Last evening the government responded to Sophia Holloway’s petition (currently standing at over 12,000 signatures) “Don’t abandon the Chalk Stream recovery pack”

This is what they said … I’ll comment in numbered notes below.

Government responded

This response was given on 1 July 2025

The government has secured £2 billion from water companies over the next five years to deliver more than 1,000 targeted actions for chalk stream restoration as part of our Plan for Change. (1)

Chalk streams are a source of national pride.  As one of Britain’s most nature rich habitats, they support some of our rarest wildlife – from chalk salmon to trout, they are home to beloved and endangered species.  

This Government will restore our chalk streams to better ecological health as part of our mission to clean up rivers, lakes and seas for good.  Fixing the systemic issues in the water system is essential to address the multiple pressures facing chalk streams. (2)

We are taking action to hold water companies and other polluters to account through the Water (Special Measures) Act 2025 and delivering an ambitious programme of reforms will fix the water system, managing and resetting the water sector. (3)

The Government has launched the largest crackdown on water companies in history. The era of profiting from pollution is over. Unfair bonuses have now been banned for six polluting water companies. In the largest criminal action against water companies in history, a record 81 criminal investigations have been launched into sewage pollution. Polluting water bosses who cover up their crimes now face two-year prison sentences. (4.)

Alongside our programme of reforms we are taking immediate action to clean up chalk streams. Water companies will invest £2 billion over the next 5 years to deliver more than 1,000 targeted actions for chalk stream restoration as part of our Plan for Change. (5)
 
Furthermore, the government is investing £1.8 million through the Water Restoration Fund and Water Environment Improvement Fund for locally-led chalk stream clean-up projects across affected regions. And over £100m in fines and penalties levied against water companies will be reinvested into projects to clean up our waters which could include local programmes to address pollution in chalk streams. (6)
 
Our Environmental Land Management (ELM) schemes, funding for which will increase by 150% to £2bn by 2028/2029, are providing incentives for farmers and land managers to farm more sustainably – six of our Landscape Recovery projects are being developed in chalk stream catchments, with potential to benefit up to 350km of chalk stream habitat. (7)
 
We’re tackling one of the biggest impacts on chalk streams by reducing the risk of harmful abstraction by an estimated 126 million litres daily, through the amendment of water company abstraction licences, protecting vital water flows to these fragile ecosystems. (8)

Our Storm Overflows Discharge Reduction Plan ensures chalk streams are prioritised for improvement as part of the record £11 billion investment to improve nearly 3,000 storm overflows nationwide. (9)

From June 2025, the Environment Agency’s updated Water Resource National Framework will place chalk stream environmental needs at the heart of all water resource planning and decision making. (10)
 
Our protections through the Water (Special Measures) Act will hold polluters accountable and ensure these iconic British habitats are preserved for future generations. (11)

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

My notes on the above:

1. This is the amount due for investment through the WINEP (Water Industry National Environment Programme) in the next five-year cycle. It is part of a record-breaking sum (the size of which is to be welcomed and is largely due to the tireless campaigning of the eNGOs and others), but it is not a new announcement. In fact, most companies will have had to trim back their programmes as Ofwat examines and passes the proposals.
2. Reforming the water system was not on our list of recommendations in the chalk stream strategy and doesn’t address our central ask, which is for greater protection for chalk streams, though clearly it is related. And few would argue with the idea that reform is necessary. There are indeed “systemic issues” and the current system is obviously not working as well as it could in a number of key respects. Monitoring, regulation and enforcement being key. The system also lacks joined up thinking. Empowering the catchment partnership structures would be a good thing.
3. As above – reform in regard to governance and financial transparency is clearly needed.
4. Personally I don’t think we should ever kid ourselves that we don’t all “profit from pollution”. We all enjoy clean water and flushing loos. Half the increase in human longevity since the middle of the 19th century is down to improved water sanitation, during which time the environment has picked up most of the bill through diminished natural flows in rivers and by serving the job of national lavatory for treated (and untreated) water. Arguably, it was historically inevitable that things would evolve this way. New towns built over forgotten chalk streams. Natural flows diminished until all the dishwashers and loos discharge their stolen water back into the river. The real cost of water to the environment is not even slightly reflected in water bills. The question is what value does society NOW place on living, healthy rivers? It’s a much higher value than it used to be and half our battle is persuading government to catch up with public opinion.
5. See 1.
6. This sounds encouraging. In 2022/23 £242 million in fines was levied on to the water industry only £11 million of which found its way into the Water Restoration Fund, £1.8 million (roughly 18%) of which is finding its way to chalk stream projects. Everyone has been asking, where’s the money gone? Dare we hope for 18% of this new figure? £18 million? You could totally re-naturalise the floodplains and re-meander 6 medium sized chalk streams top to bottom for that kind of sum.
7. We knew about Landscape Recovery already. It does offer the potential for significant restoration of the chalk streams within LR projects. I’m writing reports for a few of these streams and will be scoping and recommending exactly what I have described in the last line of point 6 above.
8. This is mostly the reduction of abstraction license headroom rather than actual abstraction reduction. 106 Ml/d of headroom reduction. 20 Ml/d of actual abstraction reduction.
9. Good stuff but we knew about it already. One component of our request for better protection for chalk streams was delivered by the previous administration when it included chalk streams in the “high priority sites” in the Storm Overflows Discharge Reduction Plan.
10. This is really interesting, if cryptic. We have asked for chalk streams to be prioritised in the environmental destination scenarios in the National Framework for Water Resources. What that means in plain English is that we have asked for chalk streams to be prioritised in the delivery of the abstraction reductions that must be met as part of a process called the National Framework: the construction of a joined up water resources network, where new sources and reservoirs and inter-regional transfers are developed in order to take pressure off the environment. There is a potential “business as usual” scenario which none of us wants to see when it comes to vulnerable chalk streams. This statement by the government is new and encouraging but so far rather vague. It could potentially be another piece in the jigsaw of greater protection (adding to 9. above) for chalk streams.
11. See 2 and 3 above.

So … possible incremental progress in a couple of respects, one of which could be key, though the statement too is too vague to say either way. It doesn’t amount to the bespoke and specific policy document that the Defra chalk stream recovery pack would have been. Albeit, as I have said, that pack had itself been watered down more to series of commitments to review than to act, it nevertheless would have amounted to a clear steer from the government as to the importance of chalk streams. This response and the Minister’s letter (see previous post) are clearly progress relative to a few months ago when one might have got the impression that chalk streams had slipped through a gap in the floorboards at Defra. Call me blindly optimistic but I’m still holding out for a bespoke document.