Water (Conservation and Miscellaneous Provisions) (Hansard, 31 October 1995)

§ Mrs. Helen Jackson (Sheffield, Hillsborough)

I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to provide for the conservation of water by the establishment of mandatory water leakage targets for water undertakers and by encouraging the installation of water efficient fittings in homes; to provide for the review of abstraction licences which affect sites of nature conservation value; to give domestic consumers greater choice as to methods of charging for the supply of water; and to provide for the payment of compensation in relation to drought orders. I am grateful for the chance to introduce the Bill, which, although a small Bill, is made significant by the failure of the water industry to cope with this year's hot dry summer. Its object is to place conservation at the heart of water management, in a way that both protects wildlife and ensures constant supplies to meet all our needs in homes and industry without the use of crude price rationing for the poor and more vulnerable.

Behind that objective lies the fact that, whatever the industry's management structure, water belongs to us all, and is in true common ownership. To squander that precious resource affects not only us but every plant, bird and animal.

The Bill seeks to achieve that objective in four ways, the first of which concerns leakage. Public anger spilled over this summer as company after company sought drought orders, hosepipe bans and, in the Yorkshire area, stand-pipes and cut-offs. That anger was fuelled by the growing awareness that because of leaking pipes, half a million gallons of treated drinking water is wasted every minute of every day—enough to serve the daily needs of an extra 26 million households.

Labour's campaign to highlight that scandal has now been backed by the National Rivers Authority report, "The Drought of '95", published last month, which said: Leakage is an area where in knowledge, the UK is without doubt a world leader, but in practice has some of the highest leakage rates in the world". My Bill calls for mandatory targets to be set, monitored and enforced by the Government through the Environment Agency, in close consultation with the companies and the water regulator. The power to penalise companies for failure would rest with the new agency rather than with Ofwat, whose approach to leakage has been disappointing, constrained by its limited focus on economic factors rather than the wider conservation picture.

Two weeks ago, in a letter to the Secretary of State, the Water Services Association promised an enhanced programme of leakage reduction at no extra cost to customers. That is most welcome, and recognises for the first time that leakage reduction is the prime factor in water conservation. My Bill will ensure that those fine words are followed by effective action and investment.

Secondly, my Bill examines how homes could be designed to conserve water without changing usage patterns involving hygiene and our basic needs. Plentiful use of clean water remains the foundation for a high level of public health. The Bill seeks to minimise people's need for water by promoting water-efficient fittings in the home, rather than by using blunt economic tools simply to drive down demand.

106 For example, a programme to replace all the nation's older 9-litre toilet cisterns with new 6-litre varieties would in itself save more than 10 per cent. of present household usage. If half the baths that we take were replaced by showers—I do not advocate the Yorkshire Water chairman's advice to forgo baths and showers altogether—we should save a further 4 per cent.

Those savings are technically simple to achieve and permanent, and they would be popular because they cause no added inconvenience to customers. They are also more equitable than metering, as they are not made at the disproportionate expense of poorer customers, and are cheaper than the £200 per property cost of metering, especially as there are no continuing billing costs.

My Bill uses the new duty inserted into the Water Industry Act 1991 by the Environment Act 1995, adding a clause requiring water undertakers to devise grant schemes to help with the cost of installing the efficiency measures.

Customers who respond to the call for greater water efficiency would then be rewarded by a reduction in their bills to reflect their lower consumption. Companies would receive both the benefits of reduced demand, and their success or otherwise would be a recognised factor in price negotiations. The Government document "Water Conservation" endorses some of that approach, stresses the value of transferring to low-flush toilets and suggests that water byelaws and building regulations should be used to enforce the fitting of water-saving devices. We look forward to further work on this.

The Bill attempts to offer the necessary incentives to companies and customers to get some action. One response of the water companies to the summer shortage was to rush to the Secretary of State for drought orders, which would enable them to do two things—to take more supplies from the rivers and to escape liability for compensation. The Bill addresses both areas.

Section 79 of the Water Resources Act 1991 deals with the payment of compensation where a drought order has been made. There is no provision in the accompanying schedule for compensation for interruptions in supplies brought about by emergency drought orders. Moreover, interruptions in supply caused by ordinary drought orders are exempt from the provisions of the guaranteed standard scheme, unless covered in a specific contract with a particular business.

The horrendous threat of 24-hour cut-offs hangs today over the people of Halifax and Bradford in Yorkshire. The courts need to prepare for countless test cases for financial loss—or worse—in the event of a fire which might cause injury, or even death, which might have been prevented had a source of running water been available.

The action proposed in my Bill on compensation has been endorsed strongly by all the consumer bodies, and only last Friday by Ofwat's customer services committee.

But we cannot simply rob the lifeblood of fish, otters and other wildlife and drain the rivers dry in response to our failure to conserve the nation's resource. The Bill places water conservation at the heart of environment policy, where it belongs. It instructs the Environment Agency to review every abstraction licence which may be having a significant damaging effect upon a site of nature conservation value". Where such damaging effect is found, the Bill will seek to revoke or vary the licence accordingly.

107 Many hon. Members will remember that half an hour before the end of the debate on Report of the Environment Act 1995—at 11.55 pm precisely—and after 75 hours of debate in Committee, the Government tabled a new clause about water conservation. There was no time for a considered amendment and no time for a proper debate. The Bill seeks to put that right, and it has the support of all the officers of the all-party parliamentary group on water and many outside organisations. I commend it to the House.