Memorandum submitted by Dennis Woodman
(FL 01)
NFCDD: NATIONAL FLOOD
AND COASTAL
DEFENCE DATABASE
1. "Alan Gairns, head of property insurance
at Royal & Sun Alliance, who also leads negotiations with
the government on flooding on behalf of the Association of British
Insurers, told The Sunday Telegraph: `There's a National Flood
and Coastal Defence database that the Environment Agency has constructed
which has details of all flood defences, when they were built,
when they were inspected, what condition they're in. That's the
information we're trying to get—which we believe we're entitled
to under the terms of our existing agreement.'"—Sunday
Telegraph, 8 July 2007.
2. The NAO in its recent report on flood
defence management, predating current events, says:
"2.13 The asset data base was designed
as a place to store asset location and condition information .
. . It is not a work management system so maintenance . . . records
of completed work are kept by area on paper based records."
"2.14 We found various problems with
the operation of the asset database. . . . (Agency) staff commented
on the difficulties they had down loading information . . . the
system can still fail when large volumes of data are extracted
. . . "
"2.15 . . . the reporting tool only
enables the Agency to report separately on structures and defences
so it is not possible to produce a definitive list of systems
not at their target condition."
3. As a member of the public I asked the
Agency for access to the database[1].
I may be one of the first individuals to do so. I was given access
to a terminal at the Thames Barrier. Staff commented on the limited
scope of the database. It can only record two (jpeg type) images
per defence. It does not log riparian planning applications, so
Agency staff cannot call up flood defence matters on which they
may be required to comment. In fact I could not view any data
on my visit. The system routinely crashes in the lunch hour, when
Agency staff, off site, attend to administration unconnected with
the database.
4. There is a good degree of public awareness
of the database but it is of little use to third parties. There
is mismatch between expectation and provision. I invite you to
ask that some of the promised increased flood defence funding
is allocated to upgrading the database and its servers.
Dennis Woodman
July 2007
1 My interest in the database stems from a view that
accountability for public safety dictates that there should be
a register of third party flood defence owners in the public domain.
83% of defence owners on the tidal Thames are third party, many
unidentified, and incapable of being identified with legal certainty
and attributable legal liability. Back
|
