During the Water Quality (Sewage discharge) debate in the House of Commons, James called the use of storm overflows unacceptable and backed the government’s plan for 100% monitoring of overflows, new powers for regulators, unlimited fines, and record investment.
North West Norfolk is home to many precious chalk streams and James has consistently highlighted the need to protect these rivers including as a member of the Gaywood River Improvement Group. That’s why he supported the Environment Act & new powers to require water companies to tackle this issue and for Ofwat to act.
The government has a fully-costed plan to tackle sewage and improve water quality, with unlimited fines along with new rules and robust targets requiring water companies to invest £56 billion – the largest infrastructure investment in history. Labour and Liberal Democrats don’t have a credible plan and had the opportunity to back the government’s last night - but they failed to vote for it.
James' speech in this debate is part of his long term campaign to help tackle the issue of storm overflows discharging sewage. This also includes calling for tougher action to tackle overflows earlier this year and challenging Anglian Water to reline some of the sewer network.
Text of speech
I am pleased to speak in this debate to make it clear again that the use of storm overflows is unacceptable and needs to end. That is why I supported the Environment Act and new powers to require water companies to tackle this issue and for Ofwat to act, including where water companies seek to pay dividends when their environmental performance is not good enough.
North West Norfolk is home to many precious chalk streams, and one of my first visits as an MP was to walk the River Nar in Castle Acre with the Norfolk Rivers Trust, when we looked at work to restore part of the river to get it back to the natural widths, depths and gradients. As a member of the all-party parliamentary group on chalk streams, I have consistently highlighted the unacceptable use of storm overflows and the need to protect these rivers.
However, let us be candid about what ending the use of overflows, as some pretend is possible, would mean. It would mean sewage backing up into people’s homes. Why do Labour and the Liberal Democrats not put that on their leaflets? Why are they not open with the public about the disgusting consequences of the proposals they have put forward? Rather than misleading claims, I am interested in practical action to make a difference, and that starts with overflows.
Looking at the motion, I wonder where Labour has been. We will have 100% of overflows monitored by the end of this year, and real-time data is coming. When Labour was last in government, the figure was 7%. Then there are fines and prosecutions. Having looked at this area as a member of the Public Accounts Committee, I want to see the Environment Agency take far more robust action. All major water companies are under investigation for illegal sewage discharges, and regulators must use higher fines to focus the minds of chief executives and boards, which is why I support unlimited fines.
The third element is investment. There is no cheap way to fix a Victorian system combining rainwater and wastewater. In my constituency, residents suffered sewage coming up through manhole covers and into their homes when there was severe flooding. By challenging Anglian Water, I got it to reline some of the sewer network because there was groundwater infiltration, rather than just inundation of rainwater. As a result, we will see improvements and hopefully we will not see a repetition. But we need major investment, which is why the £56 billion is going to be required.
The motion calls for an impact assessment. That has been done as required by the Environment Act 2021 and the results are not good for either party. Liberal Democrats pretend that they can solve this problem overnight, but that is just wholly impractical, and the Labour plan appears to involve spending £600 billion in seven years. As my constituents would say, “What a load of squit”.
Instead, the Conservative party has a plan for 100% more monitoring, requiring record investment and using penalties to tackle this problem. Now water companies and regulators must be held to account to deliver real improvements for our constituents.
