In light of the King’s Speech at the May 2026 opening of Parliament confirming the government’s intent on water reform, David Smoker, Chair of the SuDS and Surface Water Systems Technical Group within the British Plastics Federation (BPF) Plastic Pipes Group, assesses whether the reforms will go far enough.
SuDS in action. Image Credit: BPF Pipes Group
Water Reform: A Missed Opportunity for Integrated Thinking?
Recent conversations around the Water Reform white paper have sparked strong reactions, and not without reason. Much of the public debate has centered on water companies, regulators, and the now-familiar criticisms: pollution incidents, executive bonuses, and a sense that accountability has been lacking. Some commentary has framed this moment as a chance for sweeping change – yet the proposed reforms seem to stop short of addressing the deeper, systemic issues.
One notable point is that the idea of an independent water commission specifically excluded consideration of renationalisation. That decision alone shaped the scope of the debate. Instead, the focus has largely been on tightening regulation and strengthening oversight. Necessary steps, certainly – but are they enough?
There are glimmers of broader thinking. Some proposals are for a new regional planning framework – infrastructure planning will be regional and have cross-sector representation, including from regulators, the water industry, agriculture, transport and regional government.
There are a lot of good things in the white paper. But overall, the reforms feel like a missed opportunity to rethink how we manage water as a resource, not just a problem.
The Problem with Siloed Thinking
Current policy discussions often treat water scarcity and water pollution as separate issues, each with their own technical fixes:
- Water shortage? Promote water efficiency, reduce leakage
- Pollution and sewer overflows? Improve drainage and expand capacity
This compartmentalized approach ignores the obvious: these challenges are interconnected. Treating them in isolation leads to piecemeal solutions that don’t address root causes.
What’s missing is a shift toward integrated water management – a system where water supply, drainage, flood risk, and environmental quality are considered together.
SuDS and Rainwater Harvesting: The Tools We Already Have
Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) are often discussed in the context of flood management, but their potential goes far beyond that. Rainwater harvesting, for example, can:
- Reduce domestic water consumption
- Lower pressure on overstretched sewer networks
- Improve resilience during drought
- Reduce runoff and pollution during storms
Yet objections persist. One common concern is the risk of misconnections, which have led to restrictions on centralised rainwater harvesting systems in multi-occupancy developments. But this is a regulatory issue, not a technical one.
As some commentators have noted, changes in regulation – such as those proposed in Julia Buckley’s Private Member’s Bill – could remove these barriers entirely. We have the technology. What we lack is the framework to use it effectively.
England’s Piecemeal Approach vs Wales’ Schedule 3
SuDS implementation in England continues to rely heavily on the planning system, which results in inconsistent, patchy delivery. Local authorities vary widely in their expectations, enforcement, and capacity. Developers often face uncertainty about what will be required, and communities see uneven outcomes.
Contrast this with Wales, where Schedule 3 of the Flood and Water Management Act has been implemented. SuDS Approval Bodies (SABs) provide a clear, consistent process. Standards are statutory. Developers know what to expect. The result is a more coherent, predictable system.
England’s National Standards for SuDS are a step forward, but they remain non-statutory (lots of ‘should’ rather than ‘shall’). The National Planning Policy Framework still contains too many loopholes, exemptions, and opportunities for SuDS to be watered down or omitted entirely.
The spectre of adoption (or rather non-adoption) still casts a shadow over the whole process.
Pre-Pipe Solutions Already Exist – So Why Aren’t We Using Them?
Before we reach for expensive, carbon-intensive infrastructure upgrades, we should be asking why proven, low-carbon, nature-based solutions aren’t being deployed at scale. SuDS, rainwater harvesting, green roofs, permeable surfaces, attenuation and infiltration systems – these are not experimental technologies. They are mature, effective, and widely used internationally.
The challenge is not innovation. It’s implementation. To paraphrase The Six Million Dollar Man: We have the technology… but can we rebuild the system around it?
The revised BPF Pipes Group guidance on SuDS is now available at Plastic Pipes Group | PPG - Support & Downloads - Guidance.