Examination of Witnesses (Questions 140 - 159)
TUESDAY 12 MAY 1998
COUNCILLOR DEREK
WHITTAKER, MR
IAN SUMNALL,
MR TERRY
OAKES AND
MR PHIL
SWANN
Chairman
140. Councillor Whittaker, welcome to the Agriculture Select
Committee. I understand this is the first time you have appeared
before a Select Committee; we shall be gentle with you. May I
invite you to introduce yourself and the members of your team
and particularly your colleague on my extreme left? I am afraid
we do not know his name and therefore we do not have a card for
him, for which I apologise.
(Councillor Whittaker) I am Derek Whittaker. I am
leader of Arun District Council, which is the A-R-U-N one, not
the one in Scotland; the one down on the south coast. I am also
chairman of a special interest group on the Local Government Association
(LGA). Immediately on my left is Terry Oakes.
(Mr Oakes) I am Director of Community Services at
Waveney District Council, which is in North Suffolk. I am Chairman
of the Anglian Coastal Authorities Group and I am also the spokesperson
for all the regional coastal groups in England and Wales.
(Councillor Whittaker) On my immediate right is Ian
Sumnall.
(Mr Sumnall) I am Chief Executive of Arun District
Council. I am also the lead officer on the Coastal Issues Special
Interest Group, which Councillor Whittaker has just mentioned.
(Mr Swann) I am Phil Swann. I am Head of the Environment
and Development Division of the Local Government Association Secretariat.
141. Thank you for coming before us. Thank you for your memorandum,
which we received last week and we appreciate it and we have read
it and we are grateful for it. Speaking as an inland member, I
suppose I was just a little surprised that there was no reference
to the Easter events because we are also concerned with internal,
not just coastal, issues in this investigation of the Committee.
It was quite an important event for the flood and coastal defence
policy overall. We expected quite a few insights into the way
flood warning systems in particular have operated in inland England.
May I ask you what the LGA's position is on the effectiveness
of flood defence policies—flood defence policies specifically—and
in particular flood warning systems in the light of what did happen
in eastern England and the Midlands?
(Councillor Whittaker) It is fair to say that no flood
warning system can be 100 per cent effective. Local authorities
are obviously aware of this through their previous involvement
with the police and the experience of dealing with emergencies
at coastlines and flood plain areas. In recent years we have witnessed
extreme meteorological conditions: floods, droughts, extreme temperatures,
increasing storms, etc. There is some problem: the nation is divided
on the question of global warming and whether sea level rises
are affecting this and what part the weather patterns actually
play within that. It is fair to say that there has been a good
relationship between local authorities and the Environment Agency.
Where we see the problem is that if you get certain factors which
do not come together, in other words if you do not get sufficiently
accurate weather warnings and then perhaps there is a delay in
giving flood warnings, you have a set of circumstances which are
pretty tragic and pretty disastrous as far as the population is
concerned. The interesting thing is that the population look to
the local authority for assistance. The Environment Agency is
not an organisation which is necessarily turned to in the first
instance or is always particularly as well equipped as a local
authority is. One of the big problems is that we are firefighting
to some degree and it is reactive action.
(Mr Oakes) The Easter floods have shown that it is
clearly very important to get the warning to the people who are
likely to be affected. We have worked well with the Environment
Agency, the police, through the county council and district council,
in setting up the new flood warning procedures. It is probably
more effective at the coast because of the storm tide warning
service which is very effective, particularly on the east coast
and there is more work to be done on the west coast. Inland it
is much more difficult in the river catchment areas. We need to
work with the Environment Agency to see how we can get the message
to the people who are really going to be affected by the floods.
That is probably what led to so many properties being caught out
this time. At the end of the day, many people do look to local
government to help them with the problems they have in getting
back into their properties and reclaiming damaged goods, that
sort of thing. What local government can do is give practical
advice, practical help. That is really what people expect of us.
(Mr Swann) Our evidence did not address this in any
detail. We only had notification that you were likely to ask us
about it on Friday. If you would like us to get some more systematic
information from our authorities on their perceptions of the events
at Easter, then we could easily get a supplementary memorandum
to you in the next two or three weeks.
142. We should certainly like that and three weeks would
be perfectly adequate for that. I have heard some anecdotal evidence
from my own constituents that the systems which were in place
under the old arrangements with Severn Trent Water did not seem
to work so well with the Environment Agency. The responsibility
seems to have eluded them in some way and we are concerned about
that. Anything you have about the effectiveness, particularly
of flood warning systems and what can be done to improve them,
would be gratefully received by the Committee.
(Mr Swann) We shall go back to our authorities, particularly
the ones in the area you have talked about, and get some feedback
from them.
143. That leads on to what I wanted to ask next. Councillor
Whittaker, you talked about the way in which people look to local
authorities in these situations. In your memorandum you talk about
the need to balance local authority powers for flood defence and
coastal protection with the requirement for regional and national
strategies. Where should this accountability for policy decisions
be held? It is a very important question both in internal and
coastal issues: local level, regional level or national level?
There are compelling arguments for all three.
(Councillor Whittaker) Yes, there are. I am almost
inclined to say that to a degree you have to have a mix of all.
There has to be a national plan. For it to be effective, it has
to be operated and put into effect within a local region by a
local authority.
(Mr Oakes) The general feeling within local government
is that there is a need for national guidance, national strategy
and that needs to be at a national level through central government.
I do not think anyone would question that. When it comes down
to developing priorities and implementing necessary schemes, the
feeling within local government is that this should be at a regional
level, coordinated at a regional level, priorities should be assessed
at a regional level against the needs for the region and then
implemented through the operating authorities who would link those
measures or schemes with the many other services for which they
are responsible, many around land use, around local plans, statutory
plans, those sorts of things. Coastal defence needs to be interlinked
with many other issues. It is not a stand-alone service. It is
carried out so that other things can take place at the coast line,
such as economic development, recreation, leisure, transportation,
all those sorts of things. We see a role at all levels but are
particularly concerned to see implementation at a local level.
144. Policy at national level, priorities at regional level,
implementation at local level is how you see it as an association.
(Mr Oakes) Yes.
Chairman: Thank you very much; that is very helpful.
Mr Mitchell
145. Would it not be better if it were all shifted up to
national level? You want to keep your finger in because you want
to hunt trophies, get money and show you are doing something for
the area. This obsession with local interests really weakens any
national approach. The approach does need to be national and it
is therefore better if it is carried out, administered and controlled
nationally.
(Councillor Whittaker) I would take a contrary view
to what you are saying but I will ask Mr Sumnall to expand upon
that.
(Mr Sumnall) We set out in the previous answer how
we saw the distribution between the three levels and obviously
the regional level is something which is going to evolve rather
than being there at the moment. As I understand it, the Government
believes in subsidiarity, there is a lot of clear accountability
at local level through local government. Mr Oakes made the point
that coast protection and flood prevention is only one of many
policies which have to be integrated and the best way of integrating
those on the ground is locally. The success rate of doing that
is emerging through the way in which local authorities, the Environment
Agency and MAFF have been able, over the last five to ten years,
to integrate things far better. No doubt you will ask us something
about shoreline management plans in a minute in relation to coastal
issues.
146. You are absolutely right.
(Mr Sumnall) That is one of the ways, how a system
is evolving, where all the key players, both from national, regional,
local levels, are working together through the coastal cells to
provide this integration. At the end of the day local government
has its status in its democratic mandate. You as MPs will know
how much your constituencies, particularly coming from a coastal
authority, are concerned when things go wrong that they want the
response local and the accountability local as well as lobbying
effectively at a national level.
147. That is true because they are facing local pressure
but that is all firefighting stuff, is it not? The pressures come
from the locality but the delivery has to come at a national level
because that is where the overview can be taken.
(Mr Sumnall) Clearly the policy is national and a
lot of the resources, which are always a key to getting away from
firefighting, have to come as a combination from central government
and from locally generated taxes. You have to remember a lot of
money is being put into coast protection and flood prevention
from council tax. That is a fair share, is it not, of national
policy and local expenditure which has to be seen there? The firefighting
issues, yes. If they are serious, firefighting issues are always
going to have to have a national response because they are bigger
than local communities can handle. If we can get through the proper
planning process of thinking through the strategic plans, and
the funding is available to go in for prevention rather than firefighting,
then I think that there is a very good case being made and happening
on the ground in a lot of cases for keeping the system roughly
as it is at the moment.
148. There are vast differences between local authorities.
Some are active on the issue, some devote a great deal of attention
and foresight to it, others just postpone it. My colleague Sally
Keeble, whose in memoriam plaque is there but not her, put down
a number of questions about applications for grant aid for flood
and coastal defence work from local authorities in the southern
Trent, the Anglian and the Thames regions in the last eight years
and there were hardly any. That indicates that local authorities
are not taking a great deal of interest in the issue, does it
not?
(Mr Sumnall) We have already said in relation to the
inland areas that we will come back to you through the LGA with
more evidence. I can particularly speak for coastal authorities.
I would accept that if you have 90-odd maritime authorities in
England there are going to be varying standards of making applications
and carrying out what has been agreed. It is a variable feast.
We feel, through the strategic groups, through the coastal groups
which no doubt you will ask us about as well in a minute, that
there is a raising of standards; best value, which is another
government imperative on local government, is being adopted through
the sharing of experience and through MAFF's involvement in ensuring
that only those schemes which meet the national priority scoring
system are coming forward, so we are not getting special pleading
in relation to certain particular issues.
149. That is a special pleading in itself. You say in your
evidence that local authorities generally have a proven record
in the delivery of flood and coast protection services. That does
not necessarily mean that it is either effective or efficient.
There are problems among your membership in fulfilling MAFF's
stated goals, are there not?
(Mr Swann) We acknowledge that in the evidence at
the end where we say that we accept there is a need for more effective
coordination between the various agencies involved. We are not
trying to pretend that every local authority gets this right.
In our evidence we call for a fundamental stocktake of how these
things are organised between us and the other agencies to ensure
more effective delivery on the ground. We say that against two
important pieces of background. Firstly, it is not possible for
all of the functions we are talking about to be undertaken at
a national level. There will always have to be some degree of
interface between the national and the local and what you are
talking about really is where the balance of that divide should
be. Integration between the two levels is always going to be difficult
and we are going to have to get it better. We acknowledge that
and we are keen to talk in more detail than we have so far to
the Environment Agency and MAFF and to get that better than it
is now. The second thing we stress is that because of the importance
of the policies we are talking about for local communities, the
local democratic input is vital. If local government is not getting
it right at the moment, our priority through the LGA would be
to promote and disseminate best practice to make sure that local
input is better rather than automatically reverting to a national
solution.
150. Those deficiencies which you agree are there, are at
their worst on inland flood protection because there is very little
in your evidence about the state of inland flood defences and
there is no comment on the issues, as far as I can see. Why is
that?
(Mr Swann) Because, in putting the evidence together
we focused, perhaps wrongly, on coastal issues. In light of what
you are saying we will go back and think in more detail about
the inland issues.
151. Let us move on to shoreline management plans. What is
the Local Government Association's opinion on the future role
of these plans? Do you think it will be practical or desirable
to make their recommendations mandatory?
(Mr Sumnall) The LGA policy is that they are a good
thing, that they have brought together the key players in coastal
defence and flood prevention issues, that they now cover the country,
which is a reflection of national priority.
152. Why is this voluntary? Should it be mandatory?
(Mr Sumnall) I was just getting to that; sorry.
153. I just want to be Perry Mason from time to time.
(Mr Sumnall) Fine. I cannot remember who the bloke
in the dock was; it is too long ago for me. Yes, there are some
missing links. That is one of the links and there are other links
into statutory development planning system which are required
so that shoreline management plans have to be taken account of
through the structure and local planning system.
154. In your evidence you do say that more work should be
undertaken on their integration into the planning system. What
steps would you envisage to ensure that is done?
(Mr Oakes) The shoreline management plans have been
promoted through the regional coastal groups and without the regional
coastal groups the shoreline management plans would not have been
achieved. The shoreline management plans are currently being adopted
by all the operating authorities within the coastal groups, that
is the local authorities and the flood defence committees of the
Environment Agency. That is the recommendation to coastal groups
and as far as I am aware that is the procedure being undertaken
at the moment. If they are adopted in some form, either as policy
statements or as a whole document, it does influence the local
plan or the structure plan within either a district, unitary authority
or a county council. What is missing at the moment, which I suspect
you are alluding to, is this recognition or adoption of the shoreline
management plan policies by MAFF. That is not done at the moment.
Local government has been pressing MAFF to somehow or other adopt
these policies within the shoreline management plans. MAFF fund
the shoreline management plans, they work with the operating authorities
to produce them and it just seems to us that if they could be
adopted in some form—and I do not know what exactly that
would be—it would give them more strength and then taken
into the local planning criteria it would mean that local government
has some real policy to work to in protecting the coastline.
155. Yes, that would be desirable. If they are going to be
mandatory, who would you like to see audit them before they are
imposed? Should that be done at a national level, should it be
done locally or what?
(Councillor Whittaker) The policy needs to be on a
local level. There are obviously some discussions about the future
of the Ministry of Agriculture or whatever the case may be. It
may well be that as far as this particular shoreline management
and the coastal protection plans are concerned, as the money comes
out of the DETR, then it may be better that it goes into that
particular department and comes back out down through to local
government. It is fair to say at the present moment there is about
a £260 million spend on this; I believe MAFF pay in about
£31 million and £211 million is raised through the local
authority levy.
156. You do say you want MAFF to commit itself to the formal
adoption of shoreline management plans drawn up by local coastal
groups. Would the policy not get a greater impetus if local authorities
set about implementing the policies which pay more attention to
or address more fully, MAFF's own guiding objectives for shoreline
management plans?
(Councillor Whittaker) My quick retort is that is
a little bit like a Catch 22 situation or chicken and the egg
really, is it not? You wanted to play the part of Perry Mason:
I am not sure I can be the defence lawyer on this particular one.
One of the reasons will be the funding as far as this is concerned.
You cannot implement something unless the funding is in place.
One of the problems has been that when the schemes are put forward
to MAFF for approval, you can work a scheme up but it does not
mean at the end of the day that MAFF are going to turn round and
say, yes, we will do this.
(Mr Oakes) The shoreline management plans are prepared
within national guidance. MAFF issues a document which outlines
how shoreline management plans should be prepared and that is
in accordance with national strategy. I would actually take issue
and say that shoreline management plans are in accordance with
national policy, that is the whole purpose of the guidance and
working through the coastal groups. When it comes to implementation,
there is more work to be done once the shoreline management plan
has been introduced, in deciding exactly how to implement one
of the four policy options. More work is needed sometimes in the
form of other studies, sometimes you can proceed by implementing
the policy. In any case it is all in accordance with national
policy.
Mr Todd
157. You refer to the preparation of strategic studies, which
MAFF have circulated draft guidance on. Could you set out what
those are intended to do?
(Mr Oakes) Having adopted the policies within a shoreline
management plan for the protection of a particular length of coastline,
the next decision is to decide how to implement that policy. Because
the shoreline management plans were actually desktop studies there
was no approval to carry out further additional studies to supplement,
to fill gaps or whatever. Sometimes it is necessary to have a
better understanding: for instance, what is happening to sediment
within a particular coastal cell, where is the sand going, where
is it coming from, how much is there of it, etcetera? Before you
can decide the impact of a policy on a beach you need to know
more about this and these strategic studies are aimed at getting
that sort of information. Sometimes it is not necessary to carry
out a strategic study. It might be a question of going along and
continuing to maintain an existing defence.
158. This is essentially so that you can work out the sequence
of actions you should take to ensure, for example, that a step
you may take to protect a coastline in one area does not then
have an impact somewhere else through shifting the movement of
sand in another direction.
(Mr Oakes) That is right. It is also to help prioritise
the schemes and to assess the need for budgets, how much money
is required in each particular budgeting year. It is really to
produce a forward action plan; that is a simple way to put it.
159. How are those then reflected in the financial planning
of the local authorities covered by those studies?
(Mr Oakes) Each year local authorities have to make
a return to the Ministry on what it foresees as its expenditure
and that then forms part of all schemes within the pool. I imagine
you will have heard about the priority scoring system and MAFF,
having collected all the schemes together and assessed the points,
then give financial approval to the schemes which can proceed
in any one particular year. They will have previously, under the
new trial system, already given technical approval to a scheme
because it is now a two-stage approval.
|
