-
Question
Critiques the Minister for contradicting previous assurances on environmental standards post-Brexit. Questions transparency and lack of consultation with environment groups while raising concerns over weakening protections under the habitats directive and nutrient neutrality rules.
Minister reply
The Minister asserts that the proposed amendments do not weaken environmental commitments, aiming to unblock 100,000 homes adding minimal pollution, ensuring no overall loss in environmental outcomes. She notes significant enforcement actions taken against water companies since 2015 and plans for sustainable farming practices.
-
Question
Acknowledges shared objectives with the shadow to improve river water quality yearly while questioning if the proposed measures address specific EU habitats directive interpretations affecting certain catchments like River Clun in his constituency.
Minister reply
The Minister agrees that the issue stems from a judgment imposed post-Brexit and highlights ongoing measures to protect rivers and environment, including plans for sustainable farming practices. She commits to bringing forward a Wye catchment plan shortly.
-
Question
Questions the Government's approach to nutrient neutrality and housing development, highlighting concerns over delays in planning permission due to farming practices. Criticises disapplication of regulations without securing additional funding or developer contributions for mitigation.
Minister reply
Responds that Natural England was consulted on potential reforms and that discussions were detailed. Defends the measures as pragmatic and necessary to unblock housing development, emphasising commitment to nature markets and voluntary developer contributions.
-
Question
Congratulates the Government for addressing blocked planning permissions caused by nutrient neutrality rulings. Emphasises doubling investment in nutrient mitigation schemes while protecting environment, and criticises opposition's stance on housing development.
Minister reply
Acknowledges concerns raised and emphasises that the measures will not have an environmental impact, as funding is being doubled for Natural England’s nutrient mitigation scheme. Also notes increased support from developers.
-
Question
Critiques Government's delay in addressing the issue since 2018 and questions their panicked response to declining housing starts.
Minister reply
Defends the measures as necessary, stating that time was needed to consider legal aspects. Emphasises the need for unblocking planning permissions and protecting the environment simultaneously.
-
Question
Argues that leaving the EU allows adapting laws better suited for the country, contrary to claims of environmental degradation.
Minister reply
Agrees with Chris Grayling, asserting that leaving the EU enables making laws beneficial for housing development and environment. Defends EU legacy judgment’s inefficacy in improving water quality.
-
Question
Questions whether Government's proposals are a regression of environmental protections and asks about Natural England’s stance on the approach.
Minister reply
Responds that Natural England is a government partner involved in mitigation schemes, disputes Office for Environmental Protection criticisms, arguing no regression in environmental outcomes.
-
Question
Highlights possibility of making housing development nitrate neutral through sustainable techniques and urges planning law to match this ambition.
Minister reply
Acknowledges the role of sustainable drainage in reducing environmental impact and commits to examining broader applications of such policies.
-
Question
Discusses the sewage overflow issue in his constituency, mentioning that there were 4,468 hours of sewage last year alone. He criticises the idea of simply waving a wand to solve housing problems.
Minister reply
DEFRA Ministers have been addressing this issue multiple times and are proud of their plan for water which includes £2.2 billion of new accelerated investment in vital infrastructure. The Government acknowledges that storm overflows and sewage discharges into waters are unacceptable and they are taking regulatory action to tackle the problem.
-
Question
Highlights environmental sensitivities in his area, mentions the Tata factory development, and South West Water's pollution reduction plan.
Minister reply
Works constructively with Natural England to tackle storm overflow issues while supporting necessary developments that are important for jobs and investment without harming the environment.
-
Question
Challenges the Government's guidance on rules since 2019, stating it has prevented affordable housing development in environmentally sensitive areas.
Minister reply
Natural England is a Government body with which they work constructively to address legal issues and ensure vital development while protecting the environment.
-
Question
Questions the unspent section 106 developer contributions for environmental projects in his area, concerns about Kirklees Council's ability to deliver these projects.
Minister reply
Engaged with local authority leaders to explain how this change will affect them and what is expected of them regarding spending money properly on infrastructure projects.
-
Question
Claims that the Government blocks housing development, particularly affordable social housing.
Minister reply
Conservative-run councils have delivered more houses over recent years compared to Labour-run councils which are experiencing failures in delivering necessary housing.
-
Question
Welcomes the Government’s measures and asks if they will result in cleaner water.
Minister reply
Acknowledges that these measures will lead to cleaner water for everyone, including those in his constituency.
-
Question
Questions the assessment behind expediting 100,000 permissions by 2030 and whether local authorities have been consulted.
Minister reply
Has consulted with local authorities and stands up for small businesses in the sector. They understand the challenges faced by those starting a business.
-
Question
Welcomes Government’s balanced approach, asks about timescale for granting planning permissions again.
Minister reply
Needs to wait for Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill to achieve Royal Assent but engagement with local authorities is ongoing to ensure spades in the ground as soon as possible.
-
Question
Challenges the Minister about scrapping housing targets, asks for Natural England’s advice and discusses the need to reverse the Prime Minister's decision.
Minister reply
The Government are committed to building 1 million homes during this Parliament and have a target of building 300,000 homes per year. They support local communities while Labour opposes development in green belts.
-
Question
Discusses work on creating wetlands and asks for more information on applying for £280 million for environmental matters.
Minister reply
Is delighted to meet her and reads any reports from her APPG. They will continue the packages being delivered by Natural England and boost them due to their benefit.
-
Question
Does the Minister accept that the proposed investment in the Natural England nutrient mitigation scheme covers only 15% of the total mitigation requirement to 2030? Where will the additional funds required to address the shortfall come from?
Minister reply
I do not accept the figure mentioned by the hon. Lady and I am unaware of its source. The schemes are ongoing, and my Department is working on details. Additionally, there is a Government scheme administered by my Department that can be delivered throughout the country.
-
Question
Does the Minister agree that there is a flaw in the way in which the Office for Environmental Protection has reached its determination in this matter? It can take into account only what is in the Bill, not the other measures mentioned by the Government. Surely it is necessary to look at all measures in the round.
Minister reply
My hon. Friend's point is correct. The Office for Environmental Protection has interpreted the situation narrowly while we have presented an ambitious package that will meet planning permissions needs and protect the environment, which we believe they are not fully considering.
-
Question
The Government pledged during debates on the Retained EU Law Act 2023 that they would not reduce environmental protections. Does this pledge still hold, or does the Minister wish to correct the record?
Minister reply
I have repeatedly stated that we do not agree that this is a regression in environmental outcomes and stand by our commitment to leave the environment in a better state than when we found it, backed up by numerous actions across various areas.
-
Question
My constituency was one of the worst-affected places with 2,000 planning applications held up. Will these well-intended laws be missing the mark they were intended to achieve?
Minister reply
The existing legal framework has had a disproportionate effect on planning permissions and house building when the main source of pollution lies elsewhere. The new package will enable house building and extensions in my hon. Friend’s constituency, help smaller builders, and protect our rivers.
-
Question
Will the new policy framework lead to increased funds for the Canal & River Trust which has seen budget cuts leading to removal of litter bins around the River Tees?
Minister reply
I will take these concerns back to DEFRA Ministers, who I am sure have heard about the Canal & River Trust’s situation and are considering providing an answer.
-
Emma Hardy
Lab
Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice
Question
Following questions on mitigation, the Government's focus is on wetlands but it will take a long time to mitigate pollution. What will be done in the interim?
Minister reply
While focusing on wetlands, other projects are part of the credit scheme. However, we need to start unblocking houses now, which is why we have taken a proportionate approach with these amendments.
-
Question
The Great Ouse Valley Environment Trust in Bedford is concerned about the fifth most polluted river in England. Can the Minister explain why protections are being decreased when urgent plans to clean waterways are needed?
Minister reply
The package we bring forward will protect the river and enable it to be cleaner, backed by our plan for water and further announcements today. This is also important for affordable housing.
-
Question
My constituents recognise the need for housing but do not like the ripping up of environmental protections. Will she apologise on behalf of her Government who crashed the economy, pushed up inflation, made materials more expensive, and did not deal with land banking?
Minister reply
What I would like to see from Members opposite is an apology for talking down this country repeatedly. The Conservative Government are getting every industry going, including house building, by working on behalf of builders rather than blockers.
-
Question
The Minister refers to doubling investment in a nutrient mitigation scheme with £200 million for slurry management yet 80% of phosphates come from households, only 15% from agriculture. Is this another example of blaming farmers?
Minister reply
We are helping farmers build a circular economy by providing slurry management grants. Farmers will welcome this intervention as it helps them farm sustainably and in harmony with nature.
-
Question
This Tory Government are failing on housing, and the environment pays the price. The Welsh Labour Government are delivering both housing and environmental protections. Why can’t this Government?
Minister reply
The Welsh Labour Government has a poor record on house building as well as tackling pollution at source. We are bringing forward catchment plans and protected site strategies to address these issues.