Written evidence from the Flood Prevention Society (FFP 51)
- There is increasing flooding and suffering as the DEFRA Committee Chairman says in his opening paragraph, but 90% of it is economically avoidable, we will explain how.
Media headlines often say “the most rain every recorded, unprecedented rainfall” etc – all are wrong. The Somerset Levels flood 2013-14 was not the highest rainfall, they had more in 1976, but there was no flooding, the rivers were getting dredged then. The 13” rainfall in a day in Cumbria was a one in 100 years event, they had more in 1929.
- The action taken by Government to remove the maintenance of rivers from the control of the river Engineers in 1995 and placing them under the full control of the Environment Agency (EA), giving the EA absolute power without accountability or responsibility has been acknowledged by most to have been a monumental mistake. The EA have a culture of not dredging and The Prime Minister, David Cameron after visiting the floods at the Somerset Levels and the Thames west of London in the 2013-14 said and I quote:- “the pause in dredging that took place in the later 1990’s was wrong and we need to get back to dredging again”. “People who say that dredging won’t make a difference are wrong”.
In our lifetime the worst British floods were in July 2007 across the Midlands and Eastern Counties, when tens of thousands of homes and businesses were flooded. Sir Michael Pitt produced a report to Government which contained three important points:
- None of the floods could be attributed to climate change.
- The EA’s indicative flood maps have a 0.1% chance of accuracy.
- If we do not act the country will lose 5% of its GDP to flooding i.e. £78 billion per year.
- The EA spokespeople are full of misleading spin, they tell the Minister and Parliamentary Under Secretary of State of the Environment, who passes it on to Members of Parliament and the House of Lords who complain to them about not dredging. The EA says that dredging has to be prioritised and justified on the grounds that it is:
- Technically sound.
- Economically viable.
- Environmentally acceptable and sustainable.
In one two page letter to the Minister they used these three headings five times. They, of course, are meaningless, as the EA with Natural England (EA) always put a flawed habitat policy before the health and safety of the public.
- Rainfall in Britain is totally unpredictable as to when, where, in what volume, and for how long of a period it is going to fall. There has been no increase in rainfall because of Global Warming. The annual average rainfall has not altered for the last 100 years. Within that average some years can vary from 30% below to 30% above average, in 2015 it was 5% below average. A report from the Centre for Hydrology and Ecology has confirmed that we have had no increased rainfall through global warming. For example the Summer of 1903 was the wettest on record in London. October 1903 was the wettest on record, several bridges were swept away in Newcastle, in June it rained non stop in London for 60 hours, the longest recorded continual rains in the UK. 1960 was the wettest year of the 20th Century in England and Wales. In July 2007 on its own was only the fifteenth wettest July on record, the wettest June was set in 1860. The world also has unpredictable rainfall. There was Noah’s Ark 40 days of floods, then a Prophet in the Bible reported seven dry years and seven wet years.
The world’s oldest weather report may have been the one inscribed 3,500 years ago on a stone block found in Egypt. A new translation of hieroglyphics on the stone, called the Tempest Stela, has deciphered an account of calamitous weather, tempest of rain … they sky being in storm without cessation, louder than the cries of the masses, and told of bodies floating down the Nile like “skiffs of papyrus”. We do not recall the ancient Egyptians talking about the excuse of global warming.
- The now devolved area of Wales with its 22 counties has published its river maintenance programme for 2015-16, all rivers mentioned, some for weed removal, but not one for dredging – before it was devolved these are example of the EA spending millions of £s on local flood defences, when a few thousand £s spent on dredging i.e. flood prevention would be more successful – at much less cost and much quicker.
5.1 These examples are from our own region but our observations and contacts tell us it is EA policy over England and Wales, so they are not spending in the right way.
5.2 Picture shows the RNLI team posing in 2000 as they take a break from the work rescuing people from the Bridge Inn public house and the surrounding area in Mold, the capital town of Flintshire, 360 feet above sea level. The River Alyn has a relatively short run to the sea. The EA now have designated several flood plain areas around Mold with development restrictions.
The EA have spent £2 million on a flood catchment area and dredged approximately only 200 yards of the river Alyn - £10,000 spent on further dredging of the Alyn would not only save money but be a better prevention. The EA have now planted 1100 willow trees along and in the River Alyn in the Mold area. Some drain pipes from the town still have their outlets under the silt in the undredged river.
5.3 Over 100 houses were getting flooded in Ruthin, a major market town in Denbighshire, from the year 2000 on. The River Clwyd was and is in an extreme state of neglected maintenance with deep accumulated silt and trees and shrubs growing inwards from both banks and touching in the middle. A major Victorian culvert about 5’ in diameter was in need of repair and its discharge point into the Clwyd was obstructed by silt build up. The EA spent over £3.5 million making a channel for one of the tributaries to bypass the town. Ruthin is 242’ above sea level with a short straightish run to the sea. Again £20,000 spent on river dredging, weed and tree clearance and repairing the Victorian culvert would have resulted in better flood prevention at much less cost.
We showed the then independent Chairman of our Regional EA Flood Protection section the state of the river, he walked it with us and was appalled – we offered to walk the river with the Regional EA Head of Flood Defence when he was actually in Ruthin – he declined, we think because of restricted EA policy, he could not have done anything about it anyway.
Again in 2012 hundreds of homes were flooded and again millions more £’s have been spent on buildings up banks instead of dredging the river. There was no flood warning – one can only be prepared for heavy rainfall by dredging the rivers.
- Most of main rivers in England and Wales have been put under the SSSI (Site of Special Scientific Interest) imposed by Natural England and the Countryside Council for Wales’ designated powers, and the European Directive of Habitat. The EA on top of their first priority of Conservation and encouragement of wildlife and biodiversity are policing rivers with their enforcement officers for their own and Natural England interests and for the SSSI and European habitat laws.
When Carlisle was flooded in 2005, the then Minister, the Rt Hon Eliot Morley, paid the city a visit, he was asked why the offending river had not been dredged, which was the crucial cause of the flooding, he said because it had the protection of SSSI and the EU Habitat Directive. What he did not reveal was the EU Directive on Habitat decreed in Article 6 Paragraph 4 “HUMAN HEALTH OR PUBLIC SAFETY HAS PRECEDENCE OVER SSSI HABITAT”. It begs the question ‘who is personally responsible for apparently contravening the Directive?’.
In 2015 Carlisle flooded again over topping the banks built up by the EA along the river, which has still not been dredged.
Typical result of the policy of having a culture of not dredging.
- We went to a stakeholders’ meeting called by the EA where they presented three alternatives to prevent flooding in a town – we said dredge the river instead it will be cheaper and more effective. The EA said dredging is not an alternative that they will allow to be considered.
- Re Flood Insurance - Thousands of premises at risk of flooding could be left without insurance, making them not mortgageable nor saleable, after the Government ruled out contributing to their cover when its deal to cover insurers expired in June 2013. Otto Thoresen of the Association of British Insurers said many households and businesses would no longer have the same level of cover, or would have to go without. “No country has a free market for flood insurance that provides affordable cover for high risk premises without some form of Government involvement”. After the Government ruled out contributing to flood cover in 2013, they are now considering (2014) a new policy called Flood RE with the Association of British Insurers. This could take years to complete, as only some factors are already agreed.
Every house in Britain now pays £10.50 towards the Flood RE fund, but the devil is in the detail:
It only applied to half a million homes. Around six million properties in the UK are thought to be at some risk of flood damage during a year, but the list of exclusions for Flood RE is lengthy, It includes:
All business premises.
As with all houses built since 2008.
All properties in higher council tax bands.
Also houses which are now flooding more often will be removed from the Flood Re, as will flats.
Landlords will not have tenanted properties covered.
It could force homeowners to leave homes because they cannot meet insurance costs and obtain a mortgage. Thus because Flood Re interferes with the free market it will fall under the EU’s banning of ‘state aid’ and the EU’s permission if obtainable could take years.
A question to the Government ‘ why won’t you underwrite Flood Re? It’s answer ‘The UK has a multi billion £, world leading insurance industry, which has the ability and financial strength to resolve this issue without calling on hard pressed tax payers’.
A columnist in The Times said ‘Profits soaring, the insurance industry must love floods’. We asked the Association of British Insurers to support our back to dredging campaign to save 90% of inland flooding, but it is obvious why it refused.
- The Prime Minister asked Lord Heseltine to do a comprehensive strategy for national wealth creation – Parts of The Rt Hon Lord Heseltine’s “No Stone Unturned” advice to Government which it could beneficially take note of to prevent flooding.
“To invite criticism is a sign of strength, to accept it is a sign of confidence”. “High infrastructure demands – high institutional funds link them”.
“Government must unleash the dynamic potential of local economies and local knowledge”.
“Are there lessons we can learn from other countries”.
“It was local leadership that built our country in the first place”.
“Both ministers and officials too often pull in different directions, they can be resistant to change, take too long to make decisions”.
“The Coalition Programme 2010 Plan for Growth published in 2011 set out significant actions in key areas including infrastructure with commitments that it can be held to account”.
“I was disappointed but not surprised to find that most people I spoke to thought departmental business plans were not fit for purpose”.
“The Cabinet Office should work with departments to remove restrictions from recruiting externally for key skills”.
“Barriers to secondments between public and private sectors should be removed”.
“The Dutch ‘Top Sector’ policy in which the Netherlands hold a strong international position have 9 main item headings which include agri-food and water management”.
(Note the environment is not mentioned).
“The Government should survey the practices and procedures of all regulators involved with a view to simplifying procedures and avoiding unnecessary duplication between agencies”.
“The Government should initiate discussion to enable UK pension funds to invest in UK infrastructure assets”.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A well maintained river has a quicker flow and larger capacity, both needed at times of high rainfall. Already 58% of the best agricultural land is now getting flooded. The Government’s first responsibility is to feed our increasing population – the world’s population is forecast to increase by 50% in the next 20 years, and we have an adverse balance of payments, so economically the government cannot allow the best agricultural land to get increasingly flooded by neglecting river maintenance. The price of food has increased by 30% in the last 5 years since the EA stopped dredging rivers.
In Holland where they have similar rainfall to us, 60% of the country is below sea level yet they have less floods that we do. They have a Ministry of Water in charge of inland and coastal flood prevention. Our Government needs to do the same preferably with a Dutch Chief Executive – they are experts in flood prevention. There is a precedent set by the Government putting a Canadian as Head of the Bank of England.
The Government made a monumental mistake in 1996 putting rivers under the control of the EA, it was like putting a fox in charge of the welfare of a poultry house, it is up to the Government to rectify it – the Country cannot afford not to.
Attached – Appendix 1
Appendix 1
Page 7 of 7