Drought: Impact and Policies

Baroness Grender Excerpts

Tuesday 20th October 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

The Government engage with water companies, the Environment Agency, the Met Office and key sectors through the National Drought Group, because we want to ensure proper co-ordinated action. The Met Office regularly updates on the potential impacts of El Niño, which helps to ensure that the group is prepared to respond. Of course, the impacts of El Niño are uncertain, but we are aware that it could contribute to continued dry conditions into autumn and winter, which could further reduce the opportunities to refill reservoirs.

Defra has announced a further £15 million of support to build on-farm reservoirs through the water management grant. To enable farmers to make better use of water during wetter periods, Defra is also taking steps towards a more dynamic abstraction licensing system. The Environment Agency has committed to reviewing its approach to abstraction and has introduced a regulatory position statement, which brings reservoir refill season forward from November to October.

[Baroness Grender (LD)]

My Lords, does the Minister agree that, with the severe droughts declared in parts of the south-west and south-east, and water companies still losing nearly 3 billion litres a day to leakage, the clean water Bill is needed now? Are the rumours true that it has been delayed again? Can she tell us when it will be introduced, given that she told us last month that she hoped to bring it shortly?

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

I assure the noble Baroness that we are actively working on the water Bill. It is an absolute priority, not just for the department but for the Prime Minister. We absolutely need to get it right. There is a lot of work going into it. A lot of changes are needed to the water industry if we are going to really make the difference that we want to make. In fact, I have only today had a meeting where I have discussed it, so it is something that we are actively working on.

Summer Drought: Future Supply Disruption

Baroness Grender Excerpts

Thursday 3rd September 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

I have said previously to noble Lords that enabling farmers to hold more water and manage water better on their land is something that the Government are very keen to see and enable. We are also very aware of the huge problems that drought causes farming. We have been looking at how we can support farmers facing lower crop yields, for example. There are also increased feed costs and irrigation issues. I have held meetings with the poultry sector, for example, specifically on the problems of heat stress on poultry. It is something we are very keen to resolve because this will be a long-term problem.

[Baroness Grender (LD)]

My Lords, does the Minister think it sends the right signal that failing water companies which are currently losing 3 billion litres a day in leakage can find £75 million for an ad campaign to tell households to use less water, while government support for farmers hit by this summer’s drought was £65 million? Can she tell us whether that farmer support package will be in any way increased?

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

We are currently working with farmers to look at what support they need, not just in this area but in other areas because farmers are under pressure in many different areas. I agree with the noble Baroness about the issues around the water companies, which is why I hope to be bringing the new water Bill to this House shortly.

Data Centres: Water Resources

Baroness Grender Excerpts

Wednesday 2nd September 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

Proper information about the actual water use of data centres is clearly very important. We are taking action to support the data centre sector in England on this. Part of what we are doing is working across government to determine how we can increase water efficiency, to reduce the data centre water demand in the first place. We are also looking at not just the available evidence but the emerging evidence that is coming through on water use in data centres. One way to get that is to work with Ofwat’s Smart Water Metering Delivery Group, which will look at rolling out smart meters in the non-household market. That will help us better understand what the standards and delivery expectations are and how much water is being used. That work is due to be completed over the next 12 months.

[Baroness Grender (LD)]

Does the Minister accept that individual data centres can use as much water as thousands of homes yet it is still so ironic that these data centres do not appear able to provide transparent data about their own usage of water? What steps are the Government taking to ensure that new data centres put their own capabilities and machine-learning know-how to good use to tell us and provide us with that information?

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

I mentioned the Water Delivery Taskforce in response to the previous question. The whole point of that is to bring together government, industry and regulators to improve that evidence. We want to look at how best we can get that information from data use centres. It is early days with this at the moment, but we are very aware that we need to get this information if we are to look at the best use of our water resources. This year has clearly demonstrated that we need to look at this, and not just at data centres. Golf courses use an enormous amount more water than data centres, for example, so it is about looking at that bigger picture as well.

Natural England: Gamebird Release Licensing

Baroness Grender Excerpts

Tuesday 21st July 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

I am very aware that there is information about the importance to the rural economy of the shooting industry. That is why the Government support well-managed shooting estates.

[Baroness Grender (LD)]

Given that the avian influenza risk has been rated high or very high continuously since October 2024 and that licensing conditions were designed specifically to limit transmission to protected birds, can the Minister confirm that the Government feel that this approach is working given that, currently, as I understand it, only one special protection area is expected to receive standard approval this season? Perhaps I may just say that I am very much looking forward to continuing to do lots of Defra Oral Questions with the noble Baroness in September and hopeful that we will do so.

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

I thank the noble Baroness. I jolly well hope that too; I am waiting to find out. She raised the important issue of avian influenza. It has caused some serious problems. This year was worse than last year—not as bad as a few years ago—and it is not going to go away, so the way we manage avian influenza is incredibly important. That has to include the way that we manage and release game birds.

Farming and Food Production: Land Use Framework

Baroness Grender Excerpts

Tuesday 21st July 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

The recent global instability has shown that we need to be more self-sufficient and strengthen our energy independence. Doing so can also help to lower costs and tackle climate change. In addition, farmers and landowners can choose to diversify their income through solar projects on their land, which can also increase the resilience of their farming businesses. I agree with the noble Lord that solar installations on rooftops and reservoirs are important, but on their own they cannot deliver the scale and capacity required to meet the nation’s needs. The land use framework demonstrates how we can safeguard our most productive agricultural land while adapting land use to support nature recovery, climate resilience, housing and infrastructure. Expanding land use for renewable energy will not come at the expense of our best agricultural land, and solar developments will need to be located in the most appropriate places.

[Baroness Grender (LD)]

My Lords, will the Minister say more about the promised reforms to the farm tenancy forum and what it will actually deliver? Tenants manage a third of England’s farmland yet have little say when landlords respond to new environmental or energy incentives. Can she confirm whether a tenant farmer commissioner, as recommended by the Rock review, remains under active consideration?

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

I cannot confirm that question specifically—I would have to go back to the department and check—but I can say that the department is keen to work very closely with tenant farmers. That is why we have a tenant farming commissioner: we want to do everything we can to support more tenant farmers to become profitable and more secure.

Bycatch Risk Prioritisation Framework

Baroness Grender Excerpts

Tuesday 21st July 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

I think the answer to that is yes.

[Baroness Grender (LD)]

Will the Minister confirm that the Government still intend to meet their legal duties to achieve good environmental status for UK seas, given that bycatch is repeatedly cited as a key barrier to this? Can she tell us what quantified time-bound targets this framework will contain to try to get us to that aim?

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

My understanding is that the framework will be ongoing: we get it set up, we get it working, we collect the data and we monitor. It will also inform further frameworks going forward.

Clean Water Bill: Chalk Streams

Baroness Grender Excerpts

Monday 13th July 2026 Lords Chamber

Asked by

[Baroness Grender]

To ask His Majesty’s Government when they intend to publish the Clean Water Bill; and what steps they will take before its publication to ensure that urgent protections for chalk streams are in place.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Baroness Hayman of Ullock) (Lab)]

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.

[Baroness Grender (LD)]

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?

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

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.

Farming Practices: Sustainable Farming Incentive

Baroness Grender Excerpts

Monday 13th July 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

I am very aware of the issue the noble Baroness refers to; we have discussed it in Parliament. The issue is that common land and shared grazing are in principle eligible for both SFI and CSHT—the higher tier—but, for technical reasons, it is not currently possible for common groups to apply for SFI or to enter the new higher-tier grants, as the noble Baroness so rightly said. The RPA is engaging with the different external stakeholders, including the Foundation for Common Land, to discuss what can be done to ensure that they can apply for grants and get the support they need. We are looking to introduce the ability to apply in respect of common land under the stewardship higher tier later this year. We will be trialling applications before we spread it out more widely.

[Baroness Grender (LD)]

My Lords, does the Minister agree that species-rich grassland is one of the clearest examples of regenerative farming in practice? Why, then, has support for it been removed from SFI 2026? How does that sit with the Government’s commitment to regenerative agriculture?

[Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)]

We have tried to bring SFI into new areas because it is really important that smaller farms and different types of farms have the opportunity to get the grants to do regenerative farming. Alongside that, we are looking at other ways to support the kind of things the noble Baroness is talking about. It is also important to remember that, when there is a grant for something, it does not mean that is the only thing you can get a grant or support for. I would encourage landowners to look broadly at what we have to offer.

Justification Decision (Generation of Power by the RR SMR) Regulations 2026

Baroness Grender Excerpts

Tuesday 7th July 2026 Grand Committee

[Baroness Grender (LD)]

My Lords, I welcome these regulations. This is the right thing to do, and it is the right time to do it, because our energy security is under real pressure. We need every credible part of the low-carbon mix working as hard as it can.

This order will give legal effect to the decision that the Rolls-Royce small modular reactor is justified under the 2004 regulations. It is a generic and non-site-specific decision. It does not authorise a single spade in the ground, still less the construction or operation of the reactor. All the real-world hurdles remain: environmental permits, a nuclear site licence, planning consent and all the other approvals that any serious project must secure. It was good to hear the reassurances on that front from the Minister.

That matters, because this Committee should be clear about what is being decided and what is not, as the Minister said. We are not approving a reactor to be built tomorrow; we are saying that, in principle, the design has passed the justification test. That is sensible, and we support it. But it is not the same thing as delivery, and we are clear that we do not want it to be confused with a regulatory green light, with progress on the ground.

Our central point is that we believe the best way to cut bills for everyone is to invest in home-grown renewable power, electricity storage and the infrastructure that gets clean electricity to where it is needed. That is where the quickest gains are, where the biggest jobs dividend is and where the strongest long-term energy security will come from. So we support SMRs and we support this justification decision, but we should not let the enthusiasm for emerging nuclear technology become an excuse to drift back into the bad old habits of overpromising on nuclear while underdelivering on renewables. Large-scale, expensive and slow-to-deliver nuclear projects have had years to demonstrate their value. Too often, they have done the opposite; they have tied up time, money and political attention that could have been used more productively and more proactively elsewhere.

That is why the balance matters. SMRs may well have a role to play, and this design may contribute to a more secure decarbonised grid, but the Government must be absolutely clear that the priority is not to deepen our dependence on the old model of nuclear development. The priority is to accelerate renewables generation, storage and the modern grid that can support them.

It will astonish the Minister to hear that I have only one question regarding this SI. How will the Government make sure that support for Rolls-Royce SMR does not slow down the pace of renewables and storage, so that we ensure that this is genuinely complementary rather than competitive with the faster deployment of the clean power that is already available? How will the Government avoid the familiar pattern in which nuclear projects absorb the oxygen while more agile solutions are left waiting in the wings?

We support this instrument but we do so on all those clear understandings—that it is part of a wider energy strategy, not a substitute one. I look forward to hearing the Minister’s response.

REACH (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2026

Baroness Grender Excerpts

Tuesday 7th July 2026 Grand Committee

[Viscount Stansgate (Lab)]

My Lords, I hope I will not detain the Committee for long, but this is a very important and intricate area. The noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh, has great experience of this from her time at the European Parliament. I remember visiting the European Parliament—it must have been almost 20 years ago—when REACH was being debated. It was, and I believe it remains, the largest piece of legislation ever passed by the European Parliament.

I did not have the benefit of the CIA briefing, but I will take the opportunity of paying tribute to the work of the CIA, because it does a great deal in this area and I have placed that on record. I have worked with it in the past, as with other organisations such as the Society of Chemical Industry and scientific bodies such as the Royal Society of Chemistry, which 20 years ago were taking a very close interest in this subject. I am glad that my noble friend the Minister referred to the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee, because it has quite rightly raised some concerns.

My points are very brief. First, I understand the case for extending the current deadlines in the way that my noble friend has set out. I also understand the case for aligning the UK REACH submission deadlines with the development and implementation of the alternative transitional registration model. But I hope my noble friend will understand if I say that we hope that we will not be here in a few years with my noble friend making the case for further extensions to the deadlines. If there is any word of reassurance she can give on that, I would be very grateful.

My second point is to ask whether UK businesses still have difficulty accessing the hazard data required to support registrations. As I understand it, the data is still held by EU-based consortia under the provisions of EU REACH.

Thirdly—I apologise to the Minister in advance if I am wrong—am I right that in the last month 15 substances of very high concern were added to the UK list? I am encouraged by nodding elsewhere along the Benches. If this is true, can my noble friend say a little more about what the substances are? I understand that they are the first major additions to that list for some time. It would be interesting for the Committee to know the reasons for it and to be reassured that there are very good reasons for doing so.

[Baroness Grender (LD)]

My Lords, I thank the Minister for introducing this draft instrument and explaining its purpose. On the Liberal Democrat Benches, we recognise the case for this measure and will support it. We do so because it is a pragmatic step to avoid a cliff edge—not because we believe the current system is in any sense satisfactory.

As described by the noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh, the chemicals sector could be described as the invisible backbone of our economy. It underpins everything from advanced manufacturing to pharmaceuticals, construction and consumer goods. It matters that we get the regulatory framework right, not just for the industry but for the people who work in it, the consumers and, importantly, the environment. The alternative transitional registration model, which the Minister described to us, is intended to reduce unnecessary duplication. According to the Government’s assessment, it could cut one-off industry costs by around 70%, or roughly—I think this is the estimate that the noble Baroness is looking for—around £2 billion. To stop that additional payment is extremely welcome, but businesses need certainty, not a rolling series of extensions that leave everyone guessing what comes next.

We very much appreciate that this Government are having to square the circle of a previous negotiation and a Brexit that we view as the gift that keeps on taking from the British people and from every industry in Great Britain. Nevertheless, I have four questions for the Minister.

First, can she set out the milestones that will determine whether the ATRm is delivered on time, given that the design and implementation are not, as she described, expected to be completed until summer 2027? The Committee needs some confidence that we are moving towards some kind of stable system, not simply pushing the problem further down the road. Will the Minister also confirm how progress will be monitored and how often updates will be published? What will trigger, in turn, some kind of remedial action if the timetable slips? There is a danger of the perception that the sector continues to run on a series of sticking plasters; I am sure she appreciates that.

Secondly, what assurance can she give that any future divergence from EU REACH will be strictly evidence led and transparent? I read somewhere that the system is like reading the description on the back of a book without having any of the information inside the book that is necessary to move at pace. The Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee has already raised concerns about the lack of clarity around the circumstances in which the Government would diverge, and the Office for Environmental Protection has highlighted the problem of new EU hazard classes that have not yet been brought into GB law. How will the Government avoid creating an unpredictable system in which decisions appear to be made case by case, without a clear scientific basis? I think this is something that the noble Viscount, Lord Stansgate, was reaching towards. If the default position is alignment with EU REACH unless there are compelling reasons to diverge, we need to know what those reasons are, how they will be tested, and how the public and Parliament will be able to scrutinise them.