Previous Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page


Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: My Lords, I am almost speechless. Out of politeness, I thank the Minister for his reply, but I am deeply disappointed by it. He continues to miss the point. I agree that the Government did consult on flood defence committees' restructuring, when they should have been consulting on how to involve the public in the Water Framework Directive. When the Minister said that the committees need simply to be flood defence committees, so that they can focus on floodwater issues, that entirely misses where the Water Framework Directive takes us. It takes us away from dealing with floodwater as simply that, and it encourages us to deal with water as a whole, as a cycle—so that while it could be floodwater, it could also be water helping wetlands to be successful or it could be irrigation water. That will involve the public in all sorts of ways, planning authorities and so on.

I am deeply disappointed that the Government still refuse to see that simply rearranging the flood defence committees will not change fundamentally the attitude to water of the public and public bodies as required for the measure to be successful.

I can see that I shall get no further in obtaining the Government's consent to the amendment. In order to make the point, I shall test the opinion of the House.

10.35 p.m.

On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 158) shall be agreed to?

24 Jun 2003 : Column 263

Their Lordships divided: Contents, 17; Not-Contents, 30.

Division No. 4

CONTENTS

Addington, L.
Astor of Hever, L.
Barker, B.
Blatch, B.
Byford, B.
Cope of Berkeley, L.
Dixon-Smith, L.
Geddes, L.
Harris of Richmond, B.
Livsey of Talgarth, L. [Teller]
Miller of Chilthorne Domer, B.
Montrose, D.
Northesk, E.
O'Cathain, B.
Razzall, L.
Shutt of Greetland, L. [Teller]
Taylor of Warwick, L.

NOT-CONTENTS

Acton, L.
Andrews, B.
Blackstone, B.
Borrie, L.
Brooke of Alverthorpe, L.
Campbell-Savours, L.
Clark of Windermere, L.
Corbett of Castle Vale, L.
Crawley, B. [Teller]
Davies of Coity, L.
Elder, L.
Evans of Parkside, L.
Evans of Temple Guiting, L.
Farrington of Ribbleton, B.
Faulkner of Worcester, L.
Fyfe of Fairfield, L.
Gale, B.
Goldsmith, L.
Gould of Potternewton, B.
Grocott, L. [Teller]
Hardy of Wath, L.
Jones, L.
Ramsay of Cartvale, B.
Rendell of Babergh, B.
Smith of Leigh, L.
Stone of Blackheath, L.
Thornton, B.
Warner, L.
Whitaker, B.
Whitty, L.

Resolved in the negative, and amendment disagreed to accordingly.

24 Jun 2003 : Column 263

10.46 p.m.

[Amendment No. 159 not moved.]

Lord Whitty moved Amendment No. 160:


    After Clause 67, insert the following new clause—


"EFFICIENT USE OF WATER RESOURCES
In section 6 of the Environment Act 1995 (c. 25) (general provisions with respect to water), in subsection (2)(b), after "Wales" there is inserted "(including the efficient use of those resources)"."

On Question, amendment agreed to.

[Amendment No. 160A not moved.]

Clause 69 [Environment Agency to be enforcement authority under the Reservoirs Act 1975]:

[Amendment No. 160B not moved.]

Clause 72 [Flood plans]:

Lord Whitty moved Amendment No. 161:


    Page 85, line 17, after first "a" insert "large raised"

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Clause 73 [National security]:

Lord Whitty moved Amendment No. 162:


    Page 86, line 34, after "reservoir" insert "(whether a large raised reservoir or not, as the case may be)"

On Question, amendment agreed to.

24 Jun 2003 : Column 264

Lord Livsey of Talgarth moved Amendment No. 163:


    After Clause 76, insert the following new clause—


"SUSTAINABLE CONSERVATION OF WATER RESOURCES
The Environment Agency shall continuously monitor water resources in England and Wales to ensure—
(a) that all water resources are ecologically sustainable;
(b) high levels of water quality;
(c) that water quality consistently improves over time;
(d) that compensatory river flows can sustain a river system;
(e) that volumes of water in lakes and reservoirs comply with agreed pre-determined levels;
(f) that oxygen and acidity levels meet agreed parameters;
(g) that fresh water fisheries can sustain the renewal of fish populations;
(h) that actions and targets are laid down as a result of river basin management plans agreed with river basin management committees."

The noble Lord said: My Lords, Amendment No. 163 is the braces for the belt which is the EU Water Framework Directive. If that does not come through in the Bill, this is a longstop to try to ensure that we have proper environmental sustainability. The amendment deals with the sustainable conservation of water courses. We ask for the Environment Agency to monitor continuously water resources in England and Wales to ensure that all water courses are ecologically sustainable; that there are high levels of water quality; that water quality consistently improves over time; that compensatory river flows can sustain a river system; that volumes of water in lakes and reservoirs comply with agreed pre-determined levels; that oxygen and acidity levels meet agreed parameters; that fresh water fisheries can sustain the renewal of fish populations; and that actions and targets are laid down as a result of river basin management plans agreed with river basin management committees.

That is a longstop if we do not have adequate protection in the Bill. We would like to ensure that the principles of environmental sustainability are contained in this legislation. We believe that the main points are made in the amendment. I beg to move.

Lord Whitty: My Lords, the noble Lord links this amendment to the Water Framework Directive and in some sense it would appear to be another attempt to put chunks of the directive or what one needs to do under the directive on to the face of the Bill. I know that is what the noble Lord thinks and that is what the Liberal Democrat Benches have been urging on us, but the logic of decisions taken during the passage of the Bill is that, for the implementation of the directive, we are resting on the normal transposition process. Therefore, the Bill does not cover the range of areas covered by the Water Framework Directive. While many of the objectives are desirable and reflect other parts of the Bill, it seems superfluous to have in the Bill a clause that will be dealt with by another piece of

24 Jun 2003 : Column 265

legislation, albeit secondary legislation, under the European Communities Act. Therefore, I hope that the noble Lord does not pursue the amendment.

Lord Livsey of Talgarth: My Lords, I note what the Minister said, and I also note the late hour. This amendment is essential to ensuring the environmental and sustainable conservation of water resources. However, I do not wish to press this amendment at present. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 85 [Self-lay and adoption of water mains and service pipes]:

Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton moved Amendment No. 164:


    Page 101, line 6, at end insert—


"( ) The prohibition imposed on a water undertaker by subsection (11) above shall be enforceable under section 18 above by the Authority."

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Clause 86 [Requisition and adoption of sewers]:

Lord Livsey of Talgarth moved Amendment No. 165:


    Page 105, line 31, at end insert—


"(5) After consultation with any such bodies as appropriate the Secretary of State shall publish a protocol for unadopted sewers."

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I am sure that the Minister will note that I have considerably modified this amendment, which refers to unadopted sewers. The Minister was helpful in Committee. In the report of the Committee proceedings of 29th April 2003, one can read that the Minister assured the Committee that as far as the new build was concerned, any new sewers would be the subject of a protocol that was established as a result of a consultation in 2000,


    "which sets out the key elements of design and construction of sewers for all new developments".—[Official Report, 29/4/03; col. GC 161.]

That is what the Minister said when we discussed another, similar amendment. He stated then that,


    "the situation is far more complicated with regard to existing private sewers".—[Official Report, 29/4/03; col. GC 161.]

At that time, the Minister said that he would shortly issue a consultation paper seeking views on possible solutions to deal with the problems.

In this amendment, I am not asking for precise commitments from the Minister in the Bill, but I am asking for parity with new developments as far as unadopted sewers are concerned. We are asking for a protocol for unadopted sewers, in the same way as the Minister outlined that there is a protocol for new sewers. This would be a commitment from the Government to ensure that these unadopted sewers would be the subject of a protocol and would be brought up to scratch over time. It gives the Minister more leeway than I gave him in previous amendments in Committee.

I doubt whether there is any Member in the other place who is not afflicted with the problem of unadopted sewers in his constituency. They are a blight on housing, and a huge problem. If the Minister

24 Jun 2003 : Column 266

will accept this and produce a protocol that lays down the conditions for unadopted sewers to be brought into the system in a way of the Government's choosing, many residents throughout the country would be eternally grateful. This is important, and I beg to move the amendment.


Next Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page