My Lords, it is surely not a moment too soon for this House to turn its attention to flood dangers, although they are taking up only a minuscule part of this walloping great ragbag of a debate. The horrendous events in Cumbria last week were described by a Minister as a "once in a thousand years" event. If he was trying to imply that such a thing rarely happens, he is wrong. We have had floods in Britain for years. Yes, they have been on a smaller scale, but that does not change the utter despair suffered by those affected. The brave and conscientious policeman who died on Northside Bridge in Workington is not the first person to die by flooding in Britain—many have died in that way over the years.
An untold number of people have experienced the same heartbreak and helplessness as we heard described last week by one young mother whose kitchen is under four foot of water. She has no electricity, gas or useable water, and is at her wits’ end to know how to feed her family. Past experience shows that it will be months before she can live in her house. Her floors, furniture, fixtures and fittings will be ruined, and the place will smell like a sewer. Even worse, she will not be able to get insurance and will find it impossible to sell her house, because no mortgage will be available.
These problems have been with us for years. I have raised them at least twice in your Lordships’ House. I have written letters to the Environment Agency, and attended many meetings in my home town, where we know about flooding. Northampton has suffered two major floods and many less serious. We have a committee—all volunteers—on flooding in my area, and I must declare an interest in that I am its president. I have not submitted my own research to it, but the committee has put together a huge pile of very important information on these matters.
We have had an uphill battle with the Environment Agency. First, it assured us that surveys of our area showed a very low risk of floods—such things would happen only once in 200 years. It then had to admit that this was wildly out: it was more likely to be once in 50 years and, in many parts of our area, once in 10 years. In some, it was even less than that. This has now been acknowledged.
Some efforts to help have been made by the Environment Agency. Sluice gates were put in. Unfortunately, they cannot be fully opened. If they were, Billing Aquadrome, which is an adjacent holiday spot, would be totally submerged within minutes—so they are not a lot of good. The River Nene rises ominously when no de-silting is done—sometimes, it is not. A man-made lake was dug to cope with the extra outflow of water from a new housing development, but the lake has never had the attention that it needed over the past few years and the area now floods regularly.
This brings me to the feckless way in which the Government habitually ignore the dangers of building on flood plains. To my utter amazement, there is not a word in the Bill which we suppose will shortly come before us that would halt that or disallow building until and unless it could be protected from flood waters.
I understand that the Government’s original plan to build 3 million new houses by 2020 is still in place. It is no small comfort to know that they will be out of office long before then—about 10 years before, I would say—so perhaps that will never happen. However, at one time, I actually thought that the Government had learnt the lesson that no new house-building should take place on flood plains. I read with a happy smile that the then Minister of State for Housing, Yvette Cooper, said on 8 January 2007 that, ""housing … should not be permitted in those areas unless it can be clearly demonstrated that the development will be safe".—[Official Report, Commons, 8/1/07; col. 366W.]"
My cheerfulness, alas, turned to utter despair when I read that the same Minister was reported as saying only six months later that such development would be acceptable so long as electricity supply lines were put into the houses on the first floor by the bedrooms instead of downstairs—dear, oh, dear.
A survey conducted last year revealed that at least 6 per cent of the brand-new houses promised are due to be built on high-flood risk land. That amounts to four towns the size of Tewkesbury—they know all about flooding in Tewkesbury.
I should perhaps remind the House that the troubles to which I have already referred are not the only ones linked to building on flood plains. In my own area, Anglian Water says that it cannot guarantee adequate drinking water and sewerage facilities for the present population, yet we have recently been told that 42,000 more homes are to be built in our area—Lord help us.
Fifty-six of the 209 local authorities which replied to the survey of 2008 to which I referred a moment ago said that they could not find out whether the planned new houses would be built on flood plains. They had asked everyone that they could, but nobody could tell them. I note that the Environment Agency reported only a week or two ago that more than 900,000 properties could face the highest risk of flooding unless money is made available generously and quickly. Is that what the Bill that we are shortly to debate says? I read it fast, I must admit, but I could not see that it said that. Nor is there any indication that local authorities will not have responsibility passed to them without the necessary funds being made available. Such a course would condemn thousands of families not only to misery but also to financial ruin, and untold numbers of buildings—factories, offices, schools, bridges and shops—would be destroyed, ruining countless businesses.
I am informed that the owner of a small business that was flooded less than two weeks ago in Arundel rang up the local council to ask for sandbags. "Oh, we don’t supply sandbags any more," said it. "Well, where can I buy them?" asked the poor man. "Well, we don’t know," they said. I do not know whether the man concerned lost his temper or what leverage he exerted, but he finally got the council to offer him two 6 x 12 sandbags—about the size of a small cushion. That was all that he could have.
Whatever happens to the promises in the Queen’s Speech, we must have legislation to protect our people as far as we can from the scale of the floods foretold. We shall have to look hard at the wisdom of building more and more houses, since it inevitably means more danger of flooding. Great information has been gained from experience. It is available, and I hope that it will be used. Too often, it has been ignored.
Queen’s Speech
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Knight of Collingtree
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 24 November 2009.
It occurred during Queen's speech debate on Queen’s Speech.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
715 c321-3 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-08 16:33:30 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_596468
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_596468
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_596468