the Secretary of State say that somehow or other there is a market solution there for Thames Water. We have had 35 years of excessive profits, pollution and rising bills. He knows he will have to take Thames Water into public ownership at some point. He quotes this strange figure of £100 billion in compensation, but surely if we took it into public ownership, Parliament would set the price at which we would purchase the company, taking into account excessive profits, pollution, damage and the destruction of so many people’s lives through the way Thames Water has behaved. Will the Secretary of State be tough with it for once and say that water is a human right, and that it should be publicly owned and publicly run?

[Steve Reed]

Water is indeed a human right, which is why this Government are taking every step necessary to sort out the broken water system that we inherited from the previous Government.

[Perran Moon (Camborne and Redruth) (Lab)]

The situation at Thames Water is deeply disturbing, and in my constituency of Camborne, Redruth and Hayle—the home of Surfers Against Sewage—there is now deep anxiety that this commercial insecurity will spread. With only three prosecutions and no meaningful penalties under the previous Government, is it not clear that the Conservatives prioritised the polluters instead of protecting the environment and customers?

[Steve Reed]

My hon. Friend gives me the opportunity to congratulate Surfers Against Sewage on its fantastic work highlighting the failures of the water sector under the previous Government. I am sure both my hon. Friend and the charity will welcome the 81 criminal investigations we have launched in order to find out where lawbreaking is happening, to take action against it and to hold those who are responsible accountable for once.

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

In this Chamber in September, I called for Thames Water to be put into special administration in order to protect my constituents. A portion of the bills they have paid since then has gone on lawyers and consultants to put together a deal that has collapsed. The Liberal Democrats—unlike the Conservatives, who continue to bury their heads in the sand—have fought against throwing more good money after bad, and more and more debt. The Government did not act in September. Will they act now, put us all out of our misery and put Thames Water into special administration?

[Steve Reed]

As I have said, the Government stand ready for all eventualities, should they be needed.

[Sir Julian Smith (Skipton and Ripon) (Con)]

I refer the House to my registered voluntary interest. Over a year ago, I spoke to one of the then biggest investors in Thames Water, and I was struck by the fact that they said they had never been in a room with the regulator, other investors or the Government. I know it is difficult commercially, but I urge the Secretary of State, in trying to resolve this issue rapidly, to use his good offices and do as much as possible in the background to bring all the stakeholders to the best result.

[Steve Reed]

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his question; I think what he is referring to, in the round, is the failures of the regulatory system and, indeed, the regulators. He will have seen that Sir Jon Cunliffe points to exactly the same problems in his interim report, published today. As we work towards the final report, published in about a month, Sir Jon is starting to point to solutions, and I am sure he will want to pay attention to the right hon. Gentleman’s comments.

[Luke Taylor (Sutton and Cheam) (LD)]

The British public are not fools—they know when the emperor has no clothes and, indeed, when a regulator has no teeth. Ofwat has failed, just as Thames Water has failed. Will the Government now act on the Independent Water Commission’s findings, published today, scrap Ofwat and replace it with a regulator that can end this crisis, which has been decades in the making?

[Steve Reed]

We are working towards resetting the entire regulatory framework, as the hon. Gentleman may have seen from Sir Jon Cunliffe’s report, published today. He is absolutely right, though: under the previous Government, the regulator was absolutely toothless. That is why one of the first pieces of legislation this Government passed was the Water (Special Measures) Act 2025, which gave the regulator the power it lacked previously to ban the unfair and unjustified multimillion-pound bonuses that so outraged the public as those companies profited from pollution.

[Dr Ben Spencer (Runnymede and Weybridge) (Con)]

I thank the Secretary of State for his comments on continuity of service, which will provide some reassurance to my constituents. Thames Water has failed my constituents time and again; clearly, it needs investment. What is he doing to ensure that there is the confidence to invest in our water sector?

[Steve Reed]

The hon. Gentleman makes a good point. Part of making the sector more investable is ensuring that we have a robust, clear and predictable regulatory framework, which is what Sir Jon Cunliffe is working towards. The hon. Gentleman may have had a chance to look at the interim report that Sir Jon published today; if he has not, I recommend it to him. That is the way we create an investable water sector and bring in the money that will allow us to fix our broken water system once and for all.

[Calum Miller (Bicester and Woodstock) (LD)]

I draw attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. My constituent Bruno lives in Charlton-on-Otmoor. When it rains heavily, sewage flows into his garden, which is within sight of a pumping station that fails every single time. One third of bills paid to Thames Water by Bruno and other customers is used to service the company’s debt; that money should instead be invested, and should go towards improving pumping stations like the one near Bruno’s garden. Why will the Secretary of State not recognise that Thames is financially unviable, bring it into special administration, write down the debt and ensure that the future company serves the public interest?

[Steve Reed]

The hon. Gentleman points with a graphic example to what happens when we face the scale of regulatory failure that developed untroubled under the previous Government. That is why Sir Jon Cunliffe has brought forward his report today, which I hope the hon. Gentleman will read; I hope he will also provide Sir Jon with feedback, which he is asking for ahead of his final report in a month’s time. I remind the hon. Gentleman that the Government have helped to secure £104 billion of private sector investment by the conclusion of the price review period. That will be used to upgrade exactly the kind of facilities that he points to, which are letting down his constituents and mine, and those of everyone else in the House.

[Mr Will Forster (Woking) (LD)]

With a third of customers’ bills going to service Thames Water’s debt, my constituents are fed up of paying higher bills for Thames Water’s mistakes. Will the Government agree to put Thames Water into special measures to save my constituents and bill payers money? It is only a matter of time for Thames Water; will the Secretary of State act now and save people money?

[Steve Reed]

I share the hon. Gentlemen’s anger that the public have been left to pay the price of Tory failure over 14 years. One of the first things I did when I was appointed Secretary of State was get the water company chief execs into my office, seven days after the election. I got them to commit to ringfencing customers’ money that is earmarked for investment, so that it can never again be diverted to pay bonuses and dividends in the way that it was under the previous Conservative Government.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Member for Strangford—on water, no less.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Secretary of State for his answers, and for his perseverance on this subject. He will understand that it is disappointing in the extreme to hear that public funding may have to be used to bail out this company. Given that it has some 8,000 British employees and serves 25% of the UK population, Government attention is very urgently needed. What steps will be taken to ensure that this is not money down the drain, to use a pun, and that we instead reconstruct a viable concern that takes a modern approach? Does the Department have a team ready and able to step up and achieve that goal?

[Steve Reed]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question. We are ready for every eventuality, and there are teams in place to carry this out. Let me reassure him that I have no intention of using public money to bail out this company; we are looking for a market-led solution to its challenges. I thank him for his kind personal words—we will all keep persevering until we have cleaned up our waterways for good.

[Victoria Atkins]

On a point of order, Mr Speaker.

Oral Answers to Questions

Steve Reed Excerpts

Thursday 8th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Liz Twist (Blaydon and Consett) (Lab)]

4. What steps he is taking to consult the public on reforms to the water sector.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Steve Reed)]

I start by acknowledging, on VE Day, the debt that we all owe to that great generation who sacrificed so much for our freedom. We will remember them and their sacrifice forever.

The Independent Water Commission, led by Sir Jon Cunliffe, will make recommendations to transform our water system and clean up our waterways. The recommendations will form the basis of further legislation to fix our broken water system. A public call for evidence that ran for eight weeks and closed on 23 April received a very high number of responses. Those will be shared in detail when the commission publishes its recommendations. Sir Jon and the commission have held more than 130 meetings, including with regulators, environmental groups, campaigners, investors, water companies and consumer bodies. Engagement will continue ahead of the commission’s recommendations to the Government in a few weeks.

[Emma Lewell]

I echo the Secretary of State’s initial comments. South Shields has a long-standing problem with sewage being dumped in the sea at Whitburn. Just this week, Little Haven beach was handed a brown flag, and myself and local campaigners are completely fed up. The Environment Agency, Ofwat, Northumbrian Water, the council and the last Government all completely ignored our concerns. We have already requested a meeting with the Water Minister, and I hope she will confirm today that the meeting will happen very soon.

[Steve Reed]

I congratulate my hon. Friend on her tireless work to represent the concerns of people in South Shields about those terrible problems with water pollution. Of course, my hon. Friend voted for the Water (Special Measures) Act 2025, which has given the regulator many more powers, including the power to ban undeserved multimillion-pound bonuses. I am sure she will be interested to read, as will I, the findings from the Independent Water Commission led by Sir Jon Cunliffe when they come forward in a few weeks’ time.

[Liz Twist]

As we act to protect our rivers and waterways from pollution, regulation will be important. The Environment Agency’s resources were decimated under the Conservatives. How will the 2025 Act give the Environment Agency the powers it needs to hold polluting companies to account?

[Steve Reed]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The previous Government cut resources for regulation in half, and that is one of the ways water companies were able to get away with so much pollution. We have changed the law to allow regulators to recover prosecution costs so that they can carry out further prosecutions and stop those who have been polluting our waterways.

[Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)]

Can I make an appeal to the Secretary of State, and indeed his whole Front Bench, not to make farmers a scapegoat in any water reforms? Clearly, where farming and farmers are involved in bad practice, they should be penalised, but social industrialists, other employers, and indeed those in the public sector, might also pollute rivers. Water is a critical part of the food supply chain and agriculture. Farmers look after the environment on all our behalf—in the right way most of the time. My appeal to the Secretary of State is to please get the National Farmers’ Union and farmers involved and not let them become scapegoats.

[Steve Reed]

I of course agree with the right hon. Member. We are supporting farmers, many of whom were affected by very severe flooding recently, with the farming recovery fund. I am engaging constantly, and will be again today, with the National Farmers’ Union about those issues and many others.

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

By 2050 we will need more than 4,000 additional megalitres of water a day, with rising temperatures resulting in a fivefold increase in drought risk. That is concerning news for farmers in Glastonbury and Somerton, given the necessity of water for livestock and crops. What steps is the Secretary of State taking to consult farmers about reforms to the water sector, and does he know how important water is to food production?

[Steve Reed]

We recognise the importance of that point. The hon. Lady will be aware that, at the close of the price review process, we secured £104 billion of investment now and over the next five years to improve water infrastructure and ensure that we get water to where it needs to be. We have also increased flooding funding so that we can take the water away from where it should not be. All of that will support food production as well as many other sectors of the economy.

[Chris Murray (Edinburgh East and Musselburgh) (Lab)]

2. What discussions he has had with the Scottish Government on best practice on monitoring sewage overflows.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Steve Reed)]

Officials and I continue to maintain regular engagement with the Scottish Government on many issues. While sewage overflow monitoring is a devolved matter for Scotland, we continue to share best practice wherever appropriate. The SNP Government should follow this Government’s lead and introduce robust legislation to clean up their waterways.

[Chris Murray]

The beautiful beaches of my constituency are marred by sewage-related debris. In Scotland, under the SNP, we do not even properly monitor sewage overflows. Meanwhile, in England, the Labour Government are making great strides to improve water quality—how I wish we had that in Scotland. Will the Secretary of State commit to working as constructively as possible with his counterparts in the Scottish Government so that they can learn from here how we can improve water quality in Scotland?

[Steve Reed]

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for highlighting the pollution and sewage on beaches that so concern his constituents. It is deeply disappointing that the SNP Government in Edinburgh are not following the UK Government’s lead in tackling sewage pollution. I agree with my hon. Friend that his constituents, like mine, and everyone else in Scotland and right across the UK deserve to enjoy sewage-free lakes, rivers and beaches. Sadly, that does not seem to be what they are getting from the SNP.

[Alison Griffiths (Bognor Regis and Littlehampton) (Con)]

My constituents in Bognor Regis and Littlehampton have been subjected to an enormous increase in their water bills. Will the Secretary of State reassure the House that his water review will seek ways to prevent the costs of water companies’ mismanagement being passed on to their customers?

[Steve Reed]

I am sure that the hon. Lady will be reassured to hear that the Government have ringfenced money that is earmarked for investment in water infrastructure so that it can no longer be diverted for payments on bonuses and dividends. If water companies attempt to do anything of the kind, the money will be refunded to their customers through a discount on their bills.

[Rachel Blake (Cities of London and Westminster) (Lab/Co-op)]

3. Whether he is taking steps to limit increases to water bills.

--- Later in debate ---

[Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)]

T1.   If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Steve Reed)]

Fly-tipping scandalously shot up by over a third under the previous Conservative Government, and the public are rightly furious when they see their communities buried under an avalanche of rubbish. This Government will clean up our streets, towns and villages. We will support councils to identify, seize and crush waste criminals’ vehicles by closing the Tory fly-tipping loopholes that prevented tough action. We will increase sentences for dumping waste to up to five years, and we will make fly-tippers pay the cost of impounding their vehicles before they are crushed, because we believe that the polluter, not the public, should pay. This Government will call time on fly-tippers so we can restore people’s pride in their neighbourhoods.

[Ben Maguire]

The River Camel multi-use trail in my North Cornwall constituency attracts more than half a million users every year and brings over £3 million to the local economy. Will the Minister please meet me to discuss a river trail extension to Camelford as part of this Government’s manifesto pledge to create nine new river walks and connect thousands more people to nature?

[Steve Reed]

I am delighted to hear that people are enjoying the River Camel trail. It is wonderful to visit and we want to extend more of these walks across the country so that more people can enjoy them. I will of course make sure that the hon. Gentleman can meet the appropriate Minister to raise his concerns.

[Mr Speaker]

I call Diane Abbott—not here. I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Mr Speaker]

Order. This is a very important matter, but I am bothered that nobody else is going to get in, so I hope the shadow Secretary of State’s second question is shorter.

[Steve Reed]

I express my regret that the shadow Secretary of State would seek to politicise personal tragedy in this way. It is immensely regrettable that she would seek to do that; none of us can know for sure what happens in matters of personal tragedy. It is beneath her to try to weaponise the issue in the way that she has done. This Government take issues of mental health very seriously indeed. We are setting up mental health hubs in every community, so that we can support farmers and others who are suffering from mental ill health. I gently remind her that this was a problem that escalated during her time in office as Secretary of State for Health, when she failed to address the problems that people are facing.

[Victoria Atkins]

I am sorry, Mr Speaker, but I am simply confronting the Secretary of State with the realities of his policy. Another policy is distressing farmers and other people: the removal of our ancient property rights, first enshrined in the Magna Carta. The Planning and Infrastructure Bill gives a quango, Natural England, powers to seize private land, not for house building but for undefined environmental reasons. It can seize not just agricultural land, but our constituents’ gardens, and it does not even have to pay market value for that land. Will the Secretary of State now commit to an amendment to the Bill to save our constituents’ gardens, or is this Labour’s garden grab?

[Steve Reed]

As is so often the case from that particular source, that is a complete misrepresentation of the truth. Nothing of the kind is happening. Rather than trying to politicise and weaponise the matter, the right hon. Lady would help herself and people who are genuinely concerned about those issues by sticking to the facts.

[Jayne Kirkham (Truro and Falmouth) (Lab/Co-op)]

T7.   I must thank the Land Army, too. I am only here because my grandma met my grandad on his farm when she was working in the Land Army. Cornwall has a successful horticultural industry, specialising in cauliflowers, daffodils, potatoes and courgettes. The industry welcomed the extension of the seasonal worker visa scheme until 2029, but what metrics are being used to ensure that visa allocations will meet the industry’s needs? Without sufficient access to seasonal labour, there is a real risk to Cornwall’s horticultural sector.

--- Later in debate ---

[Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD)]

On behalf of all Members on the Liberal Democrat Benches, I add my tribute to those who fought and died to secure our freedom. I also pay tribute to those in rural communities, like ours in Westmorland, who fed this country and welcomed evacuee children from the cities, and to our community in Windermere, who welcomed the children who had survived the Nazi death camps after the war. We remember them all with deep gratitude.

Has the Prime Minister consulted the Secretary of State on the potential impact on British farmers of the US-UK trade deal? It is a matter of fact that US animal welfare standards are worse than ours, which means that import costs are lower, so allowing equal access is not free trade—it is unfair trade. It is throwing our farmers under the bus, just as the Conservatives did through their deal with Australia and New Zealand. Will the Secretary of State support Liberal Democrat calls for the deal to be signed only if it supports farmers, and after a vote in this House?

[Steve Reed]

There have been no announcements yet, and I cannot pre-empt them, but we have been crystal clear that we have red lines. We will not allow British farmers to be undercut on environmental or welfare standards in the way that the Conservatives did when they agreed a trade deal with Australia; it undercut British farmers and caused them immense damage. We will never go the way of the Tories; we will stand four-square behind our farmers, and I am delighted to hear that the Liberal Democrats feel the same.

[Sam Rushworth (Bishop Auckland) (Lab)]

On a similar theme, I congratulate the Government on securing a good deal for our farmers in the India trade deal, which was welcomed by the president of the NFU, who said it showed that this Government have “clearly listened”, in marked contrast to the previous Government. What assurance will the Secretary of State give me that our farmers will still be included in negotiations on the US trade deal?

[Steve Reed]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for welcoming the trade deal with India; it is a £4.8 billion boost to the UK economy, and very good news for our whisky and gin producers—and for the producers of salmon, lamb and chocolate, which are all now tariff-free exports to India. This Government will always negotiate in the national interest, and that is exactly the approach we will take with the US trade negotiations.

The Solicitor General was asked—

Sewage

Steve Reed Excerpts

Wednesday 23rd April 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Steve Reed)]

I beg to move an amendment, to leave out from “House” to end and insert

“recognises that the Government inherited a broken water system, with record levels of sewage being pumped into waterways; welcomes the Government’s rapid delivery of its promise to put water companies under tough special measures through the landmark Water (Special Measures) Act 2025, which has introduced new powers to ban the payment of unfair bonuses to water bosses who fail to protect the environment and to bring tough criminal charges against them if they break the law; supports the Government’s work to secure over £100 billion of private sector investment to upgrade the crumbling sewage infrastructure; and backs the largest review of the water sector since privatisation, aimed at tackling inherited systemic issues in order to clean up UK rivers, lakes and seas for good.”

I welcome the chance to set out the action that the Government are taking to end the sewage scandal in our waterways once and for all. The staggeringly high level of sewage pouring into our rivers, lakes and seas is a national disgrace. The beach in Deal that I visited just a couple of weeks ago was forced to cancel its Boxing day swim because of toxic levels of sewage in the water. The world-famous boat race between the Oxford and Cambridge University boat clubs earlier this month was, yet again, overshadowed by concerns about water quality in the Thames, so much so that rowers were told not to throw their teammates into the river.

[Freddie van Mierlo]

The Secretary of State mentions the boat race, but in 10 weeks we will be welcoming the world’s rowers to the Henley Royal Regatta. Does he share my concern about the amount of sewage being dumped in that part of the Thames, which is blighting the event?

[Steve Reed]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his intervention and I share his concerns. Wherever it is happening and damaging people’s ability to enjoy our rivers, it is a disgrace and a scandal, and we want to work across the House to put that right.

Parents across the country should not have to worry about letting their children splash about in the river or paddle in the sea on a sunny bank holiday weekend. I recently met campaigners at Windermere, in the constituency of the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron), who told me that they are sick and tired of the sewage flowing into the iconic and beautiful lake on their doorstep and that, a few years ago, that sewage caused algal blooms that turned it bright green.

Up and down the country, the public are furious about water pollution. So am I and so is this House, so how did we get into this situation? I am afraid to say it is the toxic result of years of failure by the previous Conservative Government. Instead of fixing our sewage system before a problem turned into a crisis, the Conservatives stood back and let water companies divert millions of pounds of their customers’ money into the pockets of their bosses and shareholders. Over £25 million was paid in bonuses to water company chief executives during the last Parliament alone. The Tories left our water infrastructure to crumble into ruin.

[Suella Braverman (Fareham and Waterlooville) (Con)]

Putting party politics aside for a moment, I point out to the Secretary of State that Southern Water was fined a record amount of £90 million for dumping raw sewage in 2021. Last year, it received another fine for dumping sewage in rivers near Southampton. This year, bills have risen by almost 50% for residents in Fareham and Waterlooville. Southern Water now proposes to recycle effluent water in Budds Farm near my constituency, to distribute drinking water to residents in Fareham and Waterlooville. Will the Secretary of State do the right thing and reject Southern Water’s proposal, which is expensive, disruptive and dubious? I do not trust Southern Water, and my constituents do not trust it either.

[Steve Reed]

I hope that the right hon. and learned Lady will work with the Government and support the reforms we are bringing forward to improve the functioning and performance of the water sector and all the water companies up and down the country, so that we can prevent the kind of concerns she speaks about.

Let us look at the record of the past Government. If somebody sees a crack in the wall of their house and they leave it for 10 years, the problem gets much worse and it costs much more to put it right. That is exactly what happened with our sewage system. The result is that rivers, lakes and seas across this country are choked by record levels of raw human filth, and bills are rising to repair damage that could have been repaired at a much lower cost if it had been done earlier. I am afraid that the Tories polluted our waterways and left bill payers to pay the price for their failure. It is no wonder that they stand condemned as the sewage party.

[Sean Woodcock (Banbury) (Lab)]

My constituency is served by Thames Water, which is the largest provider in the country. Every week in my surgery, it is fair to say that I have people who have frankly given up on this issue ever being fixed. Will the Secretary of State provide my constituents and the rest of the country with the reassurance that this Labour Government will fix the issues left by the Conservatives?

--- Later in debate ---

[Steve Reed]

As my hon. Friend will have seen, we have already passed the Water (Special Measures) Act 2025, which gives the regulators more teeth to enforce against the polluting water companies. We look forward to Sir Jon Cunliffe’s review for the Independent Water Commission; we will get the interim report next month and the final report the month after that, which will lead to further action to reset this sector once and for all.

[Joy Morrissey (Beaconsfield) (Con)]

On the subject of the Act, it is wonderful to hear the Secretary of State say that he wants to take criminal action against water companies and water bosses, but I tabled an amendment to do just that that was rejected by the Government. Now that the Act has passed, it is interesting that the Government are so keen. Why did they not just accept my amendment, or a similar one? The Act does not mention criminal charges or what they will do, as my amendment did, but it passed without that measure being put in place. The Government are now saying from a point of retrospective gleefulness at the Dispatch Box that they would like to put that in. Is that actually going to happen?

[Steve Reed]

With the greatest respect, the hon. Lady’s party had 14 years to take action, and did nothing.

Although I am grateful to the Liberal Democrats for calling this debate, and I think there are many points of similarity between our approaches, I must gently point to some of the opportunities they missed to take action when they were in government. For instance, the Environment Agency had its funding cut by more than half between 2010 and 2019, leading to a fall in prosecutions against water companies and other polluters, and there were Liberal Democrats in the coalition Cabinet that started those cuts. The coalition Government published a report in 2011 that wrongly and, in my view, bizarrely concluded that water regulation

“works and is not fundamentally flawed”.

Of course, under that coalition Government, a Liberal Democrat Minister was responsible for the water sector between 2013 and 2015, and disappointingly they kept in place the very system of regulation that the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale quite rightly just criticised.

[Gideon Amos (Taunton and Wellington) (LD)]

Would the Secretary of State recognise that the Budget papers for 2009 and 2010 show that the then Labour Chancellor was projecting bigger capital cuts in expenditure than were carried out under the coalition Government?

[Steve Reed]

I do not think that decisions taken by the coalition Government were the fault of the previous Labour Government. I am merely gently pointing out that the Liberal Democrats did have a chance to reset regulation in the way that this Government are now doing. Where they offer their support for that work, I am grateful for it; by working constructively right across the House, we can make sure that we now reset a water sector that has failed the public, consumers’ investment and the environment for far too long.

[Mr Joshua Reynolds (Maidenhead) (LD)]

In my constituency, the Cut runs from Binfield all the way through to the Thames. That river had 615 hours-worth of sewage pumped into it last year, and my constituent Danny’s dog had to be put down, having got so ill from swimming in that water. Does the Secretary of State agree that no matter how many fines we levy against Thames Water, which ultimately come back to our bills—we have to pay for them—they will do absolutely nothing to deter the shareholders and make them invest properly where needed?

[Steve Reed]

The hon. Gentleman makes a very powerful case for why reform is so desperately needed. My condolences to the owner of the dog—that is a terrible thing to happen to anybody.

[Anna Dixon]

Bill payers in my constituency of Shipley are facing an 18% hike in their bills. By 2030, the increase could be as high as 35%. About 19% of those bills already goes towards servicing the debt of the holding company that owns Yorkshire Water. Is it not the case that our customers are paying the price for the failure of the Opposition parties—plural—to address the problems in the water industry during their time in government?

[Steve Reed]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. I am angry about the bill rises, as she is. I am sure that Members on both sides of the House are angry about them, but in a very real sense, people are being forced to pay the price for 14 years of Conservative failure.

Previous Governments let the sewage scandal spread; this Government will end it once and for all. That work began as soon as we came into office. Within one week of the general election, I invited the water company chief executives into my office, and I ringfenced money earmarked for investment in water infrastructure so that it can never again be diverted for the payment of bonuses or dividends.

[Alison Hume (Scarborough and Whitby) (Lab)]

I welcome the rapid action that this Government have taken to hold failing water companies to account. Does the Secretary of State share my view that it is simply disgraceful that water company CEOs such as Yorkshire Water’s Nicola Shaw—who paid herself a £371,000 bonus —were able to pay themselves multimillion-pound bonuses while overseeing record levels of sewage spills?

[Steve Reed]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right, which is why we have given the regulator new powers through the Water (Special Measures) Act 2025. The Conservative party could have done so at any point during its 14 years in power, but at no point did it take that common-sense action. We passed that landmark piece of legislation, which became law in February. It gives the regulator tough new powers to hold water companies to account, bans unfair bonuses when water company bosses fail to meet high standards, and imposes stricter penalties—including up to two years in prison—if water company employees obstruct investigations by environmental regulators, as well as severe and automatic fines for wrongdoing. Environmental regulators can now recover costs for successful enforcement, meaning that the polluter pays and the regulators gain new resources to enforce more effectively.

[Jamie Stone]

I suggest to the Secretary of State that the problem may be more deep-seated than we realise. He mentioned algal blooms in the Lake district. Not only do those blooms turn the water a strange colour; they suck the oxygen out of the water, leading to the death of wildlife in the water. Furthermore, sewage contains heavy metals and other toxic substances that can kill fish or affect their ability to reproduce, so we may find ecosystems that have been damaged over a much longer term than we realise.

[Steve Reed]

I recognise the catastrophe that the hon. Member is talking about. It is not just that the water is polluted; the water becomes toxic, and it is killing ecosystems and damaging the wider environment. Those are all reasons that we need to move ahead quickly with the reforms that this Government are working towards.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Steve Reed]

I will give way two more times and then I had better make some progress, or Madam Deputy Speaker will chastise me as she chastised the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale.

[Paul Holmes (Hamble Valley) (Con)]

The Secretary of State is right to outline the legislation he is bringing forward, but on the ground there is still frustration about pollution in rivers, such as in Botley in my constituency. We are still seeing overflows—not from sewage but from development pollutants going into the river—and parish councils are identifying them quickly and coming to me, but the accountability structures behind water companies such as Southern Water will not answer to elected Members like me. We are still not seeing the improvement that the Secretary of State is advocating at the Dispatch Box. Will he agree to meet me and my parish council to hear our concerns? Can he outline briefly how the sewage legislation that he has just brought forward will add to that accountability for parish councils and local residents?

[Steve Reed]

The hon. Member makes an important point. One issue that Sir Jon Cunliffe and the water commission are looking at is how we can increase accountability and responsiveness directly to customers and, indeed, to authorities such as the parish councils he has just talked about. I would be happy to arrange a meeting for him with the appropriate Minister.

[Daisy Cooper (St Albans) (LD)]

The Secretary of State referred to rare ecological rivers that can be damaged by sewage pollution. In my constituency, we have a very rare chalk stream, the River Ver. Thames Water says that many of the sewage spills happen because the pipes are old and porous. Part of the solution is to line them, but when Thames Water is lining pipes, it is not prioritising pipes that are close to rare chalk streams. Will the Secretary of State meet me to discuss my Chalk Streams (Sewerage Investment) Bill, which would make water companies prioritise those pipes that are close to chalk streams, because of their rare ecological status?

[Steve Reed]

I know the River Ver very well; I used to walk past it every day on my way to primary school at the Abbey primary school at the bottom of the abbey orchard. I would be happy to make sure that the hon. Lady gets a meeting with the appropriate Minister to raise those points.

The additional new resources that our reforms will give to the regulators are underpinned by mandatory monitoring of storm overflows and pollution incidents. Water companies in England and Wales must now publish information on the frequency and duration of discharges from every single storm overflow within one hour of the discharge happening. We have extended that to emergency overflows, so that all spills will be publicly reported in near real time. We expect water companies to monitor 50% of them by 2030 and the rest by 2035. Companies are now required to publish their annual pollution incident reduction plans and implementation reports to outline the progress they have made and show the public that they have a credible plan to end the scandal of water pollution. Those measures give the water regulators new powers to hold water companies to account and ensure that customers and the environment always come first.

We can and we will turn the water sector around. We have secured more than £104 billion of private sector investment in the water sector over the next five years. That is the biggest investment in our water sector in its history, and the second biggest investment in any part of the economy over the lifetime of this Parliament. It will build and upgrade water infrastructure in every single region of the country, cut sewage spills by 45% compared with 2021 levels and drastically improve the quality of water in our rivers, lakes and seas. It will allow us to move ahead with nine new reservoirs and nine large-scale water transfer schemes, and reduce leaks from crumbling pipes, so that we have a reliable water supply for the future.

This vast investment will create tens of thousands of jobs up and down the country, allow us to go ahead with building 1.5 million new homes, support 150 major infrastructure projects and power new industries with high water usage, such as data centres. This is the regional economic growth that the country voted for last year; this is the Labour party’s plan for change in action.

[Sir Gavin Williamson (Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge) (Con)]

I think that Members in all parts of the House agree with much of what the Secretary of State is saying. I am fortunate enough to have the beautiful River Trent in my constituency, along with the Sow and the Penk, but new housing developments, which he mentioned, are a big issue, because the run-off from them is not properly attenuated. How could that best be dealt with? Building homes for the right reasons sometimes has unintended consequences.

[Steve Reed]

The right hon. Gentleman is entirely right, and I have asked Sir Jon Cunliffe to consider measures that we could implement to start to address that and, indeed, wider issues involving nutrient neutrality in our waterways.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Steve Reed]

I will make some progress, because I do not want to take up too much of the debate.

Last month the Water Minister and I toured the country to see where and how the investment will be spent—from Windermere to the Wye, from Hampshire to Yorkshire, and to Suffolk, Northumbria and Somerset. In Windermere, we are working with local groups and organisations to eliminate all sewage discharges into the lake. That includes schemes that allow owners of septic tanks to connect them to the mains sewer network so that they no longer discharge directly into the water. On the River Wye we are running a £1 million joint research initiative with the Welsh Government to tackle water-quality issues across the catchment. We are working with local farmers, environmental groups and citizen scientists to investigate the sources of the pollution so that we can tackle them effectively.

[Martin Wrigley (Newton Abbot) (LD)]

Will the Secretary of State give way?

[Steve Reed]

I will make some progress, if the hon. Gentleman does not mind too much.

The south-east of England will face severe water shortages by 2030 if we do not act urgently, so we are supporting new infrastructure such as the Havant Thicket reservoir, which will store nearly 9 billion litres of water when it is completed.

This is just the start of our wider plan to fundamentally reset the water sector so that it is fit for the future. I am grateful to Sir Jon Cunliffe, the former Deputy Governor of the Bank of England, for undertaking the biggest review of the water sector since privatisation. He is supported by an advisory group of experts covering the environment, public health, investors, engineering, customers and economics. The failures of regulation and governance that allowed our water system to decline into scandalous failure must never happen again. This summer, Sir Jon will publish his findings on how we can build the robust regulatory framework that we need to clean up our waterways, build infrastructure for a reliable water supply and restore public confidence.

[Martin Wrigley]

Will the Secretary of State give way?

[Steve Reed]

If the hon. Gentleman does not mind, I will make a little more progress, because I have already taken up more than 20 minutes of other Members’ time.

Sir Jon is looking into how we can embrace a catchment-based approach to cleaning up our rivers, and our farming road map will help farmers to make the transition to more nature-positive farming methods that will reduce agricultural run-off into our waterways. I hope that many Members have shared their views as part of the Independent Water Commission’s call for evidence, which closes at the end of today. The Government will respond and consult on the commission’s recommendations, and we intend to legislate so that we can completely reset our water sector for the future.

The Water Minister has announced reforms to shake up our water bathing regulations for the first time in more than a decade, so that more people, whether they are swimmers, paddleboarders or surfers, can get outside and enjoy our waters safely. Our proposed measures would remove the fixed bathing season dates from the regulations to better reflect when people actually use our waters, and would allow greater flexibility in monitoring.

[Martin Wrigley]

Will the Secretary of State give way?

[Steve Reed]

I will this time, because the hon. Gentleman has been very persistent.

[Martin Wrigley]

I thank the Secretary of State. I have just been reading about his core reforms, and I note that, as he has said, core reform 3 changes the way in which the season for bathing is determined. However, it continues the principle that water is not tested by the Environment Agency throughout the year. This is an important omission that must be rectified. During a bathing season, the water can become polluted. Will the Secretary of State consider introducing all-year-round testing for our Blue Flag areas?

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Order. Before the Secretary of State responds, I would like him to consider the fact that more than 30 colleagues wish to contribute. The longer he speaks, the less likely it is that they will all get in.

[Steve Reed]

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I will not take any more interventions. I hear the hon. Gentleman’s point. Public health is a priority in the reforms that we are making.

The Environment Agency must consider public safety and the environment when it assesses applications for bathing waters, and remove the harmful automatic designation of bathing waters so that we can continue to invest in and improve these sites. Applications for new bathing waters will open next month, adding to the more than 450 bathing waters around the country. Details of how to apply are online.

The sewage scandal ends with this Labour Government. Our groundbreaking Water (Special Measures) Act will give the regulators tough new powers to hold water companies to account. They will no longer get away with polluting our waterways and rewarding themselves with undeserved bonuses for what they have done. This is a fresh start for the water sector—a fundamental reset that will clean up our waterways, create thousands of jobs, grow the economy and give us a reliable water supply for decades to come.

Exciting progress is already being made. The Thames tideway tunnel was fully activated in February—an amazing feat of British engineering and entrepreneurial spirt that will reduce sewage spills into the Thames by around 95%. Since coming into operation, the tunnel has captured enough sewage to fill Wembley stadium five times over and stopped it pouring into the river. I want to see innovation like that not just in London but right across the country, bringing investment, driving regional economic growth and cleaning up our waterways for good.

Many of us cherish memories from childhood of summer holidays on the beach, exploring rock pools or splashing about in the waves. Today’s children deserve to make the same magical memories. This is our moment to give our children back the future that is their birthright, to restore pride in our rivers, lakes and seas, to end the sewage scandal and to clean up our waterways for good. That is the prize, and this is the Government who will make it happen.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

Oral Answers to Questions

Steve Reed Excerpts

Thursday 20th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jeremy Hunt (Godalming and Ash) (Con)]

2. What recent discussions he has had with Ofwat on encouraging water companies to increase investment in sewage discharge reduction measures.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Steve Reed)]

My officials and I have regular conversations with Ofwat and other regulators. As the right hon. Gentleman will be aware, last year water companies discharged record levels of sewage into our waterways, which is why the Water (Special Measures) Act 2025 gives the regulator tough new powers, including the ability to ban the payment of unfair bonuses to polluting water bosses. The Government have also secured a record £104 billion that will include improvements to more than 3,000 storm overflows and significantly reduce sewage spills over the next five years.

[Jeremy Hunt]

I wish you a happy World Sparrow Day, Madam Deputy Speaker.

In Bramley in my constituency in 2023, sewage was spilled into the local river for 59 hours. In Godalming, the figure was 83 hours; in Chiddingfold, it was 410 hours; and in Cranleigh, it was 691 hours. That is the equivalent of nearly two hours every single day—it is totally unacceptable. As a result, last year, after pressure from me and others, Thames Water agreed to invest £400 million by the end of next year. Will the Secretary of State meet me and the chief executive of Thames Water to see whether that money is actually being spent?

[Steve Reed]

The situation that the right hon. Gentleman describes is absolutely outrageous, and Members across the House will recognise similar situations in their own areas. We need to completely reset the water sector so that these situations cannot continue, which is why Sir Jon Cunliffe is leading a water commission. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman and other Members are taking the opportunity to feed their experiences and those of their constituents into his call for evidence, and I would be happy to arrange for the right hon. Gentleman to meet an appropriate Minister to discuss his concerns.

[Amanda Hack (North West Leicestershire) (Lab)]

I get so many people in North West Leicestershire telling me about the toxic sewage pouring into their waterways, such as in the brook near Donington le Heath. Will the Secretary of State assure me that, unlike the previous Government, when he says that he will hold the water bosses to account, he means it?

[Steve Reed]

Absolutely. That is why we have passed—and my hon. Friend will have voted for—the Water (Special Measures) Act, which gives the regulator the power they need to hold those water bosses to account so that instead of paying themselves multimillion-pound bonuses they do not deserve, that money is spent where it should be spent: on fixing our broken sewage system, so that we can cut the sewage flows that are polluting our rivers up and down the country.

[David Reed (Exmouth and Exeter East) (Con)]

3. What estimate he has made of the number of farmers affected by changes to agricultural and business property reliefs.

--- Later in debate ---

[Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)]

11. What discussions he has had with Thames Water on its financial viability.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Steve Reed)]

I am of course having conversations. I can reassure the hon. Gentleman that the company remains stable, and that the Government are closely monitoring the situation.

[Clive Jones]

Data published this week in The Guardian revealed that 50% more raw sewage was discharged by Thames Water last year than in the previous 12 months. Thames Water is racking up billions of pounds of expensive extraordinary debt, while continuing to pump tonnes of sewage into our rivers. Despite bold targets and kind words, there is simply no action on cleaning up our rivers. What will the Government do to improve Thames Water’s performance?

[Steve Reed]

The Government are taking steps to improve the performance of all water companies, including through the Water (Special Measures) Act 2025, which I spoke about earlier. Sir Jon Cunliffe is leading a review of the entire sector, so that we can reform regulation and, if need be, the regulator, to ensure that they are fit for purpose.

[Sarah Bool (South Northamptonshire) (Con)]

T1.   If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Steve Reed)]

Our rivers, lakes and seas are awash with pollution. The public are rightly furious about leaking pipes and sewage spills, and we have not built a new reservoir in this country for well over 30 years. After years of failure, this Government are turning the tide. The Water (Special Measures) Act 2025 is creating stronger regulation to hold water companies to account. We have secured over £100 billion of private sector investment—the largest such investment in the water sector in its history—to upgrade our infrastructure. Last week, the water Minister—my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice (Emma Hardy)—and I toured the country from Windermere to the Wye, from Hampshire to Yorkshire, and from Suffolk and Northumbria to Somerset, to see where that investment will build new homes, create thousands of new jobs and boost local economies. This is a cornerstone of our plan for change. Things can only get cleaner.

[Sarah Bool]

In February, Lucy Manzano of the Dover Port Health Authority came before the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee and warned that if funding was not confirmed before the new financial year, checks at our borders would stop. With the new financial year fast approaching and another case of foot and mouth in Europe, will the Secretary of State confirm that the Government have finally secured that funding, or will we be more at risk in April?

[Steve Reed]

We take border security extremely seriously. That is why we have the BTOM—border target operating model—system, which we are very closely monitoring to make sure it is doing the work that it needs to do, and why we are investing money in the National Biosecurity Centre in Weybridge to ensure it does not fall into dilapidation, which is where it was heading under the previous Government.

[Jim Dickson (Dartford) (Lab)]

T2. The Conservative party allowed the rivers and lakes in my constituency to be polluted with raw sewage while water bills rose and rose. Does the Secretary of State agree with me that, as he just said, after 14 years of Conservative neglect, things can only get cleaner?

[Steve Reed]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Over the past 14 years, things only got filthier. This Government will turn the tide. Things will get cleaner thanks to the investment this Government are bringing in.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Victoria Atkins (Louth and Horncastle) (Con)]

I welcome the Secretary of State back to the Chamber. He has been in hiding for a week. We were so worried about him that we were going to start a “Where’s Wally?” competition. The reason he has been in hiding is that he is ducking scrutiny of his dreadful decision to stop the sustainable farming incentive farm payment scheme immediately, without warning. Conservative Members have been inundated with messages from farmers saying that businesses will not survive this latest assault by the Government. How many farmers will be bankrupted as a result of the SFI stoppage?

[Steve Reed]

There were, unfortunately, record levels of bankruptcies of farm businesses under the previous Government, in which the right hon. Lady was a member of the Cabinet. Under this Government, we have more money in the hands of more farmers through SFI than at any point under the previous Conservative Government. This Government understand that when a budget has been fully allocated, you stop spending. The party of Liz Truss prefers instead to keep spending, bankrupting the economy and sending mortgages spiralling. That is not good for farmers, for the economy or for anyone.

[Victoria Atkins]

The Secretary of State cannot find his way around a farmyard; he is certainly not speaking to farmers. We Conservatives know that if the Government continue to tax, tax, tax businesses, they will break. His answers show why we have seen cold fury in the countryside at his impotence in standing up to the Chancellor on compulsory purchase orders, the massive cuts to de-linked payments, the stopping of capital grants and SFI and, of course, the family farm fax. Ahead of next week’s emergency Budget and spending review, and given that The Guardian seems to know more than he does, will the Secretary of State guarantee that his Government’s Budget will not face further swingeing cuts?

[Steve Reed]

The problem facing farming is that it became unprofitable because of the actions of the previous Government, who undercut farm businesses in trade deals, undercut farmers on welfare and environmental standards and raised barriers to exports to the European markets, causing exports to plunge by 20% since 2018, which led to record numbers of bankruptcies. This Government have a plan for change that involves turning farming into a profitable set of businesses, including by backing British businesses through public sector food procurement and ruling out trade deals that undercut farmers in the way the previous Government were happy to do.

[Johanna Baxter (Paisley and Renfrewshire South) (Lab)]

T3. I declare an interest as the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on cats. The Animal Welfare Committee’s report in September highlighted an urgent need for further regulation around the breeding of cats, after it uncovered the deeply concerning trend in demand for cats and other animals that are bred with extreme characteristics. Will the Minister set out how many of the report’s recommendations the Government have taken up, and what their timeframes are for implementation?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Paul Kohler (Wimbledon) (LD)]

Last month, more than 4,000 litres of diesel spilled into the River Wandle from a Transport for London garage in the Secretary of State’s previous constituency. Will the Secretary of State meet me and my hon. Friend the Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Bobby Dean) to discuss what can be done to restore the wildlife and to ensure that that cannot happen again?

[Steve Reed]

I agree that what happened on the River Wandle is shocking; it runs very close to my constituency as well, so I am aware of the situation. The Environment Agency is investigating and, if there was inappropriate behaviour, there will be swift action. I would be happy to arrange an appropriate meeting for the hon. Gentleman.

[Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)]

For far too long, the people of Newcastle-under-Lyme have had to live with the consequences of Walley’s Quarry landfill site. With the operator, Walley’s Quarry Ltd, now in liquidation, may I urge the Minister to do all she can to make sure that those who caused the mess are forced to pay to clean it up?

--- Later in debate ---

[Rishi Sunak (Richmond and Northallerton) (Con)]

I recently visited New Sheepfold Farm in Ingleby Greenhow to see the great work that the Day family are doing to diversify their farm, help nature recovery and improve enjoyment of our rural area. They did this with the help of the North York Moors National Park Authority and the farming and protected landscape scheme, which I am glad the Government have extended for a further year. Does the Minister agree with me about the importance of family farms, such as that of the Days, in landscapes such as the dales and the moors, and will he ensure that they remain at the forefront of Ministers’ minds?

[Steve Reed]

rose—

[Daniel Zeichner]

rose—

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the Secretary of State.

[Steve Reed]

We are fighting to have the honour of responding to the former Prime Minister! Of course I agree with him. Our focus on farm profitability is precisely so that family farms up and down the country can have a bright and secure future. Any sector that does not make a profit is not going to attract investment and will not have a future. We want farming to succeed in his constituency and in every constituency across the land.

NFU Conference: Farm Profitability

Steve Reed Excerpts

Tuesday 25th February 2025 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Steve Reed)]

Today at the NFU conference, I made several announcements to make farming more profitable:

Extending the Seasonal Worker visa route for five more years will give farms a pipeline of workers and certainty to grow their businesses. Annual quota reviews will ensure we strike the right balance—supporting farms while gradually reducing visa numbers as we develop alternative solutions.

Backing British produce: there are now requirements for Government catering contracts to favour high-quality, high-welfare products that local farms and producers are well placed to provide. The move marks a major leap in achieving the Government’s ambition for at least 50% of food supplied into the £5 billion public sector catering contracts to be from British producers or those certified to higher environmental standards.

Investment of £110 million in technology: the Farming Innovation Programme supports research and development of agri-technology for farmers, for example, the chemical-free cleaning for integrated milking equipment, which lowers energy costs and chemical use. The Farming Equipment and Technology Fund provides grants of up to £25,000 to buy new equipment such as electric weeders to reduce chemical use.

Protecting farmers in trade deals: the Government will uphold and protect our high environmental and animal welfare standards in future trade deals.

Strengthening Britain’s biosecurity: transforming the Animal and Plant Health Agency animal health facility at Weybridge into a National Biosecurity Centre, and investing £200 million to improve our resilience against animal disease to protect farmers and food producers.

As I said at the Oxford Farming Conference in January, more profitable, sustainable farm businesses will ensure our nation’s long-term food security. The Government have an important role in creating the conditions for growth and maintaining the resilient production of high-quality food the British public depends on.

[HCWS469]

Oral Answers to Questions

Steve Reed Excerpts

Thursday 6th February 2025 Commons Chamber

[Darren Paffey (Southampton Itchen) (Lab)]

2. What steps he is taking to increase the accountability of water company executives for service failures.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Steve Reed)]

I thank my hon. Friend for his service on the Water (Special Measures) Bill Committee. He will know that the Bill creates new powers for the regulator, including banning the payment of unjustified bonuses for water bosses whose companies fail to meet environmental standards and ensuring that imprisonment is a sentencing option where environmental regulators are obstructed. That will hold water companies and their executives to account. In addition, we are doubling compensation for poor service to hold water companies to account for failure in their service delivery.

[Darren Paffey]

I thank the Secretary of State for his answer. Many of my constituents in Southampton Itchen have written to me, outraged at the 53% bill increase that Southern Water is proposing at a time when it and others continue to pollute our rivers at an alarming rate. This is simply becoming a national scandal. As part of the work of the coming independent water review, will the Secretary of State ensure that water companies get back to delivering reliable services for customers, rather than lining the pockets of executives and shareholders?

[Steve Reed]

My hon. Friend makes an important point. Bills, of course, are going up because the previous Government did nothing as our sewerage infrastructure crumbled and millions of pounds were allowed to be diverted to pay for bonuses and dividends instead of investment. This Government have ringfenced the money earmarked for infrastructure so that this scandal can never happen again.

[Patrick Spencer (Central Suffolk and North Ipswich) (Con)]

Essex and Suffolk Water has issued a moratorium on commercial businesses pulling water out of the ground, which it says is due to the Environment Agency. The problem is that water-intensive businesses need water to grow. Aspall in my constituency has £10 million of investment ready to go to grow its cidery. Without access to water, it cannot make that investment. If this Government are serious about going for growth, will the Minister meet me to find a solution to the moratorium so that we can move forward?

[Steve Reed]

I am more than happy to ask the Minister for water, my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice (Emma Hardy), to meet the hon. Gentleman, who raises an important point. I have asked Sir Jon Cunliffe to look at how we can better manage this as part of the work he is leading.

[Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)]

3. What steps he is taking to help reduce sewage in rivers.

[Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

5. What steps he is taking to help improve the health of rivers.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Steve Reed)]

The previous Government did nothing as water companies discharged record levels of sewage into our waterways. The Water (Special Measures) Bill will create new powers, including banning water companies that pollute from paying bonuses, and bringing criminal charges against persistent lawbreakers. Ofwat has confirmed a record £104 billion investment to fix our broken water infrastructure and end the Tory sewage scandal once and for all.

[Tom Gordon]

In Harrogate and Knaresborough, the River Nidd regularly overflows with sewage. When I visited the Killinghall sewage treatment works last year, a key thing that came to light was that water companies are putting in infrastructure to manage the current sewage issue, rather than future-proofing. What steps will the Minister take to ensure we build sewage works that meet both current and future demand?

[Steve Reed]

The money announced in Ofwat’s final determination before Christmas will create record levels of investment in our water system to do precisely what the hon. Gentleman says, dealing with the current sewage problems while also putting in place the infrastructure to manage and meet future demand.

[Ellie Chowns]

As the Secretary of State knows, North Herefordshire is badly affected by water pollution, with devastating effects for the local economy. He also knows that agricultural pollution, not sewage, is the main problem in my constituency. He did not mention that in his answer, so I respectfully remind him yet again that the Government need to tackle agricultural pollution and sewage pollution in a joined-up way. We know the solutions—

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I think the Minister has heard the question.

[Steve Reed]

The hon. Lady makes an important point. Our farming road map will look at how we can reduce run-off from agriculture, which is a major source of pollution in our waterways. We are looking at how we can move to catchment-based models, including for the Wye, where a great deal of important work has already been done, so that we can more effectively tackle all the sources of pollution that are causing such trouble for our waterways.

[Zöe Franklin (Guildford) (LD)]

4. What steps his Department is taking to support flood preparedness projects.

--- Later in debate ---

[Darren Paffey (Southampton Itchen) (Lab)]

T1. If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Steve Reed)]

The first role of any Government is to protect their citizens. Yesterday we announced that we are committing a record £2.65 billion to build and maintain around 1,000 flood defences, to protect lives, homes and businesses—a 26% uplift per annum on what the previous Government were spending. We are immediately using £140 million to unblock over 30 projects that are ready for delivery but stalled under the previous Government. We are launching a consultation to update the funding formula so that we can speed up new schemes and ensure that rural and coastal communities are properly included. The previous Government left our flood defences in the worst condition ever recorded. This Government will put them right.

[Darren Paffey]

Levels of E. coli and faecal matter in the River Itchen remain disgustingly high. I commend the Friends of the Itchen Estuary group for their work to highlight the issue. Like me, they want designated bathing water status in order to protect the river, so will the Secretary of State update us on when that application process will open again and on what changes we can expect?

[Steve Reed]

I pay tribute to the Friends of the Itchen Estuary for their advocacy on this important issue. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs ran a consultation on reforms to the Bathing Water Regulations 2013, which closed on 23 December 2024. We are currently analysing the responses and considering how any proposed changes may impact the application and designation process, and we will of course respond fully in due course.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Victoria Atkins (Louth and Horncastle) (Con)]

The head of the Dover Port Health Authority warned the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee this week that if funding is not secured with seven weeks, food security checks at the border will be stopped. That will mean unchecked and potentially dangerous meat appearing on supermarket shelves and in restaurants at a time when there is foot and mouth disease in Germany. When will the Secretary of State protect our borders and confirm that funding?

[Steve Reed]

The National Farmers Union and other interested parties have quite rightly raised concerns about the discovery of foot and mouth disease in Germany. We are relieved that there has not been a further spread of that outbreak, but we are taking all appropriate measures at the border to ensure that this country remains safe in terms of biosecurity, and we will continue to monitor the situation and take appropriate action to ensure that there can be no repeat of what happened around 20 years ago, when a foot and mouth outbreak in this country devastated farming and cost the economy a total of £14 billion.

[Victoria Atkins]

I do not think the Secretary of State either understood my question or knows the answer, because I asked him when he will confirm the funding. Compare this relaxed approach with the Prime Minister’s seeming desperation to pay more than the entire DEFRA budget to surrender the Chagos islands. Does the Secretary of State really support taxing British farming families for dying, slashing winter fuel payments for rural pensioners, and hiking taxes on rural businesses to pay £9 billion to a foreign Government on some dodgy legal advice from Labour lawyers?

[Steve Reed]

If the shadow Secretary of State really cared about value for money, she would not have wasted £500,000 on relocating her office in the Department of Health, a project that was purely about her own personal vanity.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jeremy Hunt (Godalming and Ash) (Con)]

Given that the Office for Budget Responsibility refused to endorse the £22 billion black hole figure—in fact, it refused to say that there was any black hole at all—will the Secretary of State tell the House what possible justification there can be for the removal of agricultural property relief, which will do untold damage to the growth prospects of family farms in my constituency and across the country?

[Steve Reed]

The right hon. Member is fully aware of the appalling state the public finances were left in at the end of his Government. This Government have had to take very difficult decisions to balance the finances so we can get growth that will benefit the entire economy, including the farming sector, which was on its knees after 14 years of Conservative rule.

The Solicitor General was asked—

Flood Defence Investment

Steve Reed Excerpts

Wednesday 5th February 2025 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Steve Reed)]

Communities, homes, businesses and farmland are increasingly impacted by more frequent and severe floods. This winter alone the UK has experienced five storms in fewer than five months. As the changing climate continues to lead to more extreme weather, without action, the impacts will only get worse.

Today’s statement sets out greater detail on the Government’s plan for investment to protect against the dangers of flooding and coastal erosion. As part of the Government’s plan for change, a record £2.65 billion will be committed to better protect 52,000 properties by March 2026. Maintenance of existing flood defences will also be prioritised, ensuring a further 14,500 properties will have their expected level of protection maintained or restored. This means a total of 66,500 properties will benefit from this funding. This will help secure jobs, deliver growth and protect against economic damage.

This Government inherited flood assets in their poorest condition on record following years of underinvestment, leaving 3,000 of the Environment Agency’s 38,000 high-consequence assets below required condition. In its November 2023 report, the NAO recognised that increasing investment in operating and maintaining existing flood defences was critical to reducing the frequency and impact of flooding. Therefore, this Government are taking decisive action to fix foundations, giving communities confidence that flood defences will protect them. To support this, we are re-prioritising £108 million investment in repairing and restoring critical assets, including £36 million this year to target repairs to assets damaged in storms last winter and ongoing floods events. A further £72 million will go towards continuing these repairs and ensuring assets are as resilient and reliable as possible and operate as expected in flood events. This includes £7 million for the next phase of the Stallingborough sea defences along the Humber estuary, protecting thousands of homes, businesses and key infrastructure. A further £3.8 million will also be spent to improve protection in Pevensey Bay, as part of work to repair local sea defences.

This Government will also continue to invest in new defences. Today we are making available £140 million to allow 31 schemes to progress construction, ensuring nearby communities are protected as soon as possible. This includes the Bridgwater tidal barrier flood defence scheme in Somerset, which will receive £43 million. The Derby flood risk management scheme “Our City Our River” is set to receive £35 million. In the west midlands, the Beales Corner project, which protects communities in Bewdley, will benefit from £2 million.

A further announcement will be made in the next financial year with a full list of schemes to receive Government funding in 2025-26. This will follow agreement of these successful schemes in the usual way, through the regional flood and coastal committees with local representatives.

Supporting rural communities is central to this Government’s approach. We provided £60 million pounds to help farmers affected by the unprecedented flooding last winter through the farming recovery fund. This supported 12,700 businesses to cover the cost of restoring their farmland. We have also allocated an extra £50 million to internal drainage boards so they can increase flood resilience and manage water levels effectively for agriculture and the environment. We will continue to support farmers to manage flooding risks through the farming transition.

This Government inherited an outdated funding formula for allocating money to proposed flood defences. Established in 2011, the existing formula slows down the delivery of new flood schemes through a complex application process and has resulted in projects with funding gaps. A consultation will be launched in the coming months, which will include a review of the existing funding formula, to ensure that the challenges facing businesses and rural and coastal communities are adequately considered when delivering flood protection. The Government are committed to delivering a refreshed and updated approach to flood defence investment, fit for the challenges we face. In November, the Government announced that they will introduce this new approach from the start of a new floods investment programme in April 2026, covering both new and existing assets, and taking account of the challenges facing businesses and rural and coastal communities. The amount of money to be invested in 2026-27 and beyond will be decided at this year’s spending review.

The Government are today also convening the second meeting of its Flood Resilience Taskforce with floods Minister, Emma Hardy, joined by Ministers from across Government, alongside representatives from the Met Office, local resilience forums, and the National Farmers Union. The expert group’s discussions will focus on the national and local response to this winter’s flooding. It will also further discuss the long-term delivery of the Government’s flood resilience strategy and investment, including the planned review of the Government’s funding formula for allocating money to flood and coastal erosion defence schemes.

Flooding is a serious threat to people’s lives, homes, and businesses, with impacts reverberating across our economy and society. The role of any Government is to protect their citizens. This Government are committed to providing the investment and long-term strategy needed to ensure that resilience to flooding and coastal erosion is effectively delivered across the country.

[HCWS417]

Land Use Consultation

Steve Reed Excerpts

Monday 3rd February 2025 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Steve Reed)]

Last week, the Government opened their consultation on land use in England. This is the launch of a national conversation on land use, and will inform the development of a land use framework for England that will transform how we use land in this country to support economic growth and food security and deliver on our plan for change.

England has finite land with growing calls on it— growing food, building 1.5 million homes this Parliament, and restoring nature.

The land use consultation builds on previous contributions made by Members of the House of Lords Land Use in England Committee, several Members of this House, and other organisations that have called for a more joined-up approach to land use and land management policy. It aims to foster a national conversation on land use in England. The findings from this consultation will inform the development of our housing and energy spatial plans as well as ongoing reforms to the planning system. It is another step in the delivery of our plan for change to build 1.5 million new homes, and the energy infrastructure needed to achieve clean power by 2030, while safeguarding food security and our natural world.

The land use framework is not about telling anyone how to use their land. Using the most sophisticated land use data ever published, the land use Framework instead will provide the principles, advanced data and tools to empower decision makers to protect the most productive agricultural land, boost food security and identify areas with the greatest potential for nature recovery.

The consultation sets out a vision for land use change and seeks views on:

The scale and type of land use changes that may be needed to 2050;

the principles that should inform decision making, and how they could be applied;

the actions Government could take to support decisions about land use change.

The consultation will run for 12 weeks and will inform Government’s development of the land use framework later this year. It will include workshops across England as well as roundtables with experts, industry groups and other interested stakeholders.

[HCWS412]

Water (Special Measures) Bill [Lords]

Steve Reed Excerpts

Report stage
Tuesday 28th January 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Steve Reed)]

I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time.

Our rivers, lakes and seas are awash with pollution. The legacy of 14 years of Conservative failure is the highest level of sewage spills on record, economic growth held back by a lack of water supplies and, now, painful bill rises to fix the problems that they left behind. The British public are rightly angry about the state of our waterways. It has been left to this Government to clean up the mess once and for all. The water sector needs a complete reset, reform that puts customers and the environment first, and a new partnership with the Government to invest for the future and upgrade our broken infrastructure. This Government have a three-stage plan to make that happen.

During my first week in post, I met water company chief executives and announced immediate steps to improve the performance of the water industry, including ringfencing money for investment in water infrastructure so that it can never again be diverted to bonuses or dividends, and ensuring that customers who face frequent water outages or contaminated tap water receive more generous and faster compensation.

This evening, I am delighted to open the Third Reading debate on the Bill. Its core provisions will strengthen the powers of the regulators so that they can better hold water companies to account for poor performance. It will give Ofwat new powers to ban undeserved bonuses when water company executives fail to meet the high standards the public rightly demand. It will introduce stricter penalties, including imprisonment where senior executives of water companies obstruct investigations by environmental regulators, and includes provisions for automatic and severe fines for wrongdoing. We have also extended powers so that environmental regulators can recover costs for a wider range of future enforcement measures—the polluter, not the public, will pay. We have also introduced mandatory monitoring of emergency overflows and pollution incidents so the public can hold companies to account.

The Bill has been strengthened and improved in its passage through both Houses. I am thankful to all hon. Members, and all noble Lords in the other place, for their thorough consideration and scrutiny of the Bill, and for the many and varied amendments that have been tabled and debated. Water companies will now be required to include water supply as well as sewage-related incidents in pollution incident reduction plans, and we have created personal liability for chief executives so that there is accountability for these plans at the very highest level. Water companies will also need to produce an implementation report alongside their annual plans so the public can see what action they are taking to reduce pollution incidents.

We have introduced two clauses to consider more nature-based solutions such as reed beds and wetlands in drainage and wastewater management plans, and for Ofwat to track progress against our environmental targets. A further clause will ensure that measures are in place to support vulnerable customers, as set out by the water Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice (Emma Hardy), earlier this evening.

[Steve Race (Exeter) (Lab)]

Will the Secretary join me in commending the citizen scientists and local campaign groups that have driven many of these issues right up the political agenda, including the Friends of the River Exe in Exeter? I am delighted that this Government have acted so quickly to hold the water companies to account for the sewage crisis. Does he agree both that this is long overdue, and that it will fundamentally change the way our rivers are treated?

[Steve Reed]

I echo my hon. Friend’s commendation for the citizen scientists and the work they have done to highlight the scale of the problem.

The support for the Bill across the House and among the public demonstrates our collective desire to clean up our rivers, lakes and seas. I am proud of the progress we have made through the Bill, but it is not the extent of our ambition.

In October, I announced the biggest review of the water sector in a generation. Sir Jon Cunliffe has appointed an expert advisory group with leading voices representing the environment sector, public health, engineering, customers, investors and economists, and is preparing to launch a public call for evidence within weeks.

[Tim Farron]

The Secretary of State talks about Sir Jon Cunliffe’s water commission, and we are obviously interested in engaging with that. Does he think, though, that today’s appointment of a former Thames Water executive to the commission will fill the public with confidence that it will be independent in any way?

[Steve Reed]

Of course, it is an independent commission; it is up to Sir Jon to appoint to the board whom he likes. However, it is a very balanced board, and I hope the hon. Gentleman will recognise that voices from many stakeholder groups are represented, as indeed they should be.

The commission will report to the UK and Welsh Governments this summer, after which both Governments will respond and consult on Sir Jon’s recommendations, including on further legislation.

[Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)]

The Secretary of State is right that things are getting better. In my constituency, two new investments in water sector upgrades, by Wessex Water and Pennon, are worth a total of £230 million. Clearly, much more has to be done, but will he join me in welcoming those new investments? Does he recognise that such investment is not consistent across the country, which is exactly why we need the Bill?

[Steve Reed]

I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention and I welcome those investments. From visiting him in his constituency, I know what a champion he is for cleaning up the water and the beaches in Bournemouth.

I thank the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice and the noble Lady, Baroness Hayman of Ullock for their expert leadership of the Bill through Parliament, and members of staff in the Bill team and in DEFRA for their hard work and professionalism. I thank Members on all sides who participated in the debates at all stages. I extend my thanks to our colleagues in the Welsh Government and the Senedd for working collaboratively with the UK Government on the Bill. I am delighted that, at the Welsh Government’s own request, the benefits brought about by the Bill will extend to Wales.

[Iqbal Mohamed (Dewsbury and Batley) (Ind)]

Consumers listening to this debate have been concerned about the role of Ofwat. What reassurance can the Secretary of State give them that Ofwat, the regulator, will put consumers’ interests and environmental interests before corporations’ interests?

[Steve Reed]

Sir Jon Cunliffe’s commission will be reviewing precisely those points, and I hope the hon. Gentleman will take the opportunity to contribute his views when the call for evidence begins in just a few weeks.

The changes the Government have made in a short amount of time show that with collective determination and ambition we can turn the water sector around. The failures of the past are ending. The future of the water sector is full of promise. Our waterways have been poisoned by unacceptable levels of sewage and other pollution for too long. With these changes, finally, we will clean up our rivers, lakes and seas for good.