Surviving Drought (Environment and Climate Change Committee Report)

Lord Krebs Excerpts

Wednesday 11th November 2026 Grand Committee

[Lord Krebs (CB)]

My Lords, I thank our excellent chair, the noble Baroness, Lady Sheehan, for her comprehensive introduction to our report, and at the same time thank the outstanding clerk, policy analyst and committee operations officer who support all our work. This report appeared shortly before the driest July since records began in 1836. It was the right product at the right time.

You can build drought resilience by increasing the supply of water, reducing demand or both. The supply of water is ultimately rainfall, which can be stored or transferred from one place to another. The demands on water include use by households, industry, agriculture and nature, as well as the water that is wasted and ultimately ends up in the sea. As we have already heard, the supply—rainfall—has increased slightly over the past few decades, but it also appears to be getting lumpier, with periods of dry weather and periods of intense rainfall. Demand has increased because of population growth and the emergence of new water-intensive industries, such as data centres, as the noble Lord, Lord Ashcombe, just mentioned.

As the noble Baroness, Lady Sheehan, told us, the Minister, Emma Hardy, said that the most cost-effective measures to mitigate against drought are to reduce demand. I want to focus briefly on two areas of demand: the home and the farm. As we have already heard, household water use in England is profligate. We use over 136 litres per person per day, which is 30% more than in many other European countries. The Government have a target of reducing per-capita consumption to 122 litres by 2038, but even this is more lavish than in many other countries in Europe. The reasons for this are quite simple. On the one hand, water is too cheap. On the other, we have not legislated to require more efficient use of water in the home.

Several witnesses told us that water is too cheap, although simply increasing the price of water without reducing the amount used would have a negative effect on the cost of living crisis. However, we were told that some water companies use carrots rather than sticks to encourage more frugal water use. Anglian Water has a summer tariff and a reduced winter tariff to incentivise water saving in dry periods. South West Water offers credit on water bills to customers who reduce their water use. Does the Minister agree that these approaches should be more widely adopted by water companies?

We have already heard that Part G of the building regulations sets the rules for water use in new-build homes. The current standard of 125 litres per person is too high, and the Government accepted our recommendation that the standard should be tightened to 105 litres. They said that the policies for achieving this are expected to be published this year. As the noble Baroness, Lady Sheehan, has already asked, I reiterate that it would be nice to have an update on these policies. I particularly ask whether the policies will include rainwater harvesting and grey water recycling, which could reduce per capita consumption to 80 litres per day. The standard does not apply to existing buildings, and I therefore ask the Minister to tell us how the Government propose to address water use efficiency in these homes.

I turn to farmers. They often rely on abstracted water for irrigation. Witnesses told us about a number of problems with abstraction. One is that the cost of abstraction licences does not reflect water scarcity. Another problem that farmers complained about is that the Environment Agency is sometimes obliged to reduce the amount of water available for abstraction in order to meet the needs of nature. At the same time as these problems exist, the demand for water by farmers is very likely to increase in the future because of summer heat and drought.

The Nature Friendly Farming Network argues that a combination of on-farm reservoirs, rainwater harvesting and efficient irrigation are essential parts of the solution to increased drought resilience. In addition, it emphasises the need to foster spongy soils with high organic content that can successfully retain water. It cites figures suggesting that soils with higher organic content retain substantially more water and reduce the need for irrigation. However, a recent review of the scientific literature also suggests that spongier soils may reduce groundwater recharge, so there may be costs as well as benefits to improving the organic content of soils. Can the Minister tell us what the Government’s assessment is of the benefits and costs of spongy soils? I look forward to the Minister’s responses.