| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Flooding: Pitt Report
7 pm
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, with the leave of the House, I shall now repeat a Statement made in the other place by the Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. The Statement is as follows:
25 Jun 2008 : Column 1488
“Mr Speaker, Sir Michael Pitt has today published his final report on last summer’s flooding. I thank Sir Michael and his team for the professional way in which they have gone about their work of identifying the lessons to be learnt. I also welcome the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Select Committee report to which the Government are responding today.
“This month marks the first anniversary of the start of the floods. The lives of many people and businesses were turned upside down and the costs, human and financial, were considerable. Our thoughts will, above all, be with the families of those who lost loved ones, as well as with communities still trying to recover. I am sure that the House will wish to thank all those who have worked so hard to help those affected over the past 12 months and I pay tribute to the contribution of my honourable friend the Floods Recovery Minister.
“As Sir Michael says, ‘Last summer’s flooding was exceptional’. While we recognise both the huge emergency effort at the time and the investment over many years in flood defences, without which the effects would have been much worse, I said to the House last year that we would learn the lessons.
“Sir Michael’s report sets out more than 90 recommendations, including: establishing the right legislative framework to tackle flooding; clarifying who is responsible for what; ensuring that the public have all the information and guidance that they need; working with essential services to assess risk and protect critical infrastructure; and having a clear recovery plan right from the start of any major emergency.
“I welcome Sir Michael’s report and the direction that it sets. We will prepare a detailed response, with a prioritised action plan, in the autumn. We have already taken a number of steps that respond to Sir Michael’s findings and I wish to report these to the House.
“The Government have made available up to £88 million, with a further £31 million to come, to help local authorities to assist those in greatest need, as well as to repair infrastructure and to help schools and businesses to get going again. A lot has been achieved—most of those affected are now back in their homes—and we will continue to work with local authorities and the insurance industry to help the rest to return as soon as possible.
“Flood warnings save lives. Since last June, over 73,000 more people have registered with the Environment Agency flood warning system, and the agency will now automatically register properties to receive flood warnings where telephone numbers are publicly available. The agency has also improved its advice to the public and run flood awareness campaigns and it is working with the Met Office to improve the quality of flood warnings. The agency has spent £5 million on repairing defences damaged last summer. Current improvement schemes include a £5.9 million project refurbishing the Hull barrier and remedial works to culverts in Gloucester.
25 Jun 2008 : Column 1489
“As I informed the House last week, I have decided that the Environment Agency will now take on a new strategic overview role in England for managing flood risk, from whatever source, and that local authorities will take responsibility for surface water management, including surface water management plans, under the agency’s overview. We will now sort out the detailed arrangements for this, drawing on responses to the Future Water consultation and the results of the 15 pilot projects on urban drainage, the results of which we are publishing today.
“On critical infrastructure, electricity and water providers are responsible for ensuring continuity of supply. The electricity industry has identified just over 1,000 grid and primary sites that are in flood zones and is working with the Environment Agency to see which of these might need additional protection. Every water company is reviewing how its critical assets may be at risk from flooding in order to prioritise investment plans. This information will be used as the basis of a planned nationwide programme to improve the resilience of critical infrastructure, which the Government will produce later this year. Most local resilience forums have now been briefed on critical infrastructure in their area, and the remainder will be done by the end of August.
“On reservoir safety, we will now go ahead to prepare flood maps for reservoirs coming under the Reservoirs Act and ensure that, where they are not already available, they are provided to local emergency planners before the end of 2009. They will decide the best way to ensure that communities are informed. We will also modernise reservoir safety legislation.
“The Government will produce an outline for the national flood emergency framework by the end of July, with a draft for consultation by the end of the year. This will be part of a major programme to improve preparedness for severe flooding. We will bring forward a draft floods and water Bill in the next Session. This will enable us to respond to many of Sir Michael’s recommendations.
“The Government are increasing investment in flood risk management from £650 million this year to £800 million in 2010-11. The Environment Agency’s defences protected 100,000 properties from flooding last year and this new investment will protect a further 145,000 homes across the country. We are developing with the Environment Agency a long-term investment strategy for flood defence.
“We have set aside £34.5 million for priorities identified in Sir Michael’s report. We will, of course, need to consider the detailed recommendations and their funding with local authorities and other partners before making a final allocation but, in order to make progress, I am announcing today that at least £5 million will be made available to develop surface water management plans in the highest priority areas and at least £1 million to improve reservoir safety, specifically for inundation mapping. I have also set aside an initial £250,000 to plan a major
25 Jun 2008 : Column 1490
“We must recognise that we can never eliminate the risk of flooding, particularly as climate change takes hold, but all of us—government, water and electricity providers, local communities and individuals—must take flood risk seriously and be as prepared as we can be to deal with it. Sir Michael’s report will help us all to do this. I know that he will be taking a close interest in its implementation and I will invite him to attend Cabinet committee discussions on progress. I will report further to the House in the autumn with a detailed action plan”.
My Lords, that concludes the Statement.
7.08 pm
Lord Taylor of Holbeach: My Lords, I thank the Minister for repeating the Statement made earlier today in another place. It rightly welcomes the report of Sir Michael Pitt and his team. The Opposition also praise the quality of the report they have produced.
Since December, we have had the benefit of Sir Michael’s interim report, on which this final report is based. We have in addition to this full report a useful executive summary, which, if not enabling noble Lords to be fully comprehensive of the final detail of the report, enables us to be informed of its principal recommendations.
The Minister will also remember the debates we had recently on the initiative of my noble friend Lord Rotherwick, who is not in his place this evening. Since that time, I experienced, only a month ago, the flooding of my home in France. Eight inches of rain fell in four hours. There is nothing like direct experience in politics and it was frightening to see water cascading down the hill, through the garden, utility room and garage and out into the street. Fortunately, we were present and able to ensure that the damage was limited. Yet though the house is tiled throughout, even now it is still sweating out water. It is habitable, but neighbours were not so lucky.
I am therefore more aware than ever of the power of water and the way in which a scene of peace and calm can be turned into a scene of destruction, with landslips, mud, debris, fallen trees and collapsed walls. We were fortunate. However, the experience has made me more aware that many in this country suffering similar exceptional rainfall were not so lucky. It is right, when we consider the report, to remember the many families who still live with the consequences. Others will carry vivid and frightening memories. We can think of the families of those who lost their lives, those whose homes and businesses were wrecked and, as the Statement says, whose world was turned upside down. That will not be forgotten by them, nor should it be forgotten by us.
Some 12 months later, far too many people—11,000, in some 5,000 households—are still not back in their home. Some 2,500 are still living in caravans. I hope that the Minister agrees that insurance companies, local authorities and housing associations should prioritise getting people back into their home. It was the Prime Minister himself who promised to get people back on their feet as quickly as possible.
25 Jun 2008 : Column 1491
Many local authorities are still faced with the bill for the clear-up. Although the Government made funds available for this, not all affected authorities were fully compensated for the enormous sums involved. Do the Government have proposals for finding the £50 million by which local authorities find themselves out of pocket, or will the council tax payer pick up the bill?
Sir Michael Pitt made an interim report to enable the Government to act immediately on the 15 recommendations he made. How many of these have the Government implemented? Can the Minister tell us what they are? While we acknowledge that, thanks to the report, it is now clear what needs to be done, the Government need to appreciate the urgency of the situation. They need to demonstrate the determination to act decisively. They were all action when the spotlight was on the Prime Minister at the time, but since the fuss has died down, there has been the usual drag between intention and achievement. When he produced his report in April, Sir Michael was critical that insufficient action had been taken on raising public awareness. The Statement tells us that 73,000 more people have been registered with the Environment Agency’s flood warning scheme. How many does that make in total? How many people do the Government estimate are living in high-risk areas?
The Statement also refers to the £5 million spent by the Environment Agency in the last year in repairing damaged defences. Do the Government believe that that is an adequate response? Did not the Association of British Insurers estimate that the cost of the floods was £3 billion?
Early on, Sir Michael pointed out the confused nature of storm water management. The report makes clear the need for better maintenance of surface water drainage, particularly in urban areas. In some rural areas, highly competent internal drainage boards have maintained a high professionalism. I remind noble Lords of my interests and my dependency on my local IDB for keeping our family home, farm and business dry—no mean task when it all lies at 3 metres, more or less, above mean sea level. However, in many cases, where the need for taking these things seriously is not so self-evident, there has been a long-standing failure to maintain rainwater drainage in a proper fashion. All too often, building and development has been bolted on to an old, already inadequate and poorly maintained system, without sufficient consideration of the consequences.
We look forward to the draft floods and water Bill, but note that it is only a draft Bill. We in the Opposition approve of the opportunity for scrutiny which this provides, but do the Government feel that they can afford the time to wait for this Bill which, in the words of the Statement, will enable us to,
Have they the time to wait for the Bill? Which of the report’s recommendations do the Government believe need urgent action? Are there some that the Government have identified as needing immediate implementation? What, then, is the timetable for action on those recommendations that will be acted upon now, without delay, 12 months on?
25 Jun 2008 : Column 1492
7.14 pm
Lord Addington: My Lords, I thank the Minister for repeating the Statement and find myself in agreement with the noble Lord, Lord Taylor. Although we tried very hard, we were totally unprepared for what happened, and we are informed by the Government and government-backed scientists that this is liable to happen again. It is good to hear the Government say that they are learning from what happened, although there is then the caveat of “exceptional circumstances”. I think the general consensus is that such exceptional circumstances are likely to occur again within the next decade, if the scientists have got it right.
Can the Government give us some more assurances? I go slightly further than the noble Lord, Lord Taylor, in asking whether a timeframe will be printed for the things that require immediate action? What should be happening locally over the years? Such actions will have to be locally adjusted, but can we have an idea of when these arrangements should be in place?
What is the idea and the structure behind planning regulations for new homes? Flood plains tend to be terribly attractive places for developers, who choose to ignore the fact that water can arrive there periodically. What will we do about ensuring that any new homes reach high standards in terms of both construction and support services? One of the most important things about the Statement was the idea that drainage and power supplies should be able to survive a certain level of inundation.
Do the Government have any idea when they will be able to rehouse all the 5,000 people still living away from their home? That would be a reassuring statistic because it would give us an idea of how seriously the Government take this planning. Can they assure us that it is not a question of just one department’s funding stream being involved and that there will be an effort across government? If any one department is responsible for this level of investment, it could be tempting to take lumps out of it for other projects.
Lord Maginnis of Drumglass: My Lords—
7.17 pm
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, if I may, I should like to reply to the two noble Lords who have spoken. I am grateful for their broad welcome for the report and the Government’s response to it. As the noble Lord, Lord Taylor, indicated, these are very serious issues. The whole House will be sorry to hear of his recent direct experience of how serious this can be. I take only the smallest amount of solace from the fact that it occurred in another country and not the United Kingdom. As he rightly says, it gives one graphic experience of the costs of flooding and the cost in terms of time—people are affected for such a long time before they can go home again.
We have made significant efforts to ensure that as many householders as possible are back in their home. I pay tribute to all those who have contributed—the insurance companies, local authorities and other agencies which have responded intelligently and urgently. However, as the noble Lord, Lord Taylor, rightly identified, some people are not back in their home yet, and that represents an anxiety for us all.
25 Jun 2008 : Column 1493
The noble Lord will appreciate the figures in the Statement on immediate action taken by the Government in response to this obvious need and the promise of more to come. The additional expenditure that is scheduled for three years’ time is a very significant increase over the present figure. An increase from £650 million to £800 million is not to be disregarded—it is an indication of the extent to which the Government are concerned about flood risk.
The issue that was so painfully obvious from last year’s floods is surface water, which, as the noble Lord, Lord Taylor, identified, raises significant issues about necessary controls over the drainage system, which is meant to cope but at the time did not. As the noble Lord, Lord Addington, reminded the House, we are to expect that the somewhat extreme conditions last year that caused such dreadful problems on Humberside and in Gloucestershire and the west country may recur. What used to be regarded as exceptional in the face of what we can all recognise as aspects of climate change may necessitate a greater action on behalf of us all.
I want to emphasise in response to the noble Lord that the Government presented early funding on the issue. They gained the promise of substantial extra resources to be available to the local authorities and the Environment Agency. It is an important point that we have made it clear that the Environment Agency has to take the lead role on the issue and ensure that local authorities respond to the very real points made by the noble Lord, Lord Taylor, on the importance of the local authorities’ responsibility with regard to surface water. We must ensure that the Environment Agency looks with greater care to our reservoirs and their safety. That work is a major priority over the summer.
The noble Lord, Lord Addington, asked whether only one department was going to carry the strain. The Department for the Environment will be in the lead. It is through that department that resources will be channelled. I want to give him the reassurance that he will already have recognised—this was made clear last year by the Prime Minister’s response—that this is a matter for the whole Government. I understand his point that it needs co-operation beyond one department, because there are a number of agencies that are obviously concerned. Other departments also have to increase the priority that they attach to the issues.
I am grateful to both noble Lords. The noble Lord, Lord Taylor, referred to a constructive debate that we had recently on the issue, introduced by the noble Lord, Lord Rotherwick. I do not have the slightest doubt that the House will make sure that the issue remains at the forefront over the next few months and years.
7.23 pm
Lord Maginnis of Drumglass: My Lords, I thank the Minister for repeating the Statement. It has been enlightening. He will understand from my rising to my feet too soon my enthusiasm for his proposals. The one thing that worries me—I asked Questions for Written Answer on the matter some months ago—is
25 Jun 2008 : Column 1494
I should like the Minister’s reassurance. I recall that one of the Written Answers I received indicated that local authorities had a statutory requirement to consult the Environment Agency. Will the Minister tell us what that means? Does consultation mean that they have to accept the guidance? We know the conflict and the pressures that occur at the moment in terms of the downturn in the economy. There is also pressure on developers to keep going. There is pressure on local authorities to accommodate developers. The one thing that struck me was that when I asked about whether redress was available to persons who purchased new homes following planning approval by local authorities and if there was flooding, who was responsible, I received a clear indication that the person who buys and lives in the house is the person responsible.
I ask the Minister to clarify that point. Where there is pressure from developers and where the local authority consorts with the Environment Agency, will reasonable attention be paid to a constructive and commonsense approach so that at the end of the day the householder, who is the person about whom we are speaking, has an assurance that the measures being proposed will be effective?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for his questions and points. I can give him some reassurance. Of course decisions taken at local level will go through the usual channels and of course he may complain that that may lead to bureaucratic delay, but it is in the interests of local authorities to ensure that their neighbourhoods are safe. Let me say that they will be under a fairly clear obligation with regard to the Environment Agency. The Environment Agency is now a statutory consultee on planning developments, so the question of the permission that local authorities give to planning applications is a matter in which the Environment Agency will take an interest if the issue of flooding might be a real factor. That means that Ministers can call in major planning applications for consideration if they are advised by the Environment Agency that the risks being entailed may be too great.
Baroness O'Cathain: My Lords, I thank the Minister for repeating the Statement. I have just managed to obtain a copy from my noble friend on the Front Bench. As the Minister said, the Environment Agency will have a lead role. It has a flood warning system, it is working with the Met Office, and it is repairing defences. It is involved with the electricity industry. It also has to protect the flood defences for another 145,000 homes. Will the Minister enlarge on the role of the Environment Agency in the overall planning of housing? He has just stated that there is a statutory requirement for the Environment Agency to look at plans for housing, but is it true that that is not a statutory requirement for the eco-towns that are going to be built? That is one of the big problems that is causing concern, certainly in parts of the country. For example, in Sussex an eco-town is planned. I declare an interest in that I live not too far
25 Jun 2008 : Column 1495
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |