💧 Water (Special Measures) Bill [ Lords ] (Fifth sitting)

Public Bill Committees

🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️

The Water (Special Measures) Bill session focused on enhancing environmental duties in national parks, proposing mutual ownership for water companies exiting special administration, and discussing the establishment of a public database for sewerage undertaker performance. Despite opposition amendments being largely rejected, the session highlighted significant concerns about water quality and regulatory practices, with the government promising future legislative action following the Cunliffe review. Members expressed appreciation for the collaborative spirit during the debates and recognized the public’s role in pushing for cleaner rivers and lakes. The session concluded with the Bill set to be reported to the House, with a commitment to further address water sector issues in upcoming legislation.

Summary

  • Committee Overview and Thanks:
    • The session involved members thanking each other and the staff, including clerks, DEFRA officials, doorkeepers, Hansard team, and even the attendees from the public and environmental groups.
  • Environmental Duties in National Parks:
    • A new clause was proposed to require water companies to meet stringent environmental standards in National Parks and the Broads, aiming to achieve “high ecological status” by 2028, enhance wildlife, and reduce sewage discharges.
  • Special Administration and Ownership Models:
    • Discussion included a review to consider changing water company ownership to mutual ownership upon exiting special administration, questioning the effectiveness of private ownership in the water industry.
  • Water Quality and Public Access to Information:
    • Proposals for Ofwat to establish a public database on the performance of sewerage undertakers, providing access to real-time and historical data to enhance public scrutiny and environmental protection.
  • Public Ownership Debate:
    • Although mutual ownership was discussed, full public ownership was not within the scope of the proposed reviews.
  • Procurement Processes:
    • A new clause suggested competitive procurement processes for water infrastructure to ensure cost-effectiveness and efficiency. However, the government highlighted that such processes are already in place for larger projects.
  • Planning and Information Provision:
    • There was an emphasis on water companies providing accurate, honest assessments during planning consultations to ensure infrastructure can handle new developments. Penalties were suggested for non-compliance.
  • Regulatory Integrity:
    • Concerns were raised about regulatory capture due to the ‘revolving door’ between water companies and Ofwat, leading to a proposal to prevent recent water company employees from working at Ofwat.
  • Pollution Reduction Targets:
    • New clauses suggested setting out specific pollution reduction targets for water companies, with penalties or special measures for failing to meet these targets.
  • Future Actions:
    • The Cunliffe review was mentioned, which will further examine the regulatory system, although ownership models excluding full nationalization are within its scope.
  • Bill’s Progress:
    • The bill passed a step to be reported to the House with amendments, indicating ongoing commitment to tackle water industry issues through regulation, review, and future legislation.

Divisiveness

The session displayed significant disagreement, particularly during discussions of proposed amendments and new clauses. Members often debated the necessity, scope, and implications of various amendments, such as New Clause 28 concerning mutual ownership of water companies. This underlines substantial divisions in opinion between governmental and opposition members, warranting a high rating for disagreement