Speech by Phil Woolas MP to the Association of Drainage Authorities Annual Conference, Peterborough, 30 October 2007
Good morning. First I would like to provide you with a little context, before I come on to how we deal with the effects of flooding. Climate change is real. Science does not yet demonstrate conclusively that recent flooding was a direct consequence. But it is certainly clear to all but a very small number that CC is a man-made activity. Even if we stopped emitting tomorrow, it would still take over forty years to deal with all the emissions. We need to adapt to existing climate change as a minimum. The media tell us that Ministers are not doing enough to respond to climate change; I agree, and the need for adaptation is beginning to be recognised – but we are also not yet doing enough to prevent climate change in the first place.
Directly relevant to the adaptation side – I would like today to offer a genuine thank you to all of those present. I understand that a lot of you are made up of volunteers, and that the work you do must often seem like a thankless task. As the Minister responsible for flooding I have never received a letter thanking me for preventing flooding – and nor do I expect to – but I have had a very large number blaming me for it. The work that you do is of huge importance to the country, and to agriculture. It is something that Ministers regard as extremely important, and I am not alone. That said, when I was growing up in the countryside I was the leader of the local Young Farmers and, even though I have been attributed as having spent my summers “making hay”, I do understand what it is like. It is because of the role that you have, and the exemplary way that you carry it out, that you are able to buy credit when delivering a tough message.
Of course, resources are the big issue. The amount now spent on flood defences has been increased by four fold over the last ten years, and, as you will know, we have recently added an extra £200m to the pot. I think it far more productive, for those who have to take the decisions about flood defence, to have an argument about how resources should be spent than on what should be spent. Is what the Government spends enough? I am sometimes presented with estimates about how much it will rain – The UK Climate Impacts Programme at the University of Oxford has drawn up plans for the possible effects of climate change on the UK. It is clear from their work that winter rain will increase, and we will face drier, hotter summers, characterised by heavy short bursts of rainfall.
But even with the extraordinarily powerful techniques now available to us, it is not obvious in advance exactly where rain will fall, nor is it possible to know how much, or the effect this will have on the area upon which it falls, and where this water will flow subsequently. What I do know is that more rain fell in East Yorkshire this summer than since records began, in 1776 or thereabouts.
So how then do we plan? We can’t say with certainty that x amount spent will be enough; but what is clear is that we need to do more, and we need to do it better. I understand this – we have given more resources to flood defence, and there will be more in future.
Were it not for the extremely benign inheritance of the Victorians, and their genius for engineering, we would be absolutely bankrupt today. It’s always rained a lot in GB, and it’s something we like to talk about. A lot. It’s because of these things we have tended to take a plentiful supply of good quality, low cost water for granted. This blithe British attitude to water cannot continue. Government needs to ensure that those bodies that we trust to protect us from flooding have the ability to carry out their responsibilities properly, but it is also time that each of us, as individuals, take greater responsibility for how we use, or don’t use, our water. It is folly to continue pouring treated water on our gardens, and to wash our windows. With the levels of water scarcity that now exist, the current situation simply cannot continue.
One of the issues we are also considering is -- should permitted development rights continue to cover both hard and permeable surfaces. We can’t concrete over grass and soil in our town and cities without any consequence. Over the past ten years Londoners have concreted over twenty two Hyde Parks worth of their gardens – clearly this is not sustainable. Surfaces that allow water to penetrate, such as village greens and permeable paving, can reduce rapid run-off of water from rainfall, easing pressure on our drainage system and limit the effect of any overflow. It is folly to drain rain water through treatment works and into rivers. I want to see a water butt in every garden by 2010.
We can no longer afford to put pure water directly into the sewer. The 100 year old law that permits developments to automatically connect surface water run-off to the public sewerage system has to change.
We have also asked Sir Michael Pitt to undertake an independent, wide-ranging and thorough review to identify any lessons to be learned for the way that we manage and respond to flooding events such as the ones this summer and which will include consideration of wider flood risk management issues. Sir Michael is aiming to publish initial findings by the end of the year and subsequently a formal report.
Building and safeguarding physical defences through proper maintenance continues to be the most important mechanism we have for protecting lives, land and property from the risk of flooding and erosion on the coasts. But we recognise that building bigger, even higher is not the answer – we need to be more sophisticated. Protecting critical infrastructure is hugely important. The work that came out of our Cross-Government ‘Making Space for Water’ strategy is looking not only at how we optimise flood management spend, but also at what other ways we can take a comprehensive and sustainable approach to management of risk from all forms of flooding - from rivers, the sea, groundwater, surface run-off and sewers - and we are looking at better resilience for homes and adaptation, which will be crucial to our ability to manage flood risk in future.
In line with Making space for water, we are aiming to improve management of the risk nationally by giving the Environment Agency a strategic overview of all forms of flooding in a close partnership with local authorities, internal drainage boards and the water companies in long term planning and strategic risk management. That said, the structures will largely stay the same. I am firmly of the view that the only people who benefit from mergers are the design companies who design the new logos.
But the water companies, local councils, Internal drainage boards, the EA, the highways agency, the insurance companies, must be the bodies that take responsibility for maintaining and defending us against climatic events, and they need to get better at working together. It is easy to join the policy process at the local level, rather than at the administrative level, because they don’t follow LA boundaries. Geography doesn’t use administration as its building block – hence the need for the EA.
You will be aware that we have increased funding significantly in recent years. And what we need in addition is a longer term framework. We have moved from annual decisions to working on a three yearly basis. But three years is hardly long term – we will be able to spend better if we know what is coming. Capital allocation and revenue - or as it’s usually known, maintenance – allocation need to go hand in hand. And we need to see it in the context of other public expenditure – which can be done that much more effectively if we have well known, long term plans
We are working with the Environment Agency to develop a long term investment strategy for river and coastal flood risk management looking ahead over the next 20 years to deliver what is going to be needed. This should also give greater clarity to the public and the insurance industry on the sort of flood risk protection they can expect.
I am aware that there is some tension between agriculture, drainage and ecology. Climate change is already having a profound effect on the landscape in Great Britain and around the world. If we are going to become independent or at least seriously reduce our need for oil then we will need to produce alternative fuels, like biomass, and we are already starting to do this. Partnerships with farming, with agriculture, to, for instance, use set aside as reservoirs will become still more necessary in future, and another aspect of our need to think more long term.
There is a general consensus that politicians are incapable and unwilling to think about the long term. But this is exactly what I am proposing – policy needs to be placed in a long-term financial framework – it is what I have been asked to do, it’s what I am committed to doing, and it is one of the main criteria of my success.
Thank you for inviting me here today, I am very grateful for the opportunity - the public’s understanding of the importance of what you do is growing, and I intend to support you to make sure Boards can continue to provide a first class service into the 21st century.
Page published:
5 November 2007