Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill
Will the Minister give way?
Showing every spoken contribution, including 12,942 under 12 words. Hide short remarks
- Hansard source
- Hansard source
Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill
I thank the Minister for generously giving way again. I have no desire to test the House by pushing my amendments to a vote, and I will be happy if I can receive his assurance. I take his points on not having technology-specific regulation where possible, but can I have an assurance that the Minister will work with me, my Committee and other hon. Members to look at the need to safeguard where there are technology-specific risks?
- Hansard source
UK-US Relationship
May I echo your words, Mr Speaker, and those of the Secretary of State about Jo Cox? I am sure that everyone in the House is thinking of her today. Our special relationship with the United States is about more than just the President; it is about a deep connection with the American people, and I think we should always remember that. I am very proud of my Prime Minister’s actions with regard to the conflict in Iran, but does the Foreign Secretary agree that it is hugely important for us to continue to have that special relationship with the United States, not just with the American people but with American businesses such as Raytheon in my constituency of Harlow?
- Hansard source
Thames Water
I thank the Secretary of State for her statement, and my hon. Friend the Member for Hertford and Stortford (Josh Dean) for raising his concerns about the River Stort, which goes past my constituency. I spend many hours running alongside it, so I know what a beautiful area it is and that it needs to be protected. Mr Speaker, I cannot tell you the number of people—not just in Harlow but everywhere I go—who raise with me their dissatisfaction with Thames Water. I thank the Secretary of State for what she is doing to raise standards, but I am dubious that Thames Water is going to be able to reach them. If it does not reach those high standards, what is she going to do? People in Harlow do not want us to prop up a company whose failures hit the pockets of the public.
- Hansard source
Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill
I thank all my hon. Friends and all hon. Members who have contributed to what has been a really good and well-meaning debate. People will be relieved to know that I intend to keep my contribution fairly brief. I say to the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith) that I do not pretend to be an expert when it comes to cyber-security and resilience, although other Members across the House would say that that has never stopped me talking before. It was a pleasure to be on the Bill Committee for this legislation; in part, I think that was because of the very constructive nature of conversations in Committee. As the shadow Minister in particular will know, I sat very passively throughout Committee and said very little, which is common for me. This is a really important piece of legislation. As Members across the House have rightly said, it is the first duty of any Government to protect their citizens. There are obviously huge benefits as we move forward into a more technologically advanced world, but there are also real challenges, and as a country we need to be ready for them. It was also a pleasure in Committee to have the opportunity to mention my father-in-law, Professor Robin Bloomfield—not least because I need all the brownie points that I can get—who is a professor of cyber-security at City St George’s, University of London. Let me also reference the fact that I have a data centre in my constituency, the Kao data centre; it is named after Charlie Kao, who, along with George Hockham, created the fibre-optic cable in Harlow. It is fair to say that I have some skin in the game in terms of the importance of this legislation. When I looked through the list of amendments, the first thing I thought was, “The Liberal Democrats have been busying themselves.” I say genuinely to them that I welcome conversations about the need to protect local government and electoral services. Although I do not think that necessarily has to be covered in this legislation, I hope the Minister has listened to the comments made by the Liberal Democrats. We can absolutely come back to that conversation in this House, because it is hugely important that our democratic services in particular are not eroded by bad state actors, as has been discussed previously.
- Hansard source
Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill
As a former councillor in a district council bordering London, I know the particular challenges we had in recruiting really decent council officers. I should put it on record that we have had some fantastic officers in Harlow district council, but it was always more difficult to recruit them, because they were drawn particularly to London. I recognise the challenges that he highlights, and I obviously want more support to be given to those professionals to understand cyber-security risks. My father-in-law is very much retired, so I am not giving him a job, but I am sure he would be very keen to see that as well. My hon. Friend’s intervention brings me nicely on to my next point. My hon. Friend the Member for Warwick and Leamington (Matt Western) spoke very well and with a great deal of expertise on this topic. He referenced something that I referenced in Committee, which was that even if we think this legislation is perfect, it will not be enough. We need a culture shift when it comes to cyber-security, so I welcome my hon. Friend’s comments and ask the Minister to reflect on them when he concludes the debate. I did say that I would not give a very long speech, but I have been on my feet longer than I thought I would be, which is typical of me. I will finish by saying that over 11,000 NHS appointments and procedures were lost last year due to cyber-attacks. For too long, successive Governments have failed to properly address the growing threats from cyber criminals and hostile states. I am pleased that this Government are addressing those threats by giving regulators new powers to designate which suppliers are critical in the supply chain, and by investing £210 million to tackle threats and strengthen public services. For that reason, I strongly support the Bill.
- Hansard source
Thames Water
The Secretary of State has made the right decision in seeking to protect billpayers and opposing giving Thames Water a free pass to continue polluting our rivers. The thousands of hours of sewage spills into chalk streams and their tributaries across North East Hertfordshire that Thames Water has continued to oversee are unforgiveable, if not technically illegal. Thames Water is failing in practically every possible way. The level of incompetence is staggering, given that it has 16 million captive customers. My constituents are not interested in Thames Water being given any more chances—[Interruption.]
- Hansard source
Thames Water
Will the Secretary of State put an end to this unholy mess and rid us of this frankly parasitic company once and for all?
- Hansard source
Ebola Outbreaks
The UK has allocated £26.9 million of UK aid funding to support the response to the current Ebola outbreak within the DRC. That funding will strengthen disease surveillance and rapid response, and improve infection prevention and control. We are also working with the World Health Organisation and the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention to help scale up the response and adapt existing programmes. This is a deeply concerning situation. Over the coming weeks, we will continue to work intensively alongside international partners to monitor developments and take the necessary action to protect both regional and global health security.
- Hansard source
Ebola Outbreaks
I am glad to say that the UK is not stepping back; our response to the outbreak confirms that. We currently sit on the board of the WHO, the Global Fund, Gavi and the Pandemic Fund. Our investment helps to maintain critical global health security infrastructure, as well as tackling other health security threats such as antimicrobial resistance. Our leadership is amplified by world-class research and development, and is a trailblazer in the life sciences sector.
- Hansard source
Ebola Outbreaks
As my hon. Friend said, our immediate priority is supporting the DRC and the Africa-led response to the Ebola outbreak. The UK and international support will also strengthen health systems so that countries can better respond to future outbreaks. That includes backing Government-owned surveillance systems through the World Bank and major global health organisations. It also means providing UK expertise through mechanisms such as the UK Health Security Agency’s UK public health rapid support team.
- Hansard source
Ebola Outbreaks
I can confirm that the UK is leading the global response on Ebola and was one of the first countries to respond with funding. I can also confirm that the Foreign Secretary is leading the charge on international funding to tackle the Ebola outbreak. The right hon. Gentleman is right to raise the concerns over international health security, and that is why the UK Government are continuing to lead from the front in tackling the Ebola outbreak.
- Hansard source
Ebola Outbreaks
The hon. Member is absolutely right to say that this should be an Africa-led response, and it is extremely important that we listen to what the African countries are telling us about how we respond to the Ebola outbreak. On investment in areas such as vaccinations, the Department of Health and the FCDO have invested £160 million in the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations to ensure that we are at the forefront of helping to develop vaccines. If the hon. Member would like to write to me further, he is very welcome to do so.
- Hansard source
Topical Questions
We call on the Taliban to respect the rights of women and girls, including the right to education, and condemn any ongoing restrictions. I will raise the hon. Member’s question with the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr Falconer), who is travelling, and ensure that she gets a full written answer.
- Hansard source
Topical Questions
My hon. Friend is right to raise the importance of the G20 summit, not only this year but when the UK is hosting from January. I can confirm that tackling structural imbalances, future industries, open trade and reforming global economic systems to support developing countries will be our focus as we move into chairing the G20. He is right that this is a crucial moment for the United Kingdom. The FCDO will play an important part co-ordinating the work across Government, via the Cabinet Office.
- Hansard source
Thames Water
What reassurances can the Secretary of State provide about basic customer services? For example, Turnpike Lane tube station in my constituency has been closed since last August, because Transport for London cannot reopen it owing to the leaks and other problems that Thames Water is far too incompetent to fix. Will today’s statement lead to better customer service?
- Hansard source
Topical Questions
The incarceration of Jimmy Lai and the persecution of Hongkongers in the United Kingdom by China is deeply wrong and disturbing. Will the Secretary of State set out what action the UK will be taking to ensure our concerns are heard and action is taken to protect Hongkongers living in the United Kingdom?
- Hansard source
Thames Water
Will the Secretary of State confirm that, in the event of a special administration regime, any compensation would be based on appropriate value as set out in the case of Lithgow v. the UK, not on regulated capital value, as suggested by the shadow Secretary of State. For Thames Water, appropriate value would take account of the £23 billion in infrastructure repairs needed to meet condition P of its licence and comply with its statutory obligation, as well as the £13 billion of dividend and debt interest already paid to creditors. Appropriate value would therefore be nil. The Secretary of State said that Ofwat is responsible for taking the decision to modify the licence. I urge her to read section 12A(7) of the Water Industry Act 1991, because she has the power to overrule.
- Hansard source
Topical Questions
I recently visited Chad with the all-party group for Sudan and South Sudan, and in that connection we will shortly be registering an interest. Like the Foreign Secretary, I was moved by Chad’s willingness to accept 1.3 million refugees, but disturbed by the horrific scale of the crisis. Will the Prime Minister be raising the Sudan crisis at the G7, because it must be raised at every international gathering? Is the UK advocating for countries such as Chad to be included in international talks?
- Hansard source
Violence against Women and Girls
11. What steps she is taking with her international counterparts to help tackle violence against women and girls.
- Hansard source
Violence against Women and Girls
I was moved to hear about Jo Cox’s life and the impact of her work on women globally in last week’s debate. She was a strong advocate for women’s rights and overseas development aid. Will the Secretary of State assure me that recent cuts to aid will not have an adverse impact on projects such as those I saw in Zimbabwe last year, which are helping to reduce the incidence of violence against women and girls?
- Hansard source
Topical Questions
On a point of order, Mr Speaker.
- Hansard source
Isle of Wight Dementia Patients: Discharge to Mainland Care Homes
I thank my hon. Friend and neighbour for securing this debate, and I strongly support him on this issue. People living with dementia and their families deserve care close to home, and should not have to cross oceans or seas and get trains to get the support that they need. I want to recognise the dedicated workers across Portsmouth North who support those people’s families. In my constituency, cuts to dementia nursing have led to some of my constituents—and my team—visiting the Isle of Wight, where we saw the Parklands Dementia Resource Centre, which is an excellent example of what can be done. Will my hon. Friend expand on Parklands’ work, and join me in urging the Minister to consider more dementia hubs in under-served communities?
- Hansard source
Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill
It is a pleasure to follow such esteemed colleagues. My only declaration before I start my speech is that I hold a degree in information systems from the University of Leeds. I have been sat here for the last two hours looking at the memorial plaque for Jo Cox, 10 years after the horrific day that we lost Jo. I was a West Yorkshire candidate alongside Jo in the run-up to the 2015 election. It is to my huge detriment that I never got to serve with her here. Today is such a difficult day for so many colleagues. I know that Jo would have dearly liked to see many of the things that Labour is doing in government. It is incumbent on us to try to push forward all the things that Jo strived for, to make this place better, to make the country better and to make the world better. Let me now turn to cyber-security. Data centres are warehouse-like facilities that house the information technology equipment upon which almost all digital activity relies. The UK Government say that they “underpin almost all economic activity and innovation, including the development of AI and other technology, public service delivery” and modern-day communications. Europe’s largest data centre market is Greater London, where most of the UK data centres are concentrated. There are four types of data centre, one being AI data centres, which are facilities specialised for the high-performance computing needs of AI development and AI models. Having data centres based in the UK allows our Government to regulate them, such as by requiring them to meet cyber-security standards and reduce their environmental impact, which is obviously very important. Data centres are an essential part of our critical national infrastructure. They have a huge environmental impact so must be managed carefully, but the benefits of having them on our home turf is that we can regulate them. In our current state of hybrid war with Russia, it is vital to protect those data centres from any nefarious actors or cyber-warfare, and to strengthen their protections against cyber-attacks spawned by AI. Otherwise, the impact on public safety, the economy and society could be catastrophic.
- Hansard source
Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill
There is obviously a level of complexity here in relation to the data centre, AI development and the network in the UK and more broadly. Will the Minister therefore commit to a meeting with me and my hon. Friend the Member for Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy (Melanie Ward) to discuss this matter further?
- Hansard source
Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill
On the amendment from the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith), I think we have made some progress with the Minister, but it is clear that trying to isolate the issues around fair trial from other matters is complex. Repeating my earlier call, will the Minister meet me, the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green and others who signed his amendment to explore the complexities of this after the debate?
- Hansard source
West Bank: Settler Activity
19. What diplomatic steps her Department is taking in response to settler activity in the west bank.
- Hansard source
West Bank: Settler Activity
Last week I signed a letter to the Foreign Secretary, along with 140 colleagues, asking the Government to take further action in response to settler violence and the rhetoric used by two far-right Israeli Government Ministers. Over the last two years, I have heard from hundreds of my constituents expressing their deep concern about the Israeli Government’s actions in the west bank. Will the Secretary of State commit today to banning all trade with illegal settlements, and if not, why not?
- Hansard source
Personal Statements
With your permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a speech on my resignation. I start by echoing the remarks of so many in the House on the 10th anniversary of the death of Jo Cox. While I did not know Jo, I know what she stood for. Her unwavering commitment to equality has left a lasting legacy, and her words—we have more in common than that which divides us—still ring true and are still worth fighting for. I also pay tribute to my right hon. Friend the Member for Rawmarsh and Conisbrough (John Healey). This is the second time I have followed him in the last week, and it is a privilege to do so. Last week, I resigned as Minister for the Armed Forces. It was an exceptionally difficult decision. I have never quit anything in my life, as my mother will confirm; she tried to get me to quit the Marines for 24 years, but failed many times. I spent those 24 years in uniform, serving in operations around the world. I commanded men and women in combat and carried responsibility for their lives; I buried friends and stood beside families receiving the worst news imaginable. When I accepted ministerial office, I did so with a simple purpose: to serve those who serve us. I remain grateful to the Prime Minister for the opportunity to do so. I thank my ministerial colleagues, my hon. Friends on the Labour Benches, civil servants and, above all, the servicemen and women I have had the privilege to represent. But there comes a point when honesty requires action, and for me, that point came last week. As hon. Members know, I came into politics for one reason: to enact change. In order to work out where we are going, we must realise where we have come from. The Labour party that I joined was chiselled out of the mines of the north-east, hammered out of the shipyards of Govan, Liverpool and Belfast, and forged in the factories of the industrial revolution by people with calloused hands and sore backs—people who did a hard day’s graft and asked for one thing in return: a Government who have their back. That is the tradition in which I serve in this House, and it is the tradition that shaped the decision I took last week. I resigned for several reasons—first, because I no longer believe that the defence investment plan is preparing us for the wars we are most likely to fight. The character of warfare is changing at exceptional speed. In Ukraine, a navy without a ship has destroyed a navy. A drone costing thousands can destroy a tank costing millions. A drone can now strike 2,000 km into Russia at a fraction of the cost of a fighter jet. It is not either/or; it is an equitable mix of high-end sophistication coupled with low-end mass. That is the balance we must seek. In my view, the defence investment plan does not strike that balance for various reasons. I want to give just a small example to bring home that point, because it can often get lost. In a town in Ukraine the size of Hereford, there were 12,000 drones in the air in one day. Just comprehend that: 12,000 drones in the air. Some 90% of all casualties are from drones—not the rifle, the grenade, the tank or the artillery, but the drone. I ask the House: what will it take to realise that these figures are not fiction? They are not an embellishment of the truth, but a hard fact born out of the blood and steel of a hot war. That is the maths of modern war: millions of drones against high-end, sophisticated systems that deliver late, with huge levels of inflation, and, importantly, cannot be reproduced at the pace required to sustain a conflict against a major adversary. What will it take to learn that lesson? Do we need to rerun the Snatch Land Rover? Do we need to rerun the lack of body armour? Do we need to rerun the lack of protected vehicles in Afghanistan, which I saw impact men and women on the frontline? We do not, and we should not. Moreover, as the clouds of war darken Europe’s borders once more, do we need to learn the lessons our forefathers learned in world war two, or indeed the cold war? This is not about individual items of equipment or bespoke defence funding lines, but about preparedness, unity of purpose, prioritisation and national resilience. We are no longer packaging up our military to deploy to a foreign field; we must be ready to fight from here—from the home base—for democracy, for the right to self-determination and for European security. The reality is that we are spending too much time preparing for last year’s war, not tomorrow’s. I urge the House to push hard for transformation and to push for delivery this side of 2030. Secondly, I resigned because even if the plan had been right, it was not adequately funded. I do not lay all the blame at the door of No. 10 or No. 11; we failed—I failed—to make that argument. But national security and economic security are not competing priorities; they are the same priority. A country that cannot defend itself will not stay prosperous for long. Put simply, a country that cannot defend itself will struggle to protect its prosperity. Thirdly, I left because I could no longer ignore the continued failure to address the treatment of our veterans in Northern Ireland. It is a difficult issue, and I cannot describe how difficult this fight has been. Whatever people’s view of the troubles, a country owes a duty to those it sent into harm’s way under lawful orders, and that duty does not end when the uniform comes off. The labour movement was built on a simple idea—that the people who do the hard work that this country asks of them deserve the backing of the state in return. Too many veterans have carried uncertainty for too long, while others have benefited from political accommodations that were never available to those who served. I could not reconcile that with my own understanding of duty. To go into slightly more detail, the IRA failed to achieve its political ends through the use of terrorist tactics, and we must be exceptionally careful that we do not help them achieve those ends through other means. Constant, never-ending legal wranglings that undermine the contract between the nation and those who serve is neither a good use of taxpayer money nor an effective execution of strategy. Having inquests, inquiries and an independent commission creates a hierarchy of truth. It will cost us hundreds of millions for 15 years, painting the state as an aggressor, supporting our adversaries, leading to political objections and causing untold anguish for those who only ever deployed to protect us. We have neither the political capital nor the resources to spare for this unjust journey. In broader terms, in 2026 security means more than military strength alone. It means secure borders, secure energy, secure jobs and secure communities. It means people knowing that if they work hard and contribute, one unexpected bill will not push their family into crisis; it means knowing that their children will have opportunities that they did not. These things are absolutely connected. The cost of living is shaped by conflict thousands of miles from here. Hostile states target our infrastructure, supply chains and democracy. Energy security shapes economic security. Economic security shapes social cohesion. Importantly, above all else, social cohesion shapes national resilience. The old line between domestic policy and national security is breaking down in front of us, but our history points the way. In 1945, Britain was exhausted and in debt. Our cities had been bombed, and rationing went on for years. Yet Attlee’s Government did not conclude that Britain could afford only one priority. They built the NHS, expanded the welfare state and invested in housing. They took the decision that Britain would become a nuclear power. Those decisions came from the same understanding of what this Government and Labour are for. A country worth defending should look after its people. A country that wants to look after its people must be secure enough to do so. That is the Labour tradition. It is also, I would argue, the British tradition at its very best, but somewhere along the way we stopped thinking like that. We began treating defence, growth, energy, public services and social mobility as separate conversations. They are not. They are different parts of the same challenge: whether Britain can still provide security, opportunity and resilience for its people in a more dangerous world. That is why I ultimately concluded that I could no longer remain in Government. The issue was never simply a defence budget. It was whether the Government were moving with the urgency that the moment demands. Nearly a million young people are outside education, employment and training. Poor mental health costs this country hundreds of billions. We know that our armed forces need modernising. We know that our adversaries are becoming more aggressive. We know that our energy system remains exposed. We inherited a mess, but the population is fed up of us pointing the finger. They are looking to us for courage, clarity and conviction to make changes at the scale and, importantly, the speed that the nation requires. I have seen what our country can do. I have seen it in uniform. I have seen it in the communities across the nation. I have seen it on these Benches, where we are at our very best. The talent, the ideas, the passion, the courage—it is all here. Indeed, we have it all. I resigned because I believe that Britain and this Labour Government can deliver. I believe that we can think longer term and act earlier. I believe that we can once again build a country that provides security in the broadest sense of the word—security for our nation, communities, working families and the next generation. That is the debate that I am confident my resignation has started.
- Hansard source
Topical Questions
The International Court of Justice directed third states not to enter into trade dealings with Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territories two years ago, but the Government have still not responded to that—why? Does the Secretary of State recognise the UK’s obligations to the ICJ, and will it comply?
- Hansard source
Ebola Outbreaks
15. What steps her Department is taking with international partners to support the response to the Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
- Hansard source
Ebola Outbreaks
The covid-19 pandemic showed us how quickly infectious diseases can spread globally and the importance of acting early to contain outbreaks at source. Given that lesson, can the Minister outline how the UK is working with international partners to strengthen pandemic preparedness through this response, including by improving surveillance, early warning systems and rapid response capacity in countries like the Democratic Republic of the Congo, so that outbreaks such as Ebola are contained before they pose a wider global health risk?
- Hansard source
Topical Questions
Next January, the United Kingdom will take the chair of the G20, providing our country with a real platform to lead international conversations and to deliver here at home. Will the Minister tell the House what our priorities will be when we take the chair and what plans we have across Government to make the most of this unique position?
- Hansard source
West Bank: Settler Activity
Last week Amnesty International published a report entitled “Erasing Anything Palestinian”, which shines a powerful light on Israel’s ethnic cleansing in the west bank. It makes clear that what is happening is not driven by rogue settlers or a few extremist Ministers; rather, it is state sanctioned and state financed. Yet to date the UK’s response has been largely performative and, unfortunately, fairly inconsequential. Do the Government accept that this is state-enabled ethnic cleansing? If they do, should they not be doing much, much more to prevent it and to punish the perpetrator?
- Hansard source
Thames Water
Enough is enough. Frankly, the sight of US hedge funds picking over the carcase of Thames Water’s pipe network is revolting—it stinks. The plan includes three quarters of a billion pounds of payments to hedge funds, shareholders, debt holders and bankers. It is completely unacceptable. Thames Water is bust: it is insolvent. Now is the time to put it into special administration. It cannot meet its financial obligations, and it cannot meet its performance obligations. I urge the Secretary of State to get on with it, put Thames Water into a special administration regime, and then buy it out for a pound. That would be a good deal for the taxpayer.
- Hansard source
Tibetan Plateau: Environmental Change
The Tibetan Parliament in exile, which the all-party parliamentary group on Tibet visited a couple of weeks ago—we have engaged extensively with it—is terribly worried that the central Tibet Autonomous Region is completely closed off by the Chinese Communist party to any outside access. Little comes out and almost nothing goes in. Is the Minister not worried about the complete secrecy in which the Chinese authorities can conduct environmental destruction that has a massive global impact?
- Hansard source
Topical Questions
T8. I understand that the FCDO sent representatives to Afghanistan to meet women’s organisations a few weeks ago, so may I seek assurances about the safety of those women’s organisations going forward, and ask for a written statement on the outcomes and context of that meeting?
- Hansard source
UK-US Relationship
2. What recent assessment she has made of the effectiveness of the UK's relationship with the US.
- Hansard source
UK-US Relationship
I regret that I never had the chance to meet Jo Cox, but the Secretary of State is right: her sister is doing her very proud. As well as being the year in which the current US President was born, 1946 was the year in which the UK-US special relationship was formally cemented in Winston Churchill’s “Sinews of Peace” speech, and was credited by Russian historians with marking the start of the cold war. That war ended in the 1980s, but the relationship between western allies and Russia is distinctly chilly again, with threats appearing close to our shores even this weekend. I welcome the progress on an Iranian ceasefire, but over the three months for which the US and Israel have been at war with Iran, the conflict has made many people rich, and it has been reported that Russian revenue from oil and petroleum has increased by 39%. Given that the actions of the United States appear to be helping Russia rather than supporting Ukraine and NATO, does the Foreign Secretary share my concern that that is causing further damage to a special relationship that has endured for 80 years?
- Hansard source
Thames Water
My very first letter as a Member of Parliament was to Thames Water, following the unacceptable fact that thousands of hours of sewage had been released into the River Ver, one of our precious chalk streams. Whatever the future structure of Thames Water, what guarantees can the Minister put in place that the environmental obligations will be strengthened rather than weakened?