Clean Water Bill: Chalk Streams

My Lords, the clean water Bill was announced in the King’s Speech in May, to be introduced during this Session. We have set out our ambitious programme of reforms in the water White Paper, which was published on 20 January, and we are protecting chalk streams, including by reducing the risk of harmful abstraction, by modifying water company abstraction licences and ensuring that chalk streams are prioritised for improvement in our storm overflows discharge reduction plan.

My Lords, I thank the Minister for her response. Does she regret that, despite repeated assurances that chalk streams were an urgent priority during the passage of the Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025, they still do not have statutory protection? Can she assure the House that they will not be left out of the clean water Bill, or indeed the final National Planning Policy Framework, especially if there is any danger of that being published in a rush over the next few days due to a change in the senior management team in the House of Commons?

We are very aware that chalk streams are an important ecological resource and we are doing a number of things that will make a difference, which is what we have to do. We are holding water companies to account. We are working within the environmental land management scheme to provide incentives for farmers; for example, six of the ELMS-funded landscape recovery projects are being developed in chalk stream catchments. The Environment Agency is working, as I said, to tackle the impacts of harmful abstraction. We made a number of changes to the then Planning and Infrastructure Bill to ensure that chalk streams feature in local nature recovery strategies so that they can be embedded into any legislation. There are also actions embedded in the water White Paper, which we will discuss as we take forward the legislation.

One of the opportunities we have to protect our chalk streams is to prevent off-flow from farms. One way of doing that is to create a biodiversity break between a chalk stream and farming activity. When the Minister looks at these issues, will she examine whether financial support could be provided to farmers through the existing schemes to encourage the creation of that kind of biodiversity margin to protect chalk streams?

As I just mentioned, there are encouragements through the existing ELMS, but I take the noble Lord’s point. As we develop our support for farmers going forward, it is important that important ecological parts of our environment, such as chalk streams, are fully supported.

My Lords, as the Minister knows, I am extremely supportive of the creation of a new single regulator for the water industry, which will be in the new Bill. Admittedly, however, I am slightly disappointed that it is taking quite some time to bring it into effect. When does she think the new single regulator will become operational?

We have said that we will create a powerful new regulator. We will abolish Ofwat and bring together the different functions of Ofwat, the DWI, the Environment Agency and Natural England into one new body so that we no longer have a fragmented system. That will be part of the clean water Bill when it comes forward. We have said we will do it in this Session. We are currently working on it, and as soon as we find a suitable legislative slot, we will crack on with this.

My Lords, Wessex Water, Thames Water, Southern Water, Anglian Water and Yorkshire Water have terrible records of dumping untreated sewage into chalk streams. None has had its licence to operate revoked. Can the Minister explain how many criminal convictions these companies need before the Government will listen to the people and revoke their licences?

I am sure my noble friend is aware that, as a Government, we have created the ability to hold the directors and higher-up members within the water industry to account, including through criminal charges. That is an important step forward. The key thing is that we cannot carry on as we are, which is why we have pledged to bring in the clean water Bill this Session to tackle all the issues that he and other noble Lords are so concerned about.

My Lords, we have a unique responsibility to protect our chalk streams, given that we possess 85% of the world’s total stock. These chalk streams have suffered mistreatment, given that they are located in some of the most densely populated areas of our country. They suffer from creaking sewage treatment systems, industrial and agricultural run-off and pressure from development. The Minister mentioned that in an earlier answer, but is it not time now to encourage true catchment-level restoration projects through landscape-scale recovery schemes that can deal with priority issues for each individual river and stream? Will she take an early opportunity to stress that to the new Prime Minister?

We are investing a lot into chalk streams. As well as the £2 billion that water companies are investing over the next five years into targeted actions towards chalk stream restoration, which is part of our plan for change, we are investing £1.8 million through the water restoration fund and the water environment improvement fund for locally led chalk stream clean-up projects across affected regions. Much of that will be catchment led, because a lot of local projects are worked on right across catchments.

My Lords, does not the state of our chalk rivers demonstrate what problems were caused by a Government who did not care about the state of the rivers and a regulator that turned its back on them?

My noble friend is absolutely right that this is a long-term problem that has been going on for many years. Unfortunately, the water industry has simply not been held to account in the way that it should have been, and that is why we are bringing in the clean water Bill and changing the regulator.

Can the Government give us their estimate of the cost and the timetable for putting in the extra pipes and processing capacity so that we can clean up our rivers?

That is probably a cost for the water companies to assess.

My Lords, I understand that the Government are on the verge of planning the NPPF. Does the Minister agree that it is more important that this is got right than got out quickly? She talked about making sure that we do something about the run-off from roads. Can she add any more detail to that?

When the NPPF was revised fairly recently, for the first time it included a lot of positive actions on the environment—for example, about how it needs to be taken into account during planning. In fact, sadly, I keep a copy of it in my drawer so I can refer to it if I need to. I am pleased that we are continuing to revise it and to look at how planning and the environment work together rather than against each other. The noble Earl raises an important point about run-off from roads, and we need to look at that in more detail.

My Lords, I think this is the first time the noble Baroness has said that the Bill may not reach Parliament in this Session. Where there is no need for primary legislation—for example, the proposals in the Cunliffe review—will she look to bring these in through secondary legislation where that is appropriate?

The noble Baroness must have misheard me. I absolutely did not say that the Bill was not coming in this Session. It is absolutely our intention to fulfil the pledge made in the King’s Speech that we will bring in the clean water Bill this Session.

I do not understand the Government’s reluctance to take Thames Water into special administration when it so clearly behaved appallingly and refuses to clean up the mess it has made of not only our chalk streams but the rest of our countryside.

Very strict conditions have to be met before the Government are allowed to do that. However, we have said that we will keep all options on the table if it comes to that.

In terms of our desire for clean water, can I ask that the Government work very closely with the champions of clean water—the fishing community, who are often the eyes and ears on early signs of pollution? It is important because, although we have the desire to do this, we need volunteers and others to ensure that this comes into effect. I very much hope that Defra and the noble Baroness will work extremely effectively with the fishing community.

The noble Lord makes an important point. In fact, much of the damage and the problems that have been caused by the water industry were first flagged up by fishermen and people such as Surfers Against Sewage—those who use our waterways, seas, rivers and lakes. It is incredibly important that we work with them constructively as we now move to clean the situation up.

That concludes Oral Questions for today. Those who wish to stream out of the Chamber can do so quickly and quietly.