Lord Adonis, former chairman of the National Infrastructure Commission, has warned that the Government is “ducking” key issues on critical water infrastructure, accusing them of kicking the can down the road.

Speaking in a debate this week on the draft National Policy Statement for Water Resources Infrastructure in the House of Lords, Lord Adonis told peers that the Government have so far ducked three critical issues and that the draft national policy statement “kicks the can down the road.”

He was responding to Lord Gardiner of Kimble, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs speaking for the Government in the debate.

Lord Adonis grilled the Minister on the Statement, saying that the issue of new reservoirs was absolutely central to the debate about new infrastructure for water. The Statement raised “the very big issue in water infrastructure of whether we have a national system of water transfer to enable water to be distributed from the north, where there is a surplus, to the south, where there is a shortage.“

However, he pointed out that it did not say whether the Government’s intention is to place a higher priority on new infrastructure for water transfers than on reservoirs and asked the Minister to explain the hierarchy in the Government’s planning between new reservoirs and new infrastructure for water transfer.

Referring to the report published last year by the National Infrastructure Commission, which suggested that immediate action was needed to close a gap of 3.3 billion litres of water per day to maintain current levels of resilience, Lord Gardiner said:

“We need to tackle this challenge on two fronts, reducing demand and increasing supply through a twin-track approach.”

On levels of consumption which had reduced from around 150 litres per person per day in 1999 to around 140 litres per person per day now, the peer said more needed to be done and that the Government plan to launch a call for evidence In the coming weeks on setting an ambitious target for per capita consumption.

Despite more ambitious action to reduce demand, it was clear that in the coming decade more infrastructure would need to be built, the Minister warned, with some infrastructure schemes large enough to qualify as nationally significant.

He explained that the national policy statement would apply to infrastructure to facilitate water transfers, desalination plants and reservoirs with a deployable output of 80 million litres per day. Additionally, reservoirs with a physical volume of 30 million cubic metres would be included.

“Our current estimate is that up to three nationally significant projects - all reservoirs - are likely to come forward in the next five to 10 years to provide sufficient infrastructure. Looking to 2050 and beyond, more are likely to be required.”

Conservative peer Baroness McIntosh suggested that the Government should also look at the importance of smaller reservoirs, particularly in areas of increasing water stress, where the environmental impact would be much less - both in the building of reservoirs and their maintenance.

Lord Wigley (Plaid Cymru) pointed out that proposals for water transfer schemes, such as creating linkages to supply water from the River Severn to the Thames Valley, had implications for water storage and its release into Welsh rivers, commenting:

“Any new proposals with cross-border implications should be highlighted at the earliest possible opportunity ….the concept of exploratory consent in principle should be developed, and it should be accepted that no proposal can be taken forward unless there is formal agreement in principle on both sides. “

In terms of the use of water abstracted or provided via reservoirs in Wales, there should be reasonable payments made, he added.

Lord Adonis: “Government is ducking issues and statement kicks the can down the road”

Lord Adonis was particularly critical of the Government’s approach, expressing concern that the draft national policy statement was “essentially a list of considerations that need to be addressed in the development of a national strategy for dealing with water infrastructure which did not set out a strategy.”

On the key issues of water metering, new infrastructure, new reservoirs and a national water grid, the Minister had not offered “any clear way forward on any of those issues” and neither did the document, which simply laid out a number of considerations.

He continued:

“As soon as one gets into the actual issues at stake, they are very controversial. The issue of whether water metering will be mandatory is controversial because it will impose new requirements on householders, many of whom do not want mandatory water metering partly because it imposes the potential of real additional costs for the consumption of water.”

He also referred to “the Abingdon reservoir saga” of the proposal to build the first new reservoir in the past 30 years in Abingdon. Lord Adonis said:

“ It was proposed by Thames Water and went to public inquiry. It was reviewed by Ofwat which then ruled against it after a very long controversial planning saga and the reservoir was not built. There is still a big debate about whether that was a huge missed opportunity.”

“Only way to get controversial new infrastructure built is by Government taking the lead”

The former NIC Chairman clearly regards the Government’s approach as inadequate – he went on to tell the House:

“But on the questions of whether we will or will not be building new reservoirs, will or will not have a national water grid or will or will not have mandatory water metering—three absolutely critical issues in terms of a water infrastructure plan—the Government have ducked them all so far and have simply kicked them forward. The vogue phrase at the moment is kicking the can down the road. I say gently to the Minister that this draft national policy statement kicks the can down the road.”

“I raise that because if the can is kicked down the road and this becomes the national policy statement, the onus will in fact be on the water companies to come forward with plans that will then go to Ofwat to go through a regulatory and economic assessment with the Government having the reserve power to intervene or not.”

He told Lord Gardiner that the Government’s approach would not work when it comes to taking controversial decisions and that “the only way that you will get controversial new infrastructure built is by the Government taking the lead with a government infrastructure plan.”

He warned:

“My underlying concern about the draft national policy statement is that it could turn out to be a complete irrelevance. If we need to go into the era of building significant new infrastructure, which we might well need to do, it will have to be at the behest of the Government. It cannot come from private water companies and this does not resolve the issue of how the Government will take forward plans for significant new national infrastructure.”

Serious drought in England would lead to huge enforceable water consumption limits

Baroness Jones of Whitchurch was among a number of peers who warned the Government of potentially serious problems if it failed to address the issues. The Shadow Spokesperson on Environment, Food and Rural Affairs commented:

“Across England, there is now a one in four chance of a level 4 serious drought between now and 2050. If that were to happen, it would lead to huge enforceable water consumption limits, on a scale that the current population has never experienced and would find very difficult to tolerate. To ensure resilience of water provision, we would need an extra 4 billion litres every day by 2050.”

“Adapting to climate change means that we cannot continue with a situation where water companies are losing 20% of water to leaks—2.9 billion litres per day. At the same time, it is imperative that we improve the quality of our freshwater resources as well as tackling drought and unsustainable abstraction. Historically, relationships between water companies, housebuilders and local authorities have been complex and disjointed, without a clear sense of overriding priorities.”

She also drew attention to “a short-term focus on climate change at a local level” which had led to insufficient progress is being made, particularly locally, saying:

“For example, only 43% of local authorities plan at least 15 years ahead. Local authority planning budgets have almost halved since 2010, and over a third of planning policy staff have been lost. Only 42% of local authorities have any kind of climate change strategy. Local authorities are not resourced or geared up to the challenge ahead.“

Lord Gardiner: Govt recognises need for big national infrastructure projects and small-scale projects

In his summing up remarks concluding the debate, Lord Gardiner said he was “certainly not seeking to kick any can down the road” and had made “a careful note of all the questions” which he would not be replying to as much would “unfold in the further response.”

“We recognise that we will need both big national infrastructure projects and small-scale projects, which is part of what I have described in lay language as the balance of how we are good custodians of our water supply.”

“The noble Lord, Lord Adonis, and the noble Baroness, Lady Jones, spoke of difficult decisions. I agree. The whole purpose of this debate, and for taking this matter forward, is that difficult decisions have to be taken for the national interest.”

“ If everyone is to have water, that will mean that we may well ….. have to ask parts of the country about this -the busy south-east and other parts of the country where reservoirs, for instance, and other infrastructure projects will be not only in the national interest but probably in the local interest as well.”