10 February 2011
Yesterday in the House of Commons, Wednesday 9 February, Cotswold MP, Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, once again raised in the issue of flooding in the Cotswolds. Subsequent to a letter from Mr Barry Russell, the Environment Agency’s Area Flood Risk Manager, Mr Clifton-Brown took the opportunity to raise his concerns in a debate on the Funding of Flood Risk Management in Parliament.
In his letter of 3 February to Mr Clifton-Brown, Mr Russell stated:
"In previous years, the local authority projects received funding from a ring-fenced pot of money. This is not the case for next year (2011-12), and all projects are competing on a like for like basis-both local authority projects as well as our own. Ultimately the allocations were based on the OM score, and funding was allocated to projects with a higher score than those submitted by the Cotswold District Council. I share your disappointment in not receiving the funding that you were anticipating for this scheme."
As a result of this information Mr Clifton-Brown raised this matter with the Minister responsible for flooding matters, Richard Benyon MP. Speaking in the debate Mr Clifton-Brown spoke on this news:
“It is easy to come up with statistics to show, in order of priority, which projects will give the best value for money and save the most houses. The problem in a highly rural constituency such as the Cotswolds, which has 110 villages, lots of which have flooding problems, is that it will never meet those criteria. Most of my constituency-with the exception of Cirencester, which flooded in 2000, 2007 and 2008-will never get any funding under the system. I accept that my hon. Friend the Minister has a limited pot of funding, but I ask him to look at the system of allocation.”
The Minister, unfortunately, did not have time to respond to this point. Mr Clifton-Brown, however, subsequent to the debate has written to the Minister on this point to ask him to review the system of allocation.
Following the debate Mr Clifton-Brown commented, “Flooding remains a major issue in the Cotswolds and it is an issue I have been campaigning on for a number of years. The floods in 2007 devastated large areas of my constituency and it is regrettable that many of these areas that were badly affected will not receive funding for flood defences as they will never succeed on a value for money basis under the current system.”
“I have written to the Minister to ask him to review this system and to request his assistance in facilitating increased flood defences in the Cotswolds.”
“I am obviously happy that the Environment Agency have committed £19m of funding for flood defences in Cirencester, but as I pointed out in the debate there are over 100 villages in the Cotswolds and many communities are currently without any flood protection.”
“Like many Government agencies the Environment Agency is facing strong budgetary pressures and will be operating with a reduced level of funding. However, I hope that DEFRA and the Environment Agency will be able to review this particular matter and ensure that communities in the Cotswolds, no matter how small, will receive some level of flood protection. “
FULL TEXT:
Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (The Cotswolds) (Con): I am grateful to have caught your eye, Mr Sheridan. I will speak for two minutes only, in the hope that the hon. Member for Workington (Tony Cunningham) will also be able to speak. I do not want political differences about who did what. Other than a fire, nothing worse can happen to a home than to be flooded with a mixture of water and sewage, as I saw when walking around the streets of Fairford after the 2007 floods.
I will make one or two brief remarks. In the 2007 floods, 250 buildings in the Cotswolds were flooded, including a school on which £1 million had to be spent, doctors' surgeries and so on. I am a little concerned about a letter that I received from the Environment Agency. I pay tribute to its author, Barry Russell. In my 18 years as a Member of Parliament, I do not think that I have found such a helpful civil servant anywhere else in the country. He has been to public meeting after public meeting with me to explain what the Environment Agency can and cannot do. I do not blame him at all for what I am about to quote from his letter, but I would like the Minister's observation on it.
Barry Russell says:
It is easy to come up with statistics to show, in order of priority, which projects will give the best value for money and save the most houses. The problem in a highly rural constituency such as the Cotswolds, which has 110 villages, lots of which have flooding problems, is that it will never meet those criteria. Most of my constituency-with the exception of Cirencester, which flooded in 2000, 2007 and 2008-will never get any funding under the system. I accept that my hon. Friend the Minister has a limited pot of funding, but I ask him to look at the system of allocation.
| Hansard
In his letter of 3 February to Mr Clifton-Brown, Mr Russell stated:
"In previous years, the local authority projects received funding from a ring-fenced pot of money. This is not the case for next year (2011-12), and all projects are competing on a like for like basis-both local authority projects as well as our own. Ultimately the allocations were based on the OM score, and funding was allocated to projects with a higher score than those submitted by the Cotswold District Council. I share your disappointment in not receiving the funding that you were anticipating for this scheme."
As a result of this information Mr Clifton-Brown raised this matter with the Minister responsible for flooding matters, Richard Benyon MP. Speaking in the debate Mr Clifton-Brown spoke on this news:
“It is easy to come up with statistics to show, in order of priority, which projects will give the best value for money and save the most houses. The problem in a highly rural constituency such as the Cotswolds, which has 110 villages, lots of which have flooding problems, is that it will never meet those criteria. Most of my constituency-with the exception of Cirencester, which flooded in 2000, 2007 and 2008-will never get any funding under the system. I accept that my hon. Friend the Minister has a limited pot of funding, but I ask him to look at the system of allocation.”
The Minister, unfortunately, did not have time to respond to this point. Mr Clifton-Brown, however, subsequent to the debate has written to the Minister on this point to ask him to review the system of allocation.
Following the debate Mr Clifton-Brown commented, “Flooding remains a major issue in the Cotswolds and it is an issue I have been campaigning on for a number of years. The floods in 2007 devastated large areas of my constituency and it is regrettable that many of these areas that were badly affected will not receive funding for flood defences as they will never succeed on a value for money basis under the current system.”
“I have written to the Minister to ask him to review this system and to request his assistance in facilitating increased flood defences in the Cotswolds.”
“I am obviously happy that the Environment Agency have committed £19m of funding for flood defences in Cirencester, but as I pointed out in the debate there are over 100 villages in the Cotswolds and many communities are currently without any flood protection.”
“Like many Government agencies the Environment Agency is facing strong budgetary pressures and will be operating with a reduced level of funding. However, I hope that DEFRA and the Environment Agency will be able to review this particular matter and ensure that communities in the Cotswolds, no matter how small, will receive some level of flood protection. “
FULL TEXT:
Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (The Cotswolds) (Con): I am grateful to have caught your eye, Mr Sheridan. I will speak for two minutes only, in the hope that the hon. Member for Workington (Tony Cunningham) will also be able to speak. I do not want political differences about who did what. Other than a fire, nothing worse can happen to a home than to be flooded with a mixture of water and sewage, as I saw when walking around the streets of Fairford after the 2007 floods.
I will make one or two brief remarks. In the 2007 floods, 250 buildings in the Cotswolds were flooded, including a school on which £1 million had to be spent, doctors' surgeries and so on. I am a little concerned about a letter that I received from the Environment Agency. I pay tribute to its author, Barry Russell. In my 18 years as a Member of Parliament, I do not think that I have found such a helpful civil servant anywhere else in the country. He has been to public meeting after public meeting with me to explain what the Environment Agency can and cannot do. I do not blame him at all for what I am about to quote from his letter, but I would like the Minister's observation on it.
Barry Russell says:
"In previous years, the local authority projects received funding from a ring-fenced pot of money. This is not the case for next year (2011-12), and all projects are competing on a like for like basis-both local authority projects as well as our own. Ultimately the allocations were based on the OM score, and funding was allocated to projects with a higher score than those submitted by the Cotswold District Council. I share your disappointment in not receiving the funding that you were anticipating for this scheme."
It is easy to come up with statistics to show, in order of priority, which projects will give the best value for money and save the most houses. The problem in a highly rural constituency such as the Cotswolds, which has 110 villages, lots of which have flooding problems, is that it will never meet those criteria. Most of my constituency-with the exception of Cirencester, which flooded in 2000, 2007 and 2008-will never get any funding under the system. I accept that my hon. Friend the Minister has a limited pot of funding, but I ask him to look at the system of allocation.
| Hansard
