News from Island MP: Flood Bill takes important steps but raises new questions.
Andrew Turner, the Island’s MP, has welcomed the new Flood and Water Management Bill as an important step in the right direction, but says it raises questions about the respective responsibilities of central and local authorities in managing flood risk.  The Bill received its second reading on 15th December.  Mr Turner has recently been appointed to serve on the Public Bill Committee which will scrutinise and amend the Bill line by line.

The Flood and Water Management Bill is designed to ensure that the country is better prepared to deal with flooding and coastal erosion.  It’s most prominent provisions include a national flood management strategy drawn up by the Environment Agency, and the granting of powers to authorities to oversee or stop alterations to sites or properties deemed to increase the risk of flood.  Many elements of the Bill are drawn from 92 recommendations contained in the Pitt Review into the flooding in Gloucestershire in 2007.  Though the proposals have received cross party support, many of Pitt’s recommendations have been omitted from the most recent version of the Bill. 

Mr Turner said: 

“I am glad to serve on the public bill committee for this important new bill which covers flood and coastal erosion. It is a significant step in the right direction but this legislation is overdue. More and more local communities are seeing their very existence affected by increased rainfall levels or growing coastal erosion.  On the Island in particular, rising sea levels mean that low-lying areas such as Bembridge are at greater risk of flooding.  I will do my best in the committee to ensure the bill is as effective as it can be.”

Mr Turner added:

“Concerns exist though. Giving such a prominent national role to the Environment Agency, both in development and application of strategy, raises the potential problem that local views will not fit into national strategy.  I will work to ensure that local communities, as those most acutely affected by flooding, are given sufficient freedom to most effectively respond to the dangers.  Over-centralisation may also create a dangerous accountability gap between local people and appointed officials. 

“I will also question the powers given to authorities in controlling structures whose existence or location add to the flood or erosion risk.  Once a property is designated, owners cannot make any modifications without the consent of the designating authority.  It is clear that not all modifications would affect flood risk and we must strike the right balance between not overly restricting individual’s actions and protecting the wider community at large.  I would like to see a robust appeals procedure in place to reflect this.”