Written questions by Gardiner.

Food and Rural Affairs, whether her Department has undertaken a cost-benefit analysis of ending operator self-monitoring in the water industry.

The EA already operates a robust, risk-based system to respond to pollution incidents. The increase in inspections, including unannounced inspections, will allow the EA to conduct more in-depth and independent audits to get to the root-cause of incidents, reducing the reliance on operator self-monitoring. Government has committed to ending ‘operator self-monitoring’ so water companies will no longer mark their own homework on pollution incidents. Initial cost information on ending ‘operator self-monitoring' has been provided by the Environment Agency, and we will do further work to develop a detailed and comprehensive assessment as we move to Open Monitoring.

Food and Rural Affairs, how many solicitors were employed by the Environment Agency in the Area facing legal services teams in 2008, 2014, 2020 and 2026.

The table below shows the number of solicitors employed by the Environment Agency in the Area facing legal services teams in 2020 and 2026, and the number of vacant lawyer posts that were being held during these years. The Environment Agency does not hold data for 2008, and it has insufficient data for 2014. YearNumber of solicitors employed in Area facing teams Number of vacant lawyer posts202052 (47.36 Full Time Equivalent)4202666 (52.69 Full Time Equivalent)6

Food and Rural Affairs, how many solicitor vacancies there were in the Environment Agency Area facing legal services teams in 2008, 2014, 2020 and 2026.

The table below shows the number of solicitors employed by the Environment Agency in the Area facing legal services teams in 2020 and 2026, and the number of vacant lawyer posts that were being held during these years. The Environment Agency does not hold data for 2008, and it has insufficient data for 2014. YearNumber of solicitors employed in Area facing teams Number of vacant lawyer posts202052 (47.36 Full Time Equivalent)4202666 (52.69 Full Time Equivalent)6

Food and Rural Affairs, what criteria her department used in its decision to aim to conduct 10,000 water company asset inspections by April 2026.

The Environment Agency (EA) increased its capacity for inspections of water company assets, with over 4,000 inspections completed from April 2024 to March 2025. In April 2025 the EA increased its target for inspections to a further 10,000 in 2025/26 as part of the Governments wider focus to hold companies to account and improve out water environment. As of 31 March, the EA has successfully achieved this target – further details can be found here.

Food and Rural Affairs, with reference to the Office for Environmental Protection’s report entitled Investigation Report addressed to the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs in relation to their compliance with the Water Industry Act 1991 and the Water Environment (Water Framework Directive) (England and Wales) Regulations 2017 regarding the regulation of network combined sewer overflows, published in December 2025, whether her Department accepts that report’s findings that there have been failures to comply with environmental law by (a) her Department, (b) Ofwat and (c) the Environment Agency.

The Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) concluded its investigation in December 2025 and is taking no further action due to the significant progress that has been made by Defra, Ofwat and the Environment Agency (EA). This progress includes: Defra replacing outdated guidance with a new policy and guidance document that better reflects the legal duties of sewerage undertakersOfwat revisiting its enforcement guidance and taking enforcement action against several water companiesThe EA updating its Storm Overflow Assessment Framework, whilst progressing with plans to modernise permits and introduce spill limitsProgress on cross-cutting issues, such as the clarification of roles and responsibilities between the authorities. The OEP stated that, throughout the investigation, all public authorities engaged constructively, with a focus on the outcome of protecting the environment.

Food and Rural Affairs, whether her Department has formally responded to the Office for Environmental Protection's information notices regarding compliance with the Water Framework Directive.

This Government welcomes the Office for Environmental Protection (OEP)'s investigation, and we responded to their Information Notice on 6 March. We continue to work collaboratively with them to improve our waterways. The Government accepts the OEP’s conclusion that not enough progress has been made in meeting the Water Framework Directive’s objectives for water quality, and that this is due to a lack of investment and action over the last 15 years since the first River Basin Management Plans were published. Our Water White Paper sets out long-term reforms to strengthen regulation and planning, reduce pollution, and accelerate the delivery of vital infrastructure.

Food and Rural Affairs, whether her Department plans to undertake a cost-benefit analysis of the (a) financial and (b) non-financial costs to the public between the privatised model and public ownership of the water industry over (i) the rest of PR24 and (ii) over the following 30 years.

The reality is it would take years to unpick the current ownership model, it would be extremely complex, and we would be in the courts for years. Billions of pounds of private investment going in to fixing broken pipes would be slashed in the meantime. Nationalisation would a black hole in the public finances, this money would be better spent on our hospitals and schools. Nationalisation is not the answer – tougher regulation is – which is why we’re giving the regulators more teeth through things like these swift automatic penalties. In the Water White Paper, we are clear that where a water company might want to transition to a new ownership model, such as a not-for-profit, the new regulator will assess whether this should go ahead and ensure customer interests are properly reflected in the decision.

Food and Rural Affairs, if her department has set a date by which it aims to have ended operator self-monitoring in the water industry.

We want to move away from Operator Self‑Monitoring because the current system does not provide the transparency or independent assurance the public expects. As set out in the Water White Paper, we are working with regulators on how best to transition to an open, independently verified monitoring model. We will set out further detail once this work is complete.

Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment she has made of the implications for her policies of the Office for Environmental Protection Investigation Report, published in December 2025.

In December 2025, the Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) published the concluding reports of its investigation into the regulation of network Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs) in England. I was pleased to see recognition that work undertaken by this Government has built the foundations for much needed change in the water sector. The OEP stated that, throughout the investigation, all public authorities engaged constructively, with a focus on the outcome of protecting the environment. We agree with the OEP that it is important for Defra, the Environment Agency and Ofwat to be fully transparent when it comes to their roles and responsibilities in the regulation of network CSOs.

Food and Rural Affairs, what analysis her department has undertaken to assess whether using Regulated Capital Value to measure water company values provides the most accurate measure of their value.

Regulatory Capital Value was originally set with reference to the equity value and debt levels of each water and sewerage company at privatisation. It has been updated by the Water Services Regulation Authority (Ofwat) since and provides a proxy for the total value of the water industry’s equity and debt (otherwise known as ‘enterprise value’).

What work her department has taken to ensure overflown communities are represented in the governance structure of the UK Airspace Design Service.

The Government and the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) jointly consulted on proposals to establish a UK Airspace Design Service (UKADS) in 2024, and responses to that consultation, including from overflown communities, has helped to inform our plans. Between 17 November 2025 and 12 January 2026 the CAA consulted on guidance for the UKADS, including governance and stakeholder engagement. The outcome of this consultation will be published by the CAA.In addition, the CAA’s Airspace Change Process (CAP1616) sets out how airspace change proposals must be developed and delivered. A fundamental part of this process is the requirement for the airspace change sponsor, which would include the UKADS, to consult those who may be affected by airspace change and to consider their views before any final proposals are submitted.

What environmental duties will be placed on the UK Airspace Design Service.

The UK Airspace Design Service (UKADS) must follow the processes for airspace change, including environmental requirements, set by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) in line with the Government’s Air Navigation Directions and Air Navigation Guidance.Any airspace change proposal must follow the CAA’s CAP1616 airspace change process. CAP1616 sets out how sponsors of airspace change, including the UKADS, must undertake comprehensive environmental assessments for airspace options which are under consideration. There are also requirements for airspace change sponsors to provide sufficient information and carry out consultation with those who may be affected by a change, before any final proposals are submitted.A consultation on potential changes to the Air Navigation Directions and Air Navigation Guidance closed on 26 January 2026 and the outcome will be published later this year.

When she expects the UK Airspace Design Service to be fully operational.

The UK Airspace Design Service (UKADS) provided by NATS En Route PLC (NERL) has now begun work to enable it to deliver its functions and design airspace for the complex London region. A number of processes to complete the establishment of the UKADS will be completed over the coming weeks including the publication of updated guidance documents and decision on changes to the conditions of the NERL Licence by the CAA.

Food and Rural Affairs, what discussions her Department has had with the Health and Safety Executive on restricting PFAS in specific consumer product groups, as outlined in the PFAS Plan.

The PFAS Plan published on 3 February 2026 sets out the Government’s approach towards PFAS in consumer articles. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) were involved in the development of the PFAS Plan. Any future UK REACH Restriction would currently involve the UK REACH Agency, the HSE, consulting on a proposal. The current UK REACH work programme does not extend to this happening in 2025/26.

What steps he is taking to help tackle deforestation, air pollution and community health impacts linked to imported biomass supply chains.

The new Low-Carbon Dispatchable Contract for Difference strengthens environmental protections, and enhances monitoring, reporting and verification of compliance. The government has recently published the common biomass sustainability framework consultation. The proposals we are consulting on will ensure that the highest industry standards continue to apply to biomass power generation in the UK. International biomass supply chain operations are licensed and regulated in the jurisdiction in which they are situated. We have ongoing engagement with relevant authorities regarding the full range of sustainability, environmental and other relevant matters.

Pursuant to the answer of 21 November 2025 to question 90099, what his evidential basis is for Drax's policy of not sourcing material directly from old growth areas; and whether his Department has the same definition of old growth forest as Drax.

The Government’s definition of old-growth forest is set out in the terms of the new Low-Carbon Dispatchable Contract for Difference published by the Low Carbon Contracts Company (LCCC) on 1 December. From 2027 there is no reliance on any other definition for determining eligibility subsidy. Any breaches of the contractual restriction on sourcing biomass directly from old-growth forest will result in significant financial penalties and could lead to termination of the contract for serious or repeated breaches. The contract also contains strengthened Monitoring, Reporting and Verification (MRV) measures, and gives LCCC powers to conduct audits throughout the biomass supply chain.

Whether biomass subsidies are compatible with the recommendations of the Independent Review of the UK's Greenhouse Gas Removal Strategy.

The Independent Review considered the long-term potential for greenhouse gas removals and recommended that the UK adopt a strategic aim to minimise the use of imported biomass. The sourcing of biomass is a commercial decision for generators. However, under the terms of the new short-term Low Carbon Dispatchable Contract for Difference with Drax, large-scale biomass will play a much more limited role in the power system, operating less than half as often as it currently does. This will result in a reduction in the UK’s reliance on imported biomass feedstock going forward.

What steps he is taking to ensure that new contracts for biomass do not lead to long-term reliance on imported feedstocks.

It is for generators to ensure they can source sufficient biomass to meet generation requirements and sustainability standards set out in Government support schemes. The new low-carbon dispatchable CfD with Drax incorporates strengthened sustainability standards, including a reduction in the allowable supply chain emissions threshold from 50gCO2e/MJ to 36.6gCO2e/MJ, regardless of where material is sourced. The UK does not have sufficient forest capacity to meet current and projected short-term demand for bioenergy feedstocks. The majority of biomass imported currently is a byproduct of the wider timber industry.

What steps he is taking to ensure transparency over contract terms agreed with Lynemouth under new low-carbon dispatchable power arrangements.

We are in discussions with Lynemouth Power Station to assess whether a Low Carbon Dispatchable Contract for Difference agreement could appropriately support security of supply and deliver value for consumers. Should we proceed following a full internal decision-making process with an agreement the core elements of the Heads of Terms will be announced prior to the publication of the full contract in due course.

For what reason the Health and Safety Executive no longer assesses a risk of continuing harm to staff from wood dust exposure at Drax Power Station.

Under health and safety legislation, it is the operator of the site who has a legal duty to assess and control the health and safety risks to staff and others. There is also an obligation to keep risk assessments and control measures under review. The Health and Safety Executive’s (HSE) role as a regulator is to make sure that those who create risk, take responsibility for controlling risk through proportionate enforcement and targeted regulatory work. HSE does not operate a permissioning regime for use and handling of substances hazardous to health, including wood dust. Wood dust is one of the most common causes of occupational asthma in Great Britain. This has been a focus of recent HSE proactive interventions to reduce workplace ill health. An inspection visit to Drax Power Ltd by HSE is planned for early 2026 to examinehow well the operator is currently controlling exposure to wood dust.