Derbyshire MPs respond to controversy over river sewage and Environment Bill

Derbyshire MPs have given their thoughts on the Environment Bill after a Government U-turn to strengthen laws on the discharge of sewage into UK rivers.
Toby Perkins and Lee Rowley have both given their thoughts on the Environment Bill and the issue of sewage discharges.Toby Perkins and Lee Rowley have both given their thoughts on the Environment Bill and the issue of sewage discharges.
Toby Perkins and Lee Rowley have both given their thoughts on the Environment Bill and the issue of sewage discharges.

The key issue surrounding the bill is that, during wet weather, storm overflows release wastewater into rivers.

This is done to prevent sewers being overloaded and causing flooding, and has become a more frequent practice due to increased rainfall and outdated infrastructure.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Conservatives initially voted against an amendment to place a legal duty on water companies to reduce the amount of sewage they discharge. After much criticism, the bill was changed to require these companies by law to show a reduction in such discharges over the next five years.

Lee Rowley, Conservative MP for North-East Derbyshire, said there was no truth to claims that Conservatives had voted to damage the environment, and that the bill promised to improve many aspects of environmental policy.

“The allegation that we voted to toxify the environment is just absolute nonsense. Of course, we all want to leave our environment in a better place – that isn’t in question.

“In fact, the debate from which this very controversy emanated was on the actual Environment Bill – a flagship piece of legislation seeking to ‘put the environment at the centre of policy making’ – not just for sewage but many other aspects of improving our natural environment.”

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Mr Rowley also explained that the amendment was rejected by Conservative MPs because it was deemed impractical, and there were concerns about possible unintended consequences.

”If we had accepted the amendment in the way it was written then it might have circumscribed the ability to discharge into rivers in extraordinary circumstances. We, of course, don’t want that to happen but, until we can fully phase it out, recognise that it may have to happen sometimes.

“In those places where the infrastructure isn't yet in place to stop it happening, then you either accept temporary discharge during periods of heavy rainfall or you don’t. And, if you don’t, the water still has to go somewhere.

“If it remains in an overwhelmed system then it, inevitably, will appear somewhere – as a flood. As someone who has worked with local residents over the last two years to try to resolve flooding issues across North-East Derbyshire and who was present on the day in 2019 when flood water was washing through houses, destroying belongings and stopping daily life, I am not going to be the MP that potentially contributes to more of that happening.”

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The government has also promised to produce a statutory plan to reduce discharges from storm overflows, and water companies are set to invest £3.1 billion on storm overflow improvements between now and 2025.

Despite these measures, Toby Perkins, Labour MP for Chesterfield, remains unimpressed. He said the government lacked both the commitment to resolve this particular issue and the leadership to tackle the current climate crisis.

“We have waited many months for this Environment Bill due to unnecessary delays by the Government, whilst our waters are ever more polluted, our air is ever dirtier, and climate change continues to move the world perilously close to disaster.

“Conservative MPs rejected an amendment last week that would have legally required water companies to reduce the amount of sewage discharged into UK waterways, which would cause massive damage to our coastal towns, rivers and environment. They have had to be shamed into a U-turn, which shows that they don’t have the commitment to do what is needed.

“Real leadership is needed if we are going to tackle the threats to our environment both locally and globally, and the Government lacks the ambition or the enthusiasm to provide this leadership.”