Consultation outcome

Summary of responses and government response

Updated 17 April 2023

Introduction

Between 29 November 2018 and 31 January 2019 the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) held a consultation on the draft National Policy Statement for water resources infrastructure (the National Policy Statement). This document summarises the responses to the consultation and explains how the government has addressed the points that were raised by stakeholders.

The purpose of the consultation was to gather views on whether the draft National Policy Statement provided an appropriate and effective framework for the Examining Authority (the Planning Inspectorate) and the Secretary of State to examine and make decisions on development consent order applications, for nationally significant water resources infrastructure in England. Views were also sought on the Appraisal of Sustainability and Habitats Regulations Assessment that accompany the National Policy Statement.

Previous consultations on the National Policy Statement and parliamentary scrutiny

During winter 2017, Defra held a consultation on the early developing a national policy statement for water resources. Defra sought views on:

• three principles on how we proposed to develop the National Policy Statement
• proposals to change the types and sizes of new nationally significant water supply infrastructure to which the National Policy Statement would apply
• the Appraisal of Sustainability and Habitats Regulations Assessment scoping reports

During April 2018, Defra consulted further on proposals to amend the national policy statement for water resources: infrastructure types and sizes of infrastructure which should be considered as ‘nationally significant’. The outcome of this consultation resulted in changes to the Planning Act 2008 which came into effect in January 2019.

On the 14 February 2019, the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (EFRA) Committee launched their inquiry on the draft National Policy Statement. On the 26 April 2019 the EFRA Committee issued their report and recommendations. The government has provided a separate response to the EFRA Committee.

The Planning Act 2008 sets out the requirements for public consultation and parliamentary procedure with which the Secretary of State must comply when designating a National Policy Statement.

Any enquiries regarding this document should be emailed to defra.helpline@defra.gov.uk.

Consultation process

The consultation document asked 5 questions relating to the draft National Policy Statement and 4 questions concerning the Appraisal of Sustainability and Habitats Regulations Assessment reports. The questions are reproduced below. Written responses were received by the online Citizen Space survey, by email or post direct to Defra.

Details of the consultation and how to respond were sent to stakeholders on our database. Details were more widely publicised by trade and environmental news services, professional networks and social media.

Defra conducted the consultation on the draft National Policy Statement in line with the government’s consultation guidelines. This sets out that consultations should be informative and conveyed in a clear and concise manner so that those consulted can give informed responses.

Defra hosted 2 stakeholder events in 2019 to support the consultation. The purpose of these events was to explain the consultation and contents of the draft National Policy Statement and provide a forum for discussion and questions. Views presented by stakeholders at these events have also been considered alongside the written responses.

Consultation questions

1. Do you think the draft National Policy Statement sets out a clear need for nationally significant water resources infrastructure? Please provide reasons to support your answer.

2. Do you think the draft National Policy Statement makes clear for water undertakers, the Examining Authority and the Secretary of State the relationship between water resources management planning and applying for nationally significant infrastructure project development consent? Please provide reasons to support your answer.

3. Are the assessment criteria included in the draft National Policy Statement appropriate? Please tell us your views, including any further relevant criteria you can identify.

4. Does the draft National Policy Statement comprehensively cover the impacts of water resources infrastructure development and the effectiveness (including avoiding the creation of excessive costs or other potential barriers to the development) of associated mitigation measures? Please tell us your views, including any further impacts or mitigation measures you think should be included.

5. Do you have any other comments on the draft National Policy Statement which are not covered by the previous questions?

6. Do you agree with the findings (of ‘likely significant effects’) of the Appraisal of Sustainability Report? If not, what other significant effects do you think have been missed, and why? Please provide reasons to support your answer.

7. Do you agree with the conclusions of the Appraisal of Sustainability Report and the recommendations for enhancing positive effects associated with the implementation of the draft National Policy Statement? If not, what do you think should be the key recommendations and why?

8. Do you agree with the proposed arrangements for monitoring the significant effects of the implementation of the draft National Policy Statement? If not, what measures do you propose?

9. Please tell us your views on the findings from the Habitats Regulations Assessment Report for the draft National Policy Statement, providing reasons to support your answer.

Overview of responses

A total of 45 responses were received during the consultation. The type of respondent is illustrated in figure 1 below. A full list of organisations who responded is listed in Annex 1.

Respondents included:

• 10 NGOs
• 8 regulators
• 7 water companies
• 6 local authorities
• 6 consultancies
• 4 individuals
• 2 government bodies
• 2 from water industry

Responses were received from key stakeholder groups such as water companies, environmentally focused non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and local planning authorities. Responses were also received from the planning and construction consultancy services sector. We received responses from 8 UK and devolved administration regulatory bodies, who were responding primarily to the Appraisal of Sustainability and Habitats Regulations Assessment.

A more detailed question-by-question analysis is provided.

Responses to individual questions

Question 1

Do you think the draft National Policy Statement sets out a clear need for nationally significant water resources infrastructure? Please provide reasons to support your answer.

Background

The draft National Policy Statement sets out the need for nationally significant water resources infrastructure alongside demand management, as part of a twin track approach to secure resilient water supplies. It describes the drivers behind the need for nationally significant infrastructure, including climate change, population growth, the need to support economic growth and protecting and enhancing the environment. It presents evidence that establishes the need, such as the Water UK long term planning framework and the National Infrastructure Commission’s report on water.

Response	Percentage of responses
Agree	65%
Partly agree	8%
Disagree	5%
Not clear	14%
No response	8%

Themes emerging from responses

Most respondents considered that the draft National Policy Statement set out a clear need for water resources infrastructure and agreed that the evidence used was strong and credible. Respondents agreed with the 4 main drivers of need:

• climate change
• population growth
• economic growth
• to protect and enhance the environment

Recognition of the twin track approach in the draft National Policy Statement was welcomed by most respondents. Some respondents suggested the draft National Policy Statement was too vague in setting out the criteria for determining whether this approach had been met. Some discussed the level of uncertainty around demand management ambitions and suggested that the National Policy Statement could set out a risk profile for possible infrastructure needs based on demand reduction savings.

Respondents wanted to see recent reports and consultations, published after the draft National Policy Statement to be referenced, including the water conservation report and the consultation on ‘Improving our management of water in the environment’. It was considered that these will help to demonstrate the twin track approach.

Several respondents raised the importance of considering other water users and local communities in conceptualising and developing new infrastructure.

The need was raised for nationally significant water resources infrastructure to be promoted as an integral part of urban development, along with the need for integrated water resources management.

The role of regional plans, in demonstrating the need for infrastructure as part of water resources planning, was questioned by a large number of respondents. Some responses set out a need for the National Policy Statement to demonstrate how individual company water resources management plans will interact with regional plans. There is more on this in the answer to question 2.

Of those respondents that did not agree that the draft National Policy Statement set out a clear need, it was suggested that the need was exaggerated, and that new infrastructure is not required to support resilience.

Government response to question 1

Water resources management plans remain the most appropriate place for companies to set out their twin track approach to managing their water supplies. We will continue to make this clear in guidance. We will be clear where we expect them to reflect long term ambition such as reducing leaks or further reductions to per capita consumption.

The Environment Agency’s National Framework for water resources uses a planning assumption on per capita consumption of 110 litres per person per day by 2050. The government consulted on measures to reduce personal water use and the Secretary of State’s statement sets out how the measures consulted on will support the National Framework for water resources. The National Framework target is now supported by the statutory water demand target and the actions in the Environmental Improvement Plan. The existing regulatory framework will continue to ensure water companies are held to account. An example is Ofwat’s action against Thames Water (2018), resulting in a £65 million payment to customers, on top of £55 million in automatic penalties incurred by the company for missing the commitment it made to customers to cut leaks.

Through the Environment Act 2021, we will enhance water resources management planning processes. The measures can be used to complement the National Framework, which sets out England’s future water needs and our expectations for how regional water resources groups will deliver those needs.

The government and regulators are working together to overcome challenges to collaborative working. The creation of the regulatory alliance for progressing infrastructure development (RAPID) and the Environment Agency’s National Framework for water resources will support this. The National Policy Statement sets out more detail the role of both RAPID and the National Framework.

The National Policy Statement has been updated to recognise other relevant documents which have been published since the draft National Policy Statement was developed, including the National Framework.

The government’s approach to considering other water users and local communities in conceptualising and developing new infrastructure is addressed in response to question 2 below.

Question 2

Do you think the draft National Policy Statement makes clear for water undertakers, the Examining Authority and the Secretary of State the relationship between water resources management planning and applying for nationally significant infrastructure project development consent? Please provide reasons to support your answer.

Background

All water undertakers have a statutory obligation to produce water resources management plans. These plans set out how companies will manage and develop water resources, so as to be able to meet water supply obligations. water resources management plans are developed in line with statutory requirements and regulators’ guidance.

The draft National Policy Statement set out that it is through the process of preparing (including consultation), publishing and maintaining water resources management plans that decisions will be made on what additional water resources infrastructure is required.

Response	Percentage of responses
Agree	49%
Partly agree	5%
Disagree	0%
Not clear	30%
No response	16%

Themes emerging from responses

Over half of respondents agreed that the draft National Policy Statement makes clear the relationship between the water resources management plan process and development consent and no respondent explicitly disagreed. There was support for the National Policy Statement setting out a clear need for a collaborative approach to planning for future water resources activities, including the development of regional plans.

Of those respondents that agreed, some would like to see more clarity on the route through which major water infrastructure is delivered and the other processes and key organisations involved, for example, Ofwat and the Drinking Water Inspectorate. Some respondents stated that the draft National Policy Statement assumes that all developers are water companies and suggested that the National Policy Statement includes the role of potential third party developers of infrastructure schemes.

Other respondents who didn’t signal clear support commented that the National Policy Statement should require water companies to significantly reduce water usage and leakage before they seek to develop major additional infrastructure.

There were a number of points raised on the water resources management plan process itself and suggestions for how it could be improved.

Government response to question 2

The National Policy Statement sets out the key organisations involved in water resources planning and their roles. This includes the roles of Ofwat, the Environment Agency and the Drinking Water Inspectorate.

The National Policy Statement also sets out the potential for third parties to be developers of water resources infrastructure projects through ‘direct procurement for customers’ (DPC). This is a process for water companies to tender competitively for a third party to design, build, finance, operate and maintain infrastructure, some of which may be nationally significant infrastructure projects.

The government recognises the importance of considering other water users and local communities in conceptualising and developing new infrastructure. Water companies begin the process during the water resources management plan process, which is described in the National Policy Statement. They have a statutory duty to consult on their water resources management plans and should use this opportunity to identify and engage early with local communities, local authorities, and those who would be directly affected by a potential nationally significant infrastructure project. This early consultation may be used to inform the pre-application stage of the development consent order.

The more detailed design and scoping of a scheme will be considered during the pre-application stage of a development consent order. The development consent order regime is a front loaded process which means scoping for any new development proposal must be fully developed during the pre-application stage, before a development consent application is submitted to the Examining Authority. Statutory consultees, affected persons and local communities will have the opportunity to engage with developers during this pre-application stage by responding to consultation. They can also register as interested parties at the examination stage, as set out in the National Policy Statement.

Evidence, including that from the National Infrastructure Commission and the Environment Agency’s National Framework for water resources makes it clear that we cannot rely on leakage reduction and water efficiency measures alone to deliver the extra capacity of water needed to secure supplies and protect the environment by 2050.

Question 3

Are the assessment criteria included in the draft National Policy Statement appropriate? Please tell us your views, including any further relevant criteria you can identify.

Background

The draft National Policy Statement set out certain cross cutting principles in accordance with which development consent applications relating to water resources infrastructure are to be decided. The principles include climate change adaptation, design, the environment, health, safety and security. It also provides guidance on statutory environmental assessments as well as outlining the other regimes such as environmental permitting and abstraction licensing that operate alongside the Planning Act 2008.

Response	Percentage of responses
Agree	62%
Partly agree	13%
Disagree	0%
Not clear	11%
No response	14%

Themes emerging from responses

The majority of respondents across all sectors clearly stated that the assessment criteria are appropriate and comprehensive. Most of these respondents provided recommendations for improvements or clarifications to policy wording within the different topic areas. No new additional criteria were identified by respondents, although a small number of suggestions were received concerning amalgamating or adding additional emphasis within certain topic areas.

A third of respondents, representing the full range of sectors that responded, specifically mentioned and supported the inclusion of the environmental net gain section. Most of these respondents, however, also raised concerns that methodologies to measure environmental net gain are still in development. A number of respondents also requested clarification on the demonstration of biodiversity net gain in the National Policy Statement. A small number of respondents also questioned when environmental net gain is considered strategically during the water resources management plan stage in assessing the value of a range of projects, and how this could be relevant for and balanced against considering more local impacts as part of a development consent application.

Other comments focussed on the detailed policy wording of specific topic areas and how they could be made clearer in terms of the type of information that needs to be submitted as part of a development consent application and to inform decision making.

A number of respondents identified how the draft National Policy Statement references the linkages between the statutory assessments undertaken during the water resources management plan options appraisal process and the development consent order process, with some suggestions for clarification. A small number of respondents identified the important legal need to clarify adequately that the development consent order examination should not revisit decisions made at the water resources management plan stage.

Government response to question 3

The overall content of the National Policy Statement. Detail within some subsections, for example on habitats regulations assessment and on climate change adaptation, have been amended in light of the consultation responses.

Environmental net gain

The government acknowledges the support from respondents regarding environmental net gain but also the concerns raised on the relationship between environmental net gain and biodiversity net gain. The government’s ambition for environmental net gain is set out in the 25 Year Environment Plan and the Environmental Improvement Plan. Methodologies for assessing environmental net gain, including natural capital, are developing in a number of areas, including the water sector.

Guidance provided by regulators for water resources management plans advises on the consideration of methodologies (such as ecosystem services or natural capital approaches) to be used in the assessment of the environmental impacts of water resources options.

These methodologies sit alongside established statutory assessments such as Strategic Environmental Assessment, Habitats Regulations Assessment and Water Framework Assessments that are undertaken as part of the water resources management plan. These are scrutinised by statutory consultees and others as part of the water resources management plan consultation.

The National Policy Statement has been amended to clarify the distinction between environmental net gain and biodiversity net gain. Guidance on assessing biodiversity net gain has been updated and clarified.

A number of respondents identified that environmental factors, considered as part of the water resources management plan options appraisal process could be relevant to a development consent application. Some commented that because the impacts of each of the three nationally significant infrastructure project types and locations of projects would be very different, the potential for environmental net gain would not be equal in all instances. The National Policy Statement has therefore been amended to reflect these two points.

A number of respondents requested that clarity be provided on the methodology used to assess environmental net gain. The National Policy Statement does not specify any preferred methodology to be used to assess or quantify environmental net gain, as a number of approaches may be equally valid. However, the National Policy Statement does provide suggestions on available guidance and tools for measuring natural capital assets and ecosystem services.

Water resources management plan and development consent order assessments

The National Policy Statement acknowledges the important role of statutory assessments in developing infrastructure options as part of the water resources management plan process. A development consent order application must be supported by robust site specific assessments. This is reiterated in the National Policy Statement.

Matters to be considered as part of a development consent order examination

The National Policy Statement discusses in detail the role of the statutory water resources management plan options appraisal process. The National Policy Statement advises that when assessing applications for development consent, the Examining Authority and Secretary of State would not revisit the need case presented in a water resources management plan for an infrastructure proposal. However, the National Policy Statement cannot curtail any requirement that is prescribed within the Planning Act 2008 relating to decision making, and in particular those matters to which the Secretary of State must have regard, set out in section 104(2). In addition, the National Policy Statement identifies a number of statutory environmental assessments and other policy areas requiring the consideration of alternative proposals to those being put forward as a development consent application. The National Policy Statement advises that the water resources management plan options appraisal process will provide relevant information.

Question 4

Does the draft National Policy Statement comprehensively cover the impacts of water resources infrastructure development and the effectiveness (including avoiding the creation of excessive costs or other potential barriers to the development) of associated mitigation measures? Please tell us your views, including any further impacts or mitigation measures you think should be included.

Background

The draft National Policy Statement set out the generic impacts to be considered during the development consent order process and covers 14 topic areas. Each topic area is subdivided into specific advice on assessments, decision making and mitigation measures. The topic areas generally reflect National Planning Policy Framework policy areas and issues which have been identified as part of the National Policy Statement Appraisal of Sustainability.

Response	Percentage of responses
Agree	47%
Partly agree	34%
Disagree	0%
Not clear	8%
No response	11%

Themes emerging from responses

Around half of the respondents clearly stated they consider that the draft National Policy Statement does comprehensively cover the impacts of water resource infrastructure projects. Most of these respondents, however, also had recommendations for improving the wording of various topic areas within the draft National Policy Statement. A further 30% of respondents did not state an overall position but provided detailed comments on the topic areas. No additional impact sections (topic areas) or mitigation measures were identified, although a small number of respondents considered some topic areas could be amalgamated. No significant barriers (economic or otherwise) were identified to the deliverability of policy objectives or mitigation measures.

The majority of comments received concerned the detail of the topic areas within the draft National Policy Statement, relating to the areas of interest of each respondent. In general, respondents made suggestions for clarification of detail within policy wording on decision making and what type and level of detail should be included within assessments to support a development consent application. A number of respondents identified and supported the close links between the draft National Policy Statement and the objectives and policy requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework.

The draft National Policy Statement included summary tables (of detailed information contained within the Appraisal of Sustainability) on ‘potential impacts and mitigation measures’ relating to the topic areas, which are intended to assist with the identification of impacts and presented in an accessible way. A number of respondents (7) supported their inclusion but some also highlighted the potential for confusion arising from incorrectly interpreting their purpose and content and therefore have recommended clarification.

Government response to question 4

The overall structure and content remains the same in the National Policy Statement. No additional topic areas were identified during the consultation. Details within many sub sections have been amended in light of the consultation responses, where these are in accordance with the relevant policy areas.

For example the National Policy Statement section on ‘Biodiversity and nature conservation’ has an additional sub-section which provides more detail on assessing biodiversity net gain and aligns with updates to the Planning Practice Guidance for Nature Conservation. The National Policy Statement includes further information about the government’s policy on climate change mitigation.

We have removed the summary tables of potential impacts and mitigation that were within the National Policy Statement as the information is available from the Appraisal of Sustainability.

Question 5

Do you have any other comments on the draft National Policy Statement which are not covered by the previous questions?

Background

This question was included to capture any other comments that respondents had on the draft National Policy Statement.

We received 23 responses to this question (62%). 14 respondents did not reply to this question (38%).

Themes emerging from responses

There were a broad range of responses to this question. Some of those who responded suggested that the draft National Policy Statement should set out a national strategy on how to meet the need for new water resources infrastructure. A small number stated that the draft National Policy Statement currently provides insufficient guidance and context relating to the key stages of the development consent order process. This includes how views of customers and the public will be sought and the stages of the examination process. Some respondents made suggestions on how the National Policy Statement could reflect possible cross border schemes and requested that the National Policy Statement provide more clarity on roles and expectations. There was a call from some respondents for the National Policy Statement to avoid a repetition of information required for water resources management plans.

Government response to question 5

The National Policy Statement sets out the role of the Environment Agency’s National Framework in establishing the strategic water resources need. This provides evidence to support planning guidance and sets expectations, for example, on the level of drought resilience that water companies should plan for and the water needs of other sectors, including farming.

As explained in our response to question 1, the National Policy Statement establishes the roles of different regulators in the water resources management planning process. We have also set out in response to question 1 how consumers, the public, affected parties and other interested parties have the opportunity to engage at the pre-application stage of the development consent order process and at the examination stage. The Planning Inspectorate website contains further information on the stages of the development consent order process, including estimated timings of the stages and when consultees can get involved.

We have indicated in the National Policy Statement where information from the water resources planning process may be appropriate to use in a development consent order. The National Policy Statement provides examples of this. The National Policy Statement set out information on the consideration of cross border impacts and assessment criteria and makes it clear that Natural Resources Wales and/or Scottish Environment Protection Agency should also be consulted.

Question 6

Do you agree with the findings (of ‘likely significant effects’) of the Appraisal of Sustainability Report? If not, what other significant effects do you think have been missed, and why? Please provide reasons to support your answer.

Background

The Planning Act 2008 requires that an Appraisal of Sustainability must be carried out before a National Policy Statement can be designated. The main purpose of this appraisal is to ensure that the likely environmental and socio-economic effects of the National Policy Statement, at a national level, are identified, described and evaluated. If potential significant adverse effects are identified, the Appraisal of Sustainability recommends options for avoiding or mitigating such effects.

The Appraisal of Sustainability incorporates an assessment which satisfies the requirements of the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive and the domestic implementing regulations (The Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004).

With regard to geographic scope, the Appraisal of Sustainability considered the potential effects of the draft National Policy Statement in England, Scotland and Wales (including in the marine environment where relevant). This reflects the potential for water resources management schemes in England to impact upon adjacent areas in Scotland and Wales due to the transboundary nature of hydrological systems, such as rivers flowing across borders.

Overview of responses and issues raised

The majority of respondents supported the findings of the Appraisal of Sustainability report in terms of the likely significant effects identified. However, issues raised on this aspect of the Appraisal of Sustainability report concerned:

• the appraisal of cumulative effects (in respect of water quantity and quality)
• the impacts of water resources infrastructure

One respondent felt that the appraisal of reasonable alternatives was not helpful in illustrating the likely significant effects of the potential ‘policy’ options available.

Comments were also received on the scoping elements of the Appraisal of Sustainability report. Responses included requests for additional baseline and contextual information and amendments to the approach to the Appraisal of Sustainability, in terms of the Appraisal of Sustainability objectives used in the appraisal.

Government response to question 6

The government response to both question 6 and question 7 on the Appraisal of Sustainability is set out in response to question 7.

Question 7

Do you agree with the conclusions of the Appraisal of Sustainability Report and the recommendations for enhancing positive effects associated with the implementation of the draft National Policy Statement? If not, what do you think should be the key recommendations and why?

Background

The Planning Act 2008 requires that an Appraisal of Sustainability must be carried out before a National Policy Statement can be designated. The main purpose of this appraisal is to ensure that the likely environmental and socio-economic effects of the National Policy Statement, at a national level, are identified, described and evaluated. If potential significant adverse effects are identified, the Appraisal of Sustainability recommends options for avoiding or mitigating such effects.

Overview of responses and issues raised

The majority of respondents supported the conclusions and recommendations contained in the Appraisal of Sustainability report. One respondent, however, did not agree with the conclusions of the positive effects identified in respect of landscape. Another respondent stated that significant effects cannot be ruled out for all water resources infrastructure projects.

In response to measures identified for enhancing positive effects, one respondent commented that the geographic scope should be broadened in order to address impacts on a wider scale. Another respondent identified further recommendations for improving the draft National Policy Statement in relation to environmental net gain and water quality. A further respondent stated that it may be helpful for the Appraisal of Sustainability report to acknowledge that, for specific nationally significant infrastructure projects, the range of mitigation measures will necessarily need to take account of the local circumstances and engagement with relevant local communities.

Government response to points raised on Appraisal of Sustainability

The Appraisal of Sustainability is an appraisal of the National Policy Statement only and does not, therefore, consider specific proposals for water resources infrastructure. In consequence, some of the effects identified by respondents are not appropriate within the context of a planning policy document itself, although they could well be relevant when considering individual nationally significant water resource infrastructure.

The impacts of specific nationally significant water resources infrastructure proposals will be considered as part of the preparation of water resources management plans by water companies and, subsequently, when development consent applications are made.

In undertaking the Appraisal of Sustainability, consideration has been given to the likely activities and potential sources of effects associated with the construction and operation of water resources infrastructure. In this regard, the Appraisal of Sustainability Report summarises the potential range of water quality-related effects that could arise, as a result of the construction and operation of water resources infrastructure.

This review of impacts has helped determine the extent to which the policy contained in the National Policy Statement addresses potential adverse impacts and enhances benefits associated with the development of water resources infrastructure, in-turn informing the identification of mitigation and enhancement measures (see the assessment matrices contained in the Appendix to the Appraisal of Sustainability Report).

In this context, the appraisal contained in the Appraisal of Sustainability Report has found that the implementation of the National Policy Statement is likely to have positive effects across all of the Appraisal of Sustainability objectives that have been used to help characterise the social, economic and environmental effects of the draft National Policy Statement, with significant cumulative positive effects identified for water quantity and quality.

This reflects the expectation that the policy and guidance for the applicant, the Examining Authority and the Secretary of State contained in the draft National Policy Statement will, alongside prevailing national planning policy, legislation and regulatory regimes, provide a positive framework that helps to ensure the potential adverse impacts of water resources infrastructure development are identified, appropriately assessed and, where necessary, avoided, minimised or mitigated.

On the basis of the above, no change to the Appraisal of Sustainability Report is considered to be necessary.

With regard to environmental net gain, the government has included a new subsection specifically on biodiversity net gain within the National Policy Statement.

Question 8

Do you agree with the proposed arrangements for monitoring the significant effects of the implementation of the draft National Policy Statement? If not, what measures do you propose?

Background

Monitoring proposals for the draft National Policy Statement in relation to the requirements of the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive and the domestic implementing regulations (The Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004) were set out in the Appraisal of Sustainability Report.

Overview of responses and issues raised

There was a broad level of support for the monitoring proposals contained in the Appraisal of Sustainability Report. However, a number of respondents highlighted that there are no proposals for monitoring the landscape and cultural heritage effects.

Respondents also recommended the inclusion of indicators relating to:

• environmental net gain
• biodiversity change
• the implementation of compensatory habitat
• indirect biodiversity impacts
• flow changes
• agricultural productivity
• severance
• the health benefits of a reliable and safe water supply

Some respondents felt that further, specific consultation on the monitoring indicators for the draft National Policy Statement should be undertaken by Defra.

Respondents also commented on the monitoring methodology. One respondent questioned the worth of annual monitoring given the small number of nationally significant infrastructure projects likely to come forward. Another stated that ‘intangible wider effects’ need to be monitored, suggesting that a qualitative approach is taken to monitoring and that impacts are monetised. A comment was also received highlighting the importance of pre-monitoring as well as post-monitoring.

Government response to question 8

Defra welcomes the comments provided by respondents on the monitoring proposals set out in the Appraisal of Sustainability Report. The comments received were considered in preparing the Post Adoption Statement, which will be available when the National Policy Statement is designated. The Post Adoption Statement will include details of how the implementation of the National Policy Statement will be monitored.

Question 9

Please tell us your views on the findings from the Habitats Regulations Assessment Report for the draft National Policy Statement, providing reasons to support your answer.

Background

The National Policy Statement is subject to the Habitats Regulations: The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (SI 2017/1012). These require an assessment of whether there are likely to be any ‘significant effects’ on any habitats sites (sites protected because of their importance to nature conservation) as a result of the implementation of the National Policy Statement.

In the Habitats Regulations Assessment report, the government has focused on the public interest element (to deliver a public good) as part of the imperative reasons of overriding public interest (IROPI) requirement, as the non-site-specific nature of the National Policy Statement makes it impossible to fully assess and rule out adverse effects on habitats sites.

Overview of responses and issues raised

There was broad agreement regarding the conclusions of the Habitats Regulations Assessment amongst the consultation responses. One respondent commented that the Habitats Regulations Assessment report appears to have been ‘over-simplified’ in terms of the screening process, the assessment of in-combination effects and the assessment of alternative solutions.

One respondent stated that the wording presented in the Habitats Regulations Assessment may set a presumption that there is an agreed basis of IROPI for all developments. The same respondent stated that the information presented in the Habitats Regulations Assessment is potentially useful context for any project-level Habitats Regulations Assessments of water resources nationally significant infrastructure projects that may be required and that this should be flagged as key considerations for project level assessments. One respondent also stated that the Habitats Regulations Assessment has not considered Special Protection Areas and Ramsar sites in Northern Ireland.

Government response to question 9

The Habitats Regulations Assessment has been undertaken in accordance with the Habitats Regulations. An initial Habitats Regulations Assessment Methodology Report was issued for consultation to the UK statutory consultees for the Habitats Regulations, and to the other relevant bodies for comment between 13 November and the 22 December 2017. Whilst this technical consultation was primarily aimed at the statutory nature conservation consultees, identified under the Habitats Regulations, Defra also made the initial Methodology Report publicly available.

As a result of the responses received to the consultation, the approach to the Habitats Regulations Assessment was finalised as appropriate and set out in the final Habitats Regulations Assessment Methodology Report that was published in March 2018. In consequence, it is not considered appropriate to amend the approach to the Habitats Regulations Assessment at this stage. Further, it is Defra’s view that the approach taken to the assessment is adequately described and clear and that any revisions in this regard would not materially affect the conclusions of the assessment.

Overall, no change to the Habitats Regulations Assessment is proposed. The Habitats Regulations Assessment will be available with the National Policy Statement.

Imperative reasons of overriding public interest (IROPI) and Project-level Habitats Regulations Assessments

The National Policy Statement has been subject to a Habitats Regulations Assessment, and stages in the Habitats Regulations Assessment process have been followed. The Habitats Regulations Assessment of the National Policy Statement does not remove the need for project-level Habitats Regulations Assessments or prejudice the scope or outcomes of these assessments. The designation of the National Policy Statement for IROPI does not mean that these reasons will necessarily extend to all developments arising from the National Policy Statement, although the information provided in the National Policy Statement and Habitats Regulations Assessment may have some relevance.

The impacts of specific proposals will be assessed, initially as part of the water resources management plan process, and then when development consent applications are made. Applications will fully consider the impacts of development on habitats sites, and it should be noted that any application will need to meet the requirements of the National Policy Statement.

Sites in Northern Ireland

One respondent stated that the Habitats Regulations Assessment has not considered Special Protection Areas and Ramsar sites in Northern Ireland. Both water management and planning are devolved issues. Therefore, the Welsh Government, Northern Ireland Executive and Scottish Government each have responsibility for these issues in or as regards their respective administrations. The National Policy Statement will apply to England only.

Annex 1: List of respondents

Agilia
Anglian Water
Angling Trust
Arup
Blueprint
Canal & River Trust
Consumer Council for Water
Colne Catchment Action Network
County Land and Business Association
Environment Agency
Environmental Industries Commission / Association for Consultancy & Engineering
Friends of the Lake District
Future Water Association
Group Against Reservoir Development
Greater London Authority
Hampshire County Council
Hertfordshire and Middlesex Wildlife Trust
Historic England
Historic Environment Scotland
Jacobs
Lincolnshire County Council
Natural England
Natural Resources Wales
National Infrastructure Planning Association
Northern Ireland Environment Agency (DAERA)
Northumbrian Water
Oxfordshire County Council
Portsmouth Water
Scottish Natural Heritage (NatureScot)
Scottish Environment Protection Agency
Severn Trent Water
South Oxfordshire District Council
South West Water
Stantec
Thames Blue Green Economy
Thames Water
The Coal Authority
United Utilities
Vale of White Horse District Council
Water Resources South East
WSP
4 individuals