Select Committee on Agriculture Minutes of Evidence


Memorandum submitted by The Environment Agency (F21)

1.  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

  1.1  Although Government policy could be judged as having provided an adequate standard of service there is evidence that flood defence is currently underfunded. The consequence of this will be progressively increasing risk of failure of defences with consequent avoidable damage. Based on ongoing asset surveys and the residual lives of defences it is estimated that there is a shortfall of £30-40m per annum in capital asset renewal and maintenance to meet current and future needs. The existing defences and operational arrangements have successfully provided protection to 1.3 million properties, unless storms exceeding the design standards occur.

  1.2  However, current policy is not sustainable in social, economic and environmental terms. The shortfall in funding will not enable the Agency to meet the future challenge of deteriorating flood defence assets, climate changes and potential consequences of new development.

  1.3  The Evidence sets out an overview of the Agency's present structure, funding and range of duties. It focuses on the direct experiences and responsibilities of the Environment Agency. It confirms the need for continuing Flood and Coastal Defence works and outlines the scale of the future challenge. It then looks at the existing arrangements for delivering the flood defences, with Ministry of Agriculture Fisheries and Food responsible for high level policy and the Environment Agency, Independent Drainage Boards and Local Authorities responsible for its operation. A detailed examination of the effectiveness and efficiency of implementation of the Ministry's Policy Objectives highlights a number of issues which are summarised as follows:

    —  underfunding to meet current and future needs

    —  climate change

    —  difficulty in securing appropriate funding in some regions (via levy)

    —  reducing MAFF grant

    —  the extra 4.4 million homes

    —  accurate and timely flood warning

    —  prioritisation scoring system for capital expenditure needs modification

    —  inconsistent standards of service nationally

    —  long term funding of Public Private Partnership Projects

    —  lack of flexibility in Project Appraisal Guidance Notes

    —  public confusion over responsibility for watercourses and coastal defences

    —  grant system encourages capital works over maintenance

  1.4  The issues highlighted are potential obstacles to the development of best value sustainable solutions with the appropriate level of funding.

 2.  ENVIRONMENT AGENCY

2.1  Overview

  2.1.1  The Environment Agency took up its statutory duties at vesting day on 1 April 1996. Its vision is a better environment in England and Wales for present and future generations. It has a wide range of duties relating to different aspects of environmental management notably:

Water Management

    —  Water Resources

    —  Fisheries

    —  Conservation

    —  Navigation

    —  Recreation

Environmental Strategy

    —  monitoring the environment

    —  provision of data

    —  research and development

Environmental Protection

    —  water quality

    —  waste regulation

    —  radioactive substances

    —  advising Government on national air strategy

  2.1.2  The aim of flood defence in this is to provide effective defence and warning systems to protect people and property against flooding from rivers and the sea. In this context the role of flood defence means carrying out works ourselves such as maintaining and improving rivers, sea defences and associated structures together with providing advice to prevent the creation or extension of flooding risk and delivering a national flood warning service.

  2.1.3  Flooding is a natural process which is beneficial to the natural environment. Flood Defence is about intervention in natural processes because of human activity and development in the flood plain. Flood Defence seeks to reduce the risk of flooding and to safeguard life, protect property, sustain economic activity and protect and enhance the environment.

  2.1.4  To do this we maintain the flow carrying capacity of river channels, the foreshore in front of coastal defences and construct flood defence structures. These may involve:—

    —  earth embankments covered in vegetation

    —  concrete or steel embankments

    —  sluice gates

    —  pumping stations to transfer water from low lying areas

    —  barriers such as the Thames and the Foss (in York)

  2.1.5  The Thames Barrier is the single largest flood defence structure and is designed to allow the passage of shipping, whilst providing protection from tidal flooding in London. The level of protection is for a storm expected on average once in each thousand years. However, as with all such structures it does not stand in isolation. It is dependant upon the maintenance of flood defence embankments on the tideway throughout London. Seaward of the barrier linked tidal defences extend as far as Southend on Sea on both banks of the estuary. Integral to the system is the smaller barrier on the Barking Creek.

2.2  Statutory Role

  2.2.1  The majority of the flood defence and land drainage legislation the Agency operates under dates from 1930. This has a number of elements:

    —  a duty to exercise general supervision over flood defence

    —  a permissive power to undertake flood defence work

    —  a power to make byelaws in support of these

    —  a duty to consent works affecting flood drainage systems

    —  a power to raise drainage charges

  The Environment Act 1995 added a number of overriding duties the most relevant of which are:

    —  a principle aim of assisting in the achievement of sustainable development

    —  the promotion of conservation through the Agency's operations

    —  the promotion of water related recreation through the Agency's operations

  2.2.2  Statutory guidance under the 1995 Act also requires the Agency to operate on the basis of sound science, value for money and to manage the environment in a holistic way. It also encourages the Agency to achieve national consistency in its operations.

  2.2.3  Since 1930 the permissive powers have been used by the Agency's predecessor bodies with Government support to construct and operate flood defences on a considerable scale. This is exercised through Regional and Local Flood Defence Committees which are organised on natural river catchments.

2.3  Structure

  2.3.1  The Agency has Head Offices in Bristol and London and operates through 8 regions and 26 operating Areas (3 or 4 Areas to each Region)

  The Agency has a Chairman who is appointed by the Secretary of State for the Environment and a Board of 15 members who are accountable to Ministers for formulating and delivering the Agency's policies. One Board Member is appointed by the Minister of Agriculture, specifically for flood defence purposes.

  2.3.2  The Chief Executive, who is a member of the Board, chairs the Directors team. This comprises eight Directors who oversee and co-ordinate the development of strategy and formulation of national policies for the Agency's Environmental Strategy, Water Management, Environmental Protection, Operations, Finance, Personnel, Legal Services and Corporate Affairs activities. Each Region has a Regional General Manager but there are functional links between specialists at regional or area level and head office. Responsibility is delegated as far down the organisation and as near the customers as possible using clear policies and standards set at head office while allowing operational flexibility at the local level.

  2.3.3.  Three statutory Committees were established to provide a more direct link with the public and customers. These committees are required by the Environment Act for consultation and for providing regular feedback. The committees are: the Regional Flood Defence Committee (RFDC); the Regional Fisheries Ecology and Recreation Advisory Committee (RFERAC); and the Regional Environment Protection Advisory Committee (REPAC). There is also a fourth in Wales; the Advisory Committee for Wales.

2.4  Flood Defence Committees

  2.4.1  There are 10 Regional Flood Defence Committees in England and Wales together with 20 Local Flood Defence Committees. Flood Defence Committees have executive powers to deliver the necessary work programmes and to raise the matching funding. The committee structure in each Region is as follows (See map and comments at Annex A):-

RegionRFDC LFDC Flood Defence Advisory Committees

Anglian1 5 0
Midlands1 0 0
North East2 0 0
North West1 0 3
Southern1 3 0
South West2 3 0
Thames1 0 0
Welsh1 6 0

  2.4.2  All Committees operate within Nolan principles with meetings held in public. RFDC members comprise of:—

    —  a Chairman and number of members appointed by the Minister, one of whom will represent conservation interests

    —  two members appointed by the Agency

    —  a statutory majority of elected members from constituent councils.

  Some RFDC's have appointed three or more LFDC's whose members comprise:—

    —  a Chairman and members elected by the RFDC

    —  a majority of elected members from constituent councils.

  2.4.3  Through their membership the Flood Defence Committees provide a direct link to local authorities. This provides a local input to the identification of flood defence needs.

2.5  Funding

  2.5.1  The following extract from the Agency's 1998-99 Corporate Plan highlights the resources for Flood Defence from 1996-97 to 2000-01.

RESOURCES FOR FLOOD DEFENCE INCOME (£K)

96-97
Actual
97-98
planned
98-99
Planned
99-00
Estimate
00-01
Estimate

Levies/GDC* (see below)187,639 202,474211,746218,100 224,640
Other/Misc15,78311,125 16,13210,1609,220
MAFF Grants46,693 36,00031,000 31,00031,000
Welsh Office Grants552 1,0371,0371,037 1,037
Other Grants152317
Total Income250,819 250,953259,916260,297 265,897
Working Balances23,996 15,10415,10415,104 15,104

  *  GDC is the General Drainage Charge levied in Anglian Region of the Agency on agricultural land and buildings which are not within the area of an Internal Drainage Board. GDC is levied on land which is not subject to General Rates or Drainage Rates.

EXPENDITURE £K

96-97
Actual
97-98
Planned
98-99
Planned
99-00
Estimate
00-01
Estimate

Direct Salaries and Wages67,899 67,76267,30869,330 71,410
Other Direct Costs164,798 169,035169,088167,447 170,967
Other Regional Costs21,103 20,89221,36421,364 21,364
National Costs2,703 2,1562,1562,156 2,156
Total Expenditure256,503 259,845259,916260,297 265,897
Capital (included in above)131,437 131,431134,107135,000 136,000
Use of/(Contribution to) Balances5,684 8,892


STAFF NUMBERS

Direct Staff Input (FTE)2,908 2,8352,7772,777 2,777
In House Workforce1,647 1,6071,5561,556 1,556
Total Staff Input (FTE)3,539 3,4703,3973, 397 3,397


  2.5.2  Experience shows that the availability of MAFF grant has in the past encouraged increased funding via the flood defence levy. The Grant available is currently declining, aggravating the problems of securing adequate levy income in some parts of the country.

ISSUE

    —  Reducing MAFF Grant

 3.  FLOOD AND COASTAL DEFENCE SERVICE NEEDS

3.1  Overview

  3.1.1  Many urban and rural areas in England depend on flood and coastal defences to protect them from flooding or erosion from rivers, tidal waters and the sea. The natural flow of water means that secure and reliable protection is best achieved through management of whole river catchments.

  3.1.2  The risk of flooding is not generally recognised by the public at large, probably because floods are relatively rare events. One reason for this rarity is that many effective flood and coastal defences are already in place.

  3.1.3  The Easter weekend of 1998 showed the effect of extreme floods with over 1,000 homes flooded and four lives lost. Historically, the disastrous effects of a failure of defences were clearly illustrated by the loss of life and widespread flooding and damage caused by the 1953 storms along the East coast of Britain. These resulted in 300 deaths and damage which, if the flood were repeated today, would be estimated at £5 billion. A river flooding event in March 1947 caused widespread damage and disruption. This event caused economic losses of approximately £0\5 billion at present day prices. However, in both cases there has been substantial development in risk areas since 1953 and 1947 as well as an increasing personal affluence. This would mean that the actual level of damage should this now occur would be dramatically greater.

  3.1.4  Events of similar magnitude to those which occurred in 1947 and 1953 have occurred since. However, widespread flooding was avoided as a result of prolonged and significant investment in flood and coastal defence structures.

  3.1.5  As well as defending people and property from flooding, it is equally important to safeguard life by providing timely warnings of flood.

  3.1.6  The erosion of land and encroachment by the sea causes isloated property losses. Nevertheless, for those concerned, the effect is devastaing. A well-publicised example in recent times was the collapse of a hotel into the sea at Scarborough. In this case responsibility for coastal protection from erosion lay with a single maritime council. In other locations it can be less clear with coastal defence being vested with one body and coastal protection from erosion with another.

3.2  Scale of the Challenge

  3.2.1  In the wider world it is recognised that damage from flooding is greater than from any other form of natural disaster. The flooding in Central Europe during the summer of 1997 led to the loss of more than 100 lives and damage in excess of £4 billion. One of the lessons to be learnt from this European event is that constructed defences need an appropriate level of maintenance. If existing defences in England and Wales were allowed to fall into disrepair, the consequent annual average financial damage would conservatively be £2 billion. Apart from these economic disbenefits, the social consequences of regular floods would significantly impact on employment, health and the economy.

  3.2.2  It has been estimated that 1.3 million properties (including the Houses of Parliament) are in flood risk areas, together with 12,000 square kilometres of land, an area approximately the size of Wales. Much of this area is in the East of England and is some of the best agriculture land in Europe. It is intensely farmed to both feed the nation and contribute to it's wealth.

  3.2.3  There is also a need to protect environmental assets under threat. Many of these are of European importance and are designated as such under the EU Habitats Directive. These habitats are often situated in rural areas and the influx of visitors can contribute to the general wellbeing of rural communities. CurrentR & D work being undertaken by the Agency in partnership with English Nature indicates circa £50m will be required in the next 50 years to protect or where appropriate recreate these habitats.

  3.2.4  To set against the potentially enormous consequences of flooding and erosion, it is useful to note that the total expenditure in England and Wales was approximately £400 million in 1997-98. Of this the Agency's flood defence expenditure was £260 million.

  Future challenges fall into several key areas which are inextricably interlinked:

    —  Looking forward, we will also need to tackle the impact of climate change, of rise of sea levels, increased storminess and changes in rainfall patterns. MAFF have already issued guidance on allowances to be included in the design of replacement sea defences. These address the continuing rise in sea level together with landward tilt to the South East which will progressively impact on the investment programme in the South and South East. The scale of current investment on the South coast is already causing concern to the Agency and local authorities.

    —  There is a need to consider environmental requirements as part of the management of defences. Examples of important habitats under stress are saltmarshes and mudflats. These natural coastal features are drowned or eroded away as they become trapped between man-made sea defences and rising sea levels. Many of these habitats are of European importance and are designated as such under the EU Habitats Directive. Estuaries will be squeezed between rising sea levels and the current line of sea defences.

    —  Climate change will alter the annual amounts of regional pattern of rainfall. Of most significance is the prediction of an increase in storminess. This could well mean more frequent and more extreme rainfall events inland and gales at sea. This will increase the frequency with which the existing flood and coastal defences are overwhelmed with consequent flooding. It will also increase the rate of degradation of defences. Evidence of this is already accumulating in the asset surveys programme undertaken by the Agency. We are unable at present to fully quantify the financing implications, but without increased expenditure on maintenance the standard of protection provided by existing defences will deteriorate.

    —  Current investment by all operating authorities to set against the potentially enormous consequences of flooding and erosion is approximately £400 million. The Agency's flood defence programme accounts for £260 million. The funding implications to meet the future challenges will lead to an increase in the overall level of investment. This needs to be allocated in a way that delivers best value sustainable solutions.


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries

© Parliamentary copyright 1998
Prepared 16 June 1998