My Lords, my name is also on the amendment to which the noble Earl, Lord Selborne, has just referred. My reason for putting my name to it was very much the point he was underlining. Only by some form of no-detriment clause—some of the amendments go slightly wider—can we protect what is intended to be an outcome of retail competition, which is more focus on energy and environmental improvements at the retail-user end and final delivery. Historically, Ofwat has not been particularly good at being prepared to finance—if that is the word—through the price review, or to give priority in the price review to water efficiency schemes. I think that Ofwat improved a little in the previous price review and it shows intention to do so again in the next one, but the reality is that we have not done very well on that front. The introduction of upstream and, to some extent, retail competition could, if it is not contained, have an effect on improvements in water efficiency at the retail end, and the positive move by Ofwat in recent years to focus on water efficiency could be reversed. I strongly support what the noble Earl, Lord Selborne, has said on the amendment.
Water Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Whitty
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 4 February 2014.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Water Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
752 c139 
Session
2013-14
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2014-02-05 13:24:32 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-02-04/14020498000008
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-02-04/14020498000008
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-02-04/14020498000008