Decision details

The Chair welcomed Katherine Bentley, Resilience Service Delivery Manager to the meeting. County Councillor Shaun Turner, Cabinet Member for Environment and Climate Change, Rachel Crompton, Principal Flood Risk Officer, Fiona Duke, Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Manager, Environment Agency, and Adam Walsh and Fiona Stewart – Team Leaders, Environment Agency remained in the meeting for this item.

The report provided information on the roles and responsibilities of the county council in response to flooding, what Lancashire would expect in terms of weather warning and informing, with a particular focus on heavy rain and flooding, and what response the various authorities provided in a flooding event. The officers provided a brief verbal update at the meeting and took questions from the committee.

Comments and queries raised from the committee were as follows:

• It was highlighted that there was frustration among members and the public about not knowing who to contact during emergencies and that more clarity was needed. It was reported that members had previously been issued with an emergency contacts card and that officers were in the process of updating the card to include the automated 24/7 Floodline number which was available for public use.

• The Environment Agency's role was to lead on forecasting and warnings about flood risks and they would issue flood alerts and flood warnings and severe flood warnings to inform the public and partners of potential floods. They would also gather data post-flood to inform where flood risk management investment was needed best. It was suggested that one area of improvement with incident response could be to co-ordinate the recovery phase and send out one representative rather than multiple representatives for different purposes.

• It was noted that United Utilities would respond to flooding caused by their assets. The committee was informed that responding to flooding events wasn't the responsibility of just one organisation and depending on whose assets were the cause of the flood would depend on who led with the remedial work.

• On who to contact in an emergency situation, members of the public could ring 999 and the Fire and Rescue Service might be deployed. However, it was highlighted the Fire and Rescue Service had a finite resource and could be working across multiple locations. Incidents were triaged with a view to ensure that the service delivered the 'most for the most'.

• It was emphasised that there wasn't a single public authority that carried the duty and responsibility of saving people's homes from being flooded. Whilst generally one authority was responsible for managing the roads and drainage; one authority was responsible for sewers; and one authority was responsible for defending and rescuing people at risk of significant danger, ultimately not one organisation was responsible for water entering and flooding a property – this was the responsibility of the householder. Considerable effort was carried out by the risk management authorities on encouraging people about what they can do for themselves. The Resilience Forums across the North West had created a flood plan available to all authorities and a considerable amount of engagement was happening with local flood action groups.

• The Flood Hub was the central place for all flood-related information, preventing duplication across authorities and communities and members were directed to the hub for more information. It was noted that considerable work had been done recently to promote understanding and the responsibilities of riparian ownership. The website was funded by the North West Regional Flood and Coastal Committee and maintained by Newground Community Interest Community (CIC).

• On those unseen and preventative measures taken, it was noted that in areas where a flood was likely, the Environment Agency would perform enhanced maintenance on the main rivers and clearing grids, to ensure water would flow freely to help prevent flooding. Assurance was sought on preventative measures carried out by the county council in respect of clearing trash screens and gullies. It was suggested that the schedule for clearing trash screens and gullies be shared with members.

• Concerns were raised that homes could be built on fields that currently help mitigate flooding. However, it was noted that as with any new development in Lancashire, district councils would be required to consult with relevant agencies about flood risks and provide their advice. On individual planning applications for ten or more homes or equivalent area of commercial space, the Flood Risk Management team (Lead Local Flood Authority) would advise on the developer's proposals for managing surface water flood risks. If such advice was taken by the planning authorities (district councils), the Flood Risk Management team would support the authority when it came to the discharge of conditions and help assess what was built by developers.

• It was reported that the Environment Agency had a flood map to assist planning services that would be updated with new climate change and surface water modelling information. The Agency reported that 99% of its comments through the statutory consultee process were taken onboard by the district councils and were confident in that process. However, what was found to be problematic was in those cases where previous permissions had been given that did not take into account recent changes to the mapping and flood risk modelling data.

• Concerns about forthcoming planning reforms and the effect this could have on local decision-making for housing developments were expressed, however it was noted that agencies would still provide their statutory advice.

• The committee was informed that sandbags were not recommended by any authority in Lancashire for household flood defence due to their weight and inefficiency and that alternative products such as floodsax or hydrosacks were recommended because they were lightweight, commercially available, and could be composted or disposed of easily. It was suggested that information on the alternatives to sandbags be shared with the committee.

• It was also suggested that there should be an increased marketing and advertising of the Flood Hub resource, targeting those areas most at risk and improving communication as a preventative measure, including providing clear, basic information during emergencies.

The Chair thanked the Cabinet Member and officers for attending and answering the committee's questions.

Resolved: That;

  i.  The Cabinet Member for Environment and Climate Change gives consideration to:

a.  Increasing marketing and promotion of the Flood Hub to people in areas of risk as a preventative measure.

b.  Reviewing the Flood Hub website to determine if emergency advice could be strengthened.

  ii.  The process and schedule for clearing trash screens and gullies ahead of inclement weather be shared with all County Councillors.

  iii.  Information on the alternatives to sandbags be shared with the Environment, Economic Growth and Transport Scrutiny Committee.