Flood Risk Management-Flood Prevention, Protection and Mitigation

---

[back to previous text]

Miss Anne McIntosh (Vale of York) (Con): I sincerely apologise to you, Mr. Cummings, and to the Committee for not being in my place at the start of our proceedings. The card that I received informed me that the sitting would start at 2.30 pm.

I welcome this opportunity to debate the documents before us. I am delighted that the European Scrutiny Committee has lined up a number of issues that are causing concern. The prevention of flooding in inland and coastal areas is of key importance in protecting, homes, farms and wildlife, as the Minister must be acutely aware because of his departmental responsibilities.

Column Number: 12

I have initiated two Adjournment debates on the subject, the first in November 2000 on flooding in the Vale of York, and the second in January 2001 on flood plains in the Vale of York, and the Minister will no doubt recall my concerns at the time.

The implications of the proposal are far-ranging and I hope that for the benefit of the Committee, the European Scrutiny Committee and the House, the Minister will take the opportunity to explain the implications for the United Kingdom of an integrated European approach. In view of what the hon. Member for Ludlow said, it appears that the implications go wider even than the enlarged European Union. At least one river flows into Switzerland, a non-EU country, which leads me to ask what precautions the EU has taken to assess potential flood damage and what relations it has developed to deal with flooding from rivers.

I am concerned about the financial implications. Page 5 of the document refers to the European Union solidarity fund and mentions the figure of è3 billion. Will the Minister confirm the total expenditure and say to what extent Britain contributes to that budget? Bearing in mind that Britain has no contiguous coastline with European Union countries, and no rivers flowing through Britain emanate from other European Union countries, what remote possibility is there that Britain will benefit from that fund? With which other European Union countries are we seeking to develop a relationship? We have more in common with the Scandinavian countries in that regard.

The most worrying of the matters raised by the European Scrutiny Committee is that of subsidiarity. What precise role do the Government think the European Union should play when the main responsibility for action must surely be at national level? Most of the resources that have been committed are in respect of coastal flooding, as in East Anglia, parts of North Yorkshire and other parts of the United Kingdom, or more likely, as in the Vale of York, from river flooding as well. Do the Government agree with the European Scrutiny Committee? The Minister is on the record as saying that in his explanatory notes. I should like some explanation from him as to why the Government are agreeing to something that should clearly come within the national remit.

One aspect that could be potentially beneficial for landowners, particularly farmers, is if the Government were minded, and if the European Union would allow, the European rural development fund and the national aspect of the fund to be used to develop cases of managed retreat. That could be a particularly attractive option if the farmer is not in a financially viable position to make land available to the local community for the common good. There could be some form of compensation for such managed retreat, either to prevent flooding from rivers or coastal flooding. As that is the Minister's Department's responsibility, will he look favourably on that? Managed retreat is an option that should be considered as part of a holistic plan, and farmers and

Column Number: 13

landowners in my constituency should be compensated using some of the rural development regulations.

I have had cause to write to the Secretary of State on that subject, but so far we have not received confirmation. The Minister will probably say that it would be premature given where we are in those negotiations, but I hope that he will look favourably on such a request, because he will find enthusiastic support for it from farmers from the Vale of York. I am delighted to say that the local Environment Agency recently met our farmers, and it seemed sympathetic to it. Can the Minister put my mind at rest: would that be allowed, and would it not seem to be in conflict with the provisions of the document before us?

One of my great concerns, given that about 60 per cent. of the Vale of York is built on a flood plain, is the difficulty of inappropriate building—not farms—in towns and villages on what is a functioning flood plain. That used to be a matter for the old Department for the Environment, Transport and the Regions before DEFRA was formed and a separate Department of Transport was set up. Can the Minister confirm that, wherever possible, public agencies should work with landowners and farmers to develop a natural flood alleviation scheme for flood meadows? Will he work with the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister to ensure that inappropriate building on functioning flood plains will not take place? I am sure that all members of the Committee would wish to see building on brownfield sites wherever appropriate.

That would be much to the benefit of the European Union and the Government's role within it, particularly as they take up the cudgels in the second half of next year of the British presidency. It would be better for the EU to focus on the causes of flooding, in which we all know climate change has a fundamental role. Will the Minister's Department put pressure on the second Bush Administration to sign the Kyoto agreement, so that there will be provision for the US to meet its climate change obligations?

Returning to the farm aspect of the subject, as I mentioned, residential and commercial development can as far as possible avoid flood plains. Can the Minister use his good offices to ram that message home with the Deputy Prime Minister? Wherever possible, public agencies should work with landowners and farmers to develop natural flood alleviation systems for flood meadows, using the flexibility of the reformed agricultural policy and, as I mentioned earlier, the rural development regulation.

For coastal flooding, the priority must be to protect the land from flooding. East Anglia and other parts of the UK coastline are particularly vulnerable, so will they qualify for funding under the European solidarity fund? To neglect to maintain sea defences through lack of funds is unacceptable, and any proposals that would allow flood or sea defences to be breached must be part of a holistic and positive approach to coastal protection and it must be proved that they would be to the overall benefit of preventing coastal erosion. Will the Minister confirm that UK coastal protection and sea defences will qualify for funding from the EU

Column Number: 14

solidarity fund? When managed retreat is considered as an option, it must be part of a holistic plan that enables farmers and land owners to be compensated for allowing their land to be used for the public good, and it must attract funding from the rural development regulation.

When I was a Member of the European Parliament, I do not recall the European Parliament or Commission examining flood risk management or flood prevention, protection or mitigation measures in any great depth, so why are we considering this proposal in such depth? As we are, how do the Government square that with their overriding aim of ensuring subsidiarity as far as possible? What will the financial implications be? How much is the UK contributing to the EU solidarity fund, and what benefits might we gain from it? As an island, how will we be part of the integrated approach when we cannot possibly be at risk of flooding from other European member states?

I welcome the opportunity to discuss this document. Having served on the European Scrutiny Committee, I share many of the concerns and anxieties raised, and I look forward to the Minister putting our minds at rest.

2.42 pm

Mr. Morley: I am happy to respond to the points raised by hon. Members. I welcome the hon. Member for Vale of York (Miss McIntosh) albeit belatedly to the debate—I always value her contributions.

The hon. Member for Ludlow asked how we would address the issues in relation to the role of agri-environment. We have a long-established principle of river basin management. Under the water framework directive, we are drawing up river basin management plans. I am keen on that approach, because I like the element of public consultation and involving groups, such as local councils and community groups, to address river basin management in its entirety, including leisure, management, biodiversity, flood risk management and urban drainage. It is important to develop that approach as well as the issue of diffuse pollution. I must also point out that we have long co-operated with other European countries, for example on flood surge forecasting. We operate that scheme in conjunction with Holland and Germany.

As I said in responding to questions, there is a potential role for agri-environment and considering different types of farming and schemes. The flood action plans, which are called for under this communication, ask us to consider land use planning. That addresses part of the hon. Gentleman's point. As I said to him, there is potential to take more action along those lines. The hon. Lady also mentioned that and I shall come back to the points that she raised.

The hon. Gentleman and the hon. Lady mentioned climate change and the role of the US. We must be realistic. The Bush Administration were not going to sign the Kyoto agreement before the election, and it is not likely that they will do so after the President's re-election. However, that does not mean that there is not

Column Number: 15

a range of issues on which we can seek co-operation with the US, including research and development and funding for innovations and new technologies.

We should also not forget that some American states, both individually and in groups, are interested in joining in some projects and taking action on climate change. It would be a mistake to think that there are no voices in the US talking about the implications of climate change to us all. Whether we are big or small, rich or poor, climate change will affect us, and flooding is a case in point—climate change has a direct potential impact.

The hon. Member for North Cornwall mentioned the experience that he had in Boscastle. I know that he played a prominent role, and the response from the local authority, Environment Agency and emergency services was excellent. They deserve a great deal of credit. As was said, I visited the area to look at the clean-up and talk to the people who were affected, the local council and the hon. Gentleman about how things were going.

It is interesting that of the five areas that the communication asks member states to examine, one is recovery. I think that we have established in this country first-rate forecasting of and response to flooding. The reality is that, with the best will in the world, and even an unlimited budget, we will never be able to eliminate flooding. We cannot do that because there will always be unexpected floods. Therefore, we need to have the prediction, warning and emergency response. We established that following on from the Northampton flood in 1998, and that put us in a good condition to deal with the 2000 floods. The response was good then, and it was excellent to subsequent incidents.

We have a range of measures to help recovery, including the long-standing Bellwin formula. In the case of Boscastle, the Government office has done an excellent job in convening a working group, bringing together various groups and stakeholders that have funds and helping to direct that money towards helping the community to recover and regenerate. That was good.

One lesson that I took from Boscastle was that we have examples of good practice from around the country where local authorities have done a good job and we should learn from those experiences. Following discussions with the hon. Gentleman, I wrote to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister about the idea of a flood recovery pack, so that an affected local authority can be given a pack with procedures, best practice and contact numbers, which will allow them immediately to respond to a flood. The local council has done a very good job in Boscastle, and we can take that forward.

I turn to the question of what the communication can do, which also touches on what the hon. Lady asked about. It can help the EU to act as a facilitator. Although that may not be so important to us, it is sometimes important to have a facilitator where there are big trans-boundary rivers. For example, the Rhine

Column Number: 16

commission has been established for more than 30 years. The commission brings together all the countries that have an interest in the Rhine, including Switzerland, in dealing with flood risk management. The EU also has a role in facilitating the spread of best practice, so there is a range of activities that it can take into account.

The final point made by the hon. Gentleman concerned the Association of British Insurers and insurance in general, which is clearly important. We have agreed and established principles with the ABI. We are investing money in flood and coastal defences much in line with what it wants to see. We are delivering our side of the bargain in terms of a commitment to long-term capital investment and reviewing the planning system, which the hon. Lady mentioned; in return, it has given a commitment that flood insurance will be provided, apart from in a tiny minority of exceptional cases.

 

---

Prepared 8 December 2004