UK Infrastructure Bank Bill [Lords]

New Clause 1

Future of the Infrastructure Bank

“The Bank may not be sold until commitments to meet net zero by 2050 and duties set out in section 1 of the Climate Change Act 2008 and commitments and duties set out in section 1 of the Environment Act 2021 have been met.”—(Richard Foord.)

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

With this it will be convenient to discuss the following:

New clause 2—Businesses and bodies the Bank invests in—

“(1) The Bank must publish an annual report setting out—

(a) the geographical spread of businesses and bodies it invests in, and

(b) the ownership of the businesses and bodies it invests in.

(2) The Bank must prepare and publish a ‘Good Jobs’ plan for all businesses and bodies it invests in, which requires the business or body to improve productivity, pay, jobs and living standards.”

Amendment 5, in clause 2, page 1, line 14, at end insert—

“(i) to reduce economic inequalities within and between regions of the United Kingdom, and

(ii) to improve productivity, pay, jobs and living standards.

(c) to support supply chain resilience and the United Kingdom’s industrial strategy.”

Amendment 3, page 1, line 14, at end insert, “, and

(c) to improve water quality in the UK.”

I rise to speak to new clause 1 and amendments 3 and 4.

I welcome the UK Infrastructure Bank Bill. We previously had a Green Investment Bank, founded by the Liberal Democrats in government. It was short-sighted for the Government to sell it off, especially as it made £144 million in profit for its Australian owners last year. Nevertheless, the Liberal Democrats are glad to see steps finally being taken to put the replacement UK Infrastructure Bank on a statutory footing.

Liberal Democrat new clause 1, in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney), seeks to ensure that this new UK Infrastructure Bank will remain in operation until the Government’s net zero and environmental commitments have been met.

I hope to see this new bank change investment in green infrastructure for the better, and this brings me to the two amendments—amendments 3 and 4—tabled in my name and those of Liberal Democrat colleagues. They seek to ensure that water companies set out costed, time-limited plans to deal with discharges before they can get funding through the bank. This is important because communities across the UK are currently being impacted by the actions of some negligent and wayward water companies. For years, we have seen these firms failing to invest in our vital infrastructure, but instead prioritising shareholder payouts and bumper bonuses for chief executive officers. It is shocking that this practice has been allowed to continue, and that the Government have resisted several attempts by the Liberal Democrats to clamp down on these sewage spills.

South West Water, which covers my patch in Devon, was awarded a one-star rating by the Environment Agency after having been found to have discharged sewage into rivers and lakes and on to our beaches over 42,000 times. This represents more than 350,000 hours of dumping, including at our prestigious blue flag beaches. Three of the 10 most affected beaches are in Devon. And what was the reaction at South West Water? It gave the chief executive a bonus of more than £1 million.

We on the Government Benches are aware of some of the comments—if I may say so, the somewhat misleading comments—in Liberal Democrat propaganda about this issue. The hon. Gentleman is obviously familiar with the situation at South West Water. Could he tell me what the cost is to South West Water of eliminating sewage overflow, and what are the implications for water bills for residents in the south-west, because that is what the literature from his party has been saying needs to be done?

The amendment that we are considering is about loans from the UK Infrastructure Bank. Whatever figure is required, the bank should not be permitted to release funds for the purpose of improving our sewerage system until there are plans by water companies for the system’s complete restoration.

South West Water is not an isolated case. Last year alone, water companies paid out dividends to the tune of almost £1 billion, with water company executives pocketing £16.5 million in bonuses. Why should those people profit from others’ misery? Why should they be allowed to cut corners and get away with it? The situation is the same across the country.

Southern Water polluted our rivers and waterways more than 38,000 times in the past two years, with over 358,000 hours of spills, while their top executives raked in more than £2.3 million in bonuses, benefits and incentives. Thames Water discharged sewage into rivers and lakes 33,156 times in the past two years, lasting 378,977 hours in total, and their bosses took home more than £2.9 million on top of their already generous salaries.

It is clear that those water companies are not being run for the benefit of the British people. Instead, firms are content to sit back and watch profits pour in while communities across the country suffer. Their failure to redirect profits to patch up our ageing infrastructure and build capacity means not only sewage dumping on an industrial scale, but losing millions of tonnes of water due to leaking pipes. That amounts to a scale of negligence unparalleled by anything we have seen in recent years.

The scandal must be addressed, which is why the Liberal Democrats have tabled these amendments. It would be a scandal if taxpayers’ money were given to the same firms that continue to poison our rivers and coastlines. If we do not add strict sewerage conditions to the Bill, we will give a blank cheque using taxpayers’ money to fund those polluting, profiteering firms.

Those are the very same water companies that line their executives’ pockets with bonuses worth millions of pounds. Now they expect public money to bail them out and line the leaking pipes that they have long neglected. If they want public money to help bail them out, they must show that they have a serious plan, which is both costed and time limited, to clean up their act and end the flow of sewage gushing on to our beaches and into our rivers.

I urge colleagues from all parties to back the amendments and show that we are serious about ending the sewage scandal once and for all.