Question
Last week I saw sewage pouring into the river Ouse, all while doing a BBC interview on pollution! I have worked out that during the average length of a Budget statement, the equivalent of four Olympic swimming pools’ worth of water will have leaked across the network. If only Yorkshire Water guarded its assets as closely as the Yorkshire Chancellor guards the HP sauce in his Red Box. Does the Prime Minister agree that it is time for stronger public control of our region’s water?
Answer
My hon. Friend is right. The water industry is a symbol of what has gone wrong. The private interest has been allowed to dominate the public interest, which is why we will introduce a strengthened water Bill that will lift the bar on public ownership, alongside other reforms over the next decade. The vast majority of the public support this. They do not want to see sewage in our rivers and seas—unlike, I believe, the Leader of the Opposition, who told her conference recently, “Water privatisation has been a success.” She cannot really believe that, can she?25% point-scoring
Verdict: GREEN (82/100)
The question asked whether stronger public control of water is needed, and the reply clearly agrees and commits the government to a strengthened water Bill that will 'lift the bar on public ownership'. The answer is direct and is not evasive, though it speaks to water policy in general rather than naming Yorkshire specifically. The asker would likely have enough committed information to move on.
How we got there
| Question item | Coverage | Specificity | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Prime Minister agrees that it is time for stronger public control of water in the region (Yorkshire). | Addressed | Direct | The reply agrees with the premise ('My hon. Friend is right'), and the commitment that a strengthened water Bill will 'lift the bar on public ownership' directly answers whether stronger public control of water is needed. The reply does not name Yorkshire specifically, but the question concerns water policy generally, so this is not a misreading. |