Flood Defences: West Worcestershire

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—(Christian Wakeford.)

19:01:00

It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Madam Deputy Speaker, and what a pleasure you have had in listening to such an excellent array of maiden speeches this afternoon. I thank Mr Speaker for allocating me one of the first Adjournment debates in this new Parliament. My speech will be more of a reiteration of certain points and less of a novelty, as I was lucky enough to get an Adjournment debate on the same flood defences at the beginning of the last Parliament. During that winter, we suffered not only from coronavirus but from Storms Ciara and Dennis. I congratulate the floods Minister, the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice (Emma Hardy), on her appointment. She and I were colleagues on the Treasury Committee, and I know how passionately and genuinely she cares about flooding issues, so I look forward to working with her. My constituency is in a part of the world that floods frequently, and we realise that we will flood a lot in West Worcestershire. We have the River Severn running through the middle of the constituency, and the Rivers Avon and Teme flow into the Severn just south of Worcester, so we accept that flooding is a part of nature and part of what we have in West Worcestershire. In the years that I have been fortunate enough to represent the area in Parliament, and before, I have tried to mitigate some of the problems that arise from being in a very flood-prone part of the world. Last winter, we again saw how difficult it can be when there is a very wet winter. Many local farmers, residents and businesses were very grateful for funding from the flood recovery fund after Storms Babet and Henk.

Rural areas are often the worst impacted by flood damage, yet they are often deemed less of a priority for flood defences than urban areas. Does the hon. Lady agree that the flood defence grant in aid cost-benefit analysis must be reviewed to ensure it sufficiently values agricultural and rural communities?

The hon. Lady highlights something that I have grappled with throughout my time as a Member of Parliament. I will now move on to the situation in Tenbury Wells in my constituency. Seventeen years ago this month, in the middle of summer, we had the most severe flooding for many, many years. It caused massive damage and misery across West Worcestershire. In fact, it was the right hon. Member for Leeds South (Hilary Benn) who was the Environment Minister at the time. In 2007, he came to see the devastation in Tenbury Wells. It was at that time that I first started to look into these cost-benefit analyses and the formula that the hon. Lady raised. While accepting that, in West Worcestershire, we will flood regularly, I think that there are many things we can do to mitigate the misery of being flooded, and of being flooded regularly.

I congratulate the right hon. Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes) on being elevated to Deputy Speaker. She is well-respected and her appointment is well-deserved. Everyone in this House is very encouraged to see her in that position. May I also congratulate the hon. Member for West Worcestershire (Dame Harriett Baldwin) on securing this debate? Is she aware that inadequate flood defences mean an increase in homeowners’ insurance premiums? That increase has been noted in her constituency, as it has been in mine of Strangford. Does she agree that this House and Government must work on a UK-wide approach to ensure that insurance premiums are not hiked because defences are inadequate?

The hon. Gentleman raises an important matter. Indeed, it was after the 2007 floods that the idea of a flood reinsurance scheme came about. It was something that was established when the last Government came into power in 2010. It has now become somewhat easier to get insurance, but it does continue to be a challenge, and I shall highlight examples of that in my speech. It will be interesting to hear if the Minister can confirm from the Dispatch Box whether Flood Re will continue to be a priority for the new Government. I have campaigned successfully for many flood defence schemes in West Worcestershire over the years. We have made real progress. In particular, the two schemes that protect Upton upon Severn have been deployed year in, year out. In fact, they have successfully protected Upton upon Severn from flooding something like 40 times since they were opened in 2013. We have had a bund built along the Defford Road in Pershore; a flood defence gate installed in Kempsey; a gate barrier installed at Uckinghall; a bund built in Powick; and a community scheme is now in place in Callow End, so there has been real progress. We have seen the cumulative impact of the many millions that have been spent on flood defences across West Worcestershire in the resilience that the communities showed last winter when it was so very wet. I would like to take this opportunity to put on record my thanks to previous flood Ministers, to the teams at the Environment Agency, to Worcestershire county council and to the regional flood defence committees, which have helped over time to get these flood defence scheme funded and built.

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for giving way. She describes the huge amount of investment that has been going into the River Severn. She has an awful lot of the River Severn in her constituency. She will be aware that, in Bewdley, about £11 million is being spent on flood defences. She may remember that Daniel Kawczynski, the former Member for Shrewsbury, set up an action group because he recognised that the whole of the River Severn is a cohesive watercourse, which requires a lot of effort and attention. That role in the action group is now vacant and I was wondering whether she would be enthusiastic to take it on. She would have a lot of support from all of those Members of Parliament representing constituents on what used to be the blue River Severn, which is now, I think, a bit red and orange in places.

I thought my hon. Friend was making a good pitch to take on that role himself, and I would certainly support him in that. None the less, he is right: all of us who live along the Severn catchment and the rivers that flow into the Severn have a responsibility to work together to make sure that we make progress. With the very wet weather that we had this winter, we discovered that some of the roads that we accept will close once or twice a year are now closing more frequently. I have asked for an analysis from both our county council and the Environment Agency to explore the projections of the frequency with which those closures might happen. I am looking to find a solution to the situation with the Hanley Road outside Upton upon Severn and also the historic Eckington bridge, where the floodplain is also flooding more frequently. We need to see whether we need solutions to these infrastructure challenges over the decades to come.

On the impact on local people, I wonder whether the hon. Member is, like me, very concerned about the proposals of the Conservative-run Newcastle-under-Lyme borough council to build on Keele golf course? Many of my constituents are very concerned indeed about the potential impact of flooding that may come with such development. Does she agree that, when it comes to building, councils have to factor in the climate and our natural world?

I think the hon. Member needs to have a word with his Deputy Prime Minister about that. He and I may share some concerns about the ability of Whitehall to determine where concrete is poured across our country. Let me turn to two schemes that are still not built. They were the subject of my Adjournment debate back in 2020. I think that we can make progress in this Parliament on the Tenbury Wells and Severn Stoke flood defence schemes. I would like today’s Minister to be the Minister who sees those schemes completed. Tenbury Wells is the most beautiful town, but it was built on a floodplain centuries ago, so protecting it is a very complicated project that comprises flood gates, bunds and walls. After my Adjournment debate in 2020, to my delight a funded scheme was agreed, with £4.9 million allocated to move it forward. On top of that, last year I secured another £2.5 million from the frequently flooded communities fund, because inflation had taken its toll and construction costs had spiralled. We are now in a situation where some of those millions have been spent on consultants and advisers, but the flood defence scheme itself is still stuck on the drawing board and has not yet gone to planning. I ask the Minister for an update on that. Severn Stoke—the clue is in the name—is another community that sits on a floodplain. The village, its popular pub, its church, and the busy A38 road are frequently flooded. In fact, the village hall had to be pulled down because the parish could no longer afford to insure the property. The church is now struggling with insurance. In the last Parliament, I was pleased to win funding for that scheme as well, including from the frequently flooded communities fund, and arranged the transport of local topsoil to the place free of charge, but I would now also describe that scheme as stalled. In fact, there is a forlorn pile of topsoil in Severn Stoke that sat there while the village flooded again last winter. Will the Minister tell me how we can get both schemes moving again and, importantly, how we can get them finished? In April, I had a very helpful meeting with the Environment Agency chief executive Philip Duffy and the Environment Agency team. I had another one scheduled for June, but of course the general election intervened. I ask the Minister whether we can reschedule that meeting at the earliest moment, to identify how to unblock the two schemes. I know that the last Government were on track to spend over £5 billion on flood defences over the spending review period.

My hon. Friend is giving an excellent speech, and making a very strong case for why we need to invest in flood defence schemes. Under the last Conservative Administration, we increased the amount of investment in flood defence schemes from £2.6 billion to £5.2 billion over the next six-year period. Does she agree that the new Government should adhere to those funding increases so that we can ensure that schemes such as the ones for which she is advocating are dealt with and funded?

I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention. He points to a fact that I acknowledge: cumulatively, we have become more resilient to flooding in West Worcestershire over the last 14 years, but there are still these two schemes. That was going to be my next question to the Minister: will she confirm that the new Government will continue with the same level of spending that my hon. Friend mentioned? Is there anything that I could do, other than leading debates such as this and meeting with the chief executive of the Environment Agency, that would help locally to unblock any of the issues? I know that these schemes, particularly the one in Tenbury Wells, are complicated. I just want the Environment Agency to be able to find its way through the obstacles. The local community knows that in order to make the omelette that is the flood defences of Tenbury Wells, a few eggs will need to be broken, with a few road closures at times and potentially some loss of road space down some side roads. I just want to say on behalf of the community that it is prepared to put up with that level of inconvenience and some traffic disruption for a while in order to protect its beautiful town. As can be seen from the other examples in West Worcestershire that I have mentioned, particularly Upton upon Severn, the long-term benefit of protecting the town is immeasurable. Will the Minister join me in an effort of shared persistence and determination to protect these two communities by finally getting the two schemes built, preferably before the inevitable arrival of the next serious floods? Finally, will she confirm that she will press ahead with the expanded offer of the farming recovery fund? Farmers in my constituency and elsewhere think it is very important that the offer includes those who experienced damage due to extreme rainfall, and not just those who experienced flooded land.

On that point, will the hon. Lady give way?

I have given way once already to the hon. Lady. I am going to allow the Minister to use the remaining time to respond.

I call the Minister, Emma Hardy.

19:16:00

Thank you and congratulations, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is a night of firsts—I am giving my first speech as Minister and we have you here for the first time as Deputy Speaker—but of course we have the continuity of the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) being here to intervene in the Adjournment debate. As so many things change, so many things remain the same. Long may that continue. I am delighted to respond to the hon. Member for West Worcestershire (Dame Harriett Baldwin), who I hold in high regard and esteem. I enjoyed our time together on the Treasury Committee. I am pleased, in my first debate as Minister, to be able to talk to her about something that we had conversations about before I took this role. I want to state at the beginning that I will be very happy to continue the conversation; I recognise that she requested a meeting and I will be more than happy to follow that up. The hon. Member alluded to 2007, which we remember very well. She talked about the challenge and the impact in her constituency, and it was the same for me in Hull—absolutely devastating. As she mentioned, people continue to feel the trauma, which has a long-lasting impact not just on the economy and the state of people’s property, but on people’s mental health. I therefore want to make it abundantly clear that this Government are committed more than ever to protecting communities from flooding. It is one of our top five priorities in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, and the good news is that the work has already begun. I want to be as open and honest as possible with the hon. Member, so I have looked in detail at the two schemes that I was aware she would raise tonight. Although I have been informed that the Environment Agency has completed some work since 2007 and progress has been made—I am sure we both want to acknowledge that—these two schemes do seem to be particularly difficult. I recognise that she raised the same issue with the previous Minister. I extend my sympathies to all the communities of West Worcestershire who were affected by the winter flooding, which is an awful thing for anyone to experience. I enjoy and share the hon. Member’s persistence. In fact, I believe that this place only works when we have persistent and talented women leading the way, so I am absolutely with her on that. Let me turn first to the Severn Stoke flood alleviation scheme. I understand that the hon. Member was involved in securing some of the soil required for the embankment. My understanding of the situation is that if the scheme is completed, it will better protect 18 homes and businesses and the Rose and Crown pub, which I have heard good things about, but the difficulty seems to be making sure that the scheme is within the funding envelope that has been allocated. My understanding—I will make a comment on the funding formula—is that the benefits of the scheme, as assessed, cannot be greater than the cost of delivering the scheme. The funding envelope that has been allocated is based on the benefit that is meant to be given, so the scheme has to be delivered within that envelope, even though payment in kind has been received, in terms of the provision of the soil. That is the difficulty with that particular scheme. The good news is that the Environment Agency is still working on finding a contractor; it is still going out there and talking to organisations that could deliver the scheme within the budget available. The hon. Member mentioned the role that she could play. She has knowledge and experience of businesses in the area, and that might be one avenue to explore with contractors, who would learn the benefits that they would bring to the city and how they would be celebrated. We would need to make sure that they could deliver within the funding that is provided. That is the particular difficulty, as I understand it. I recognise the frustration that the hon. Member expressed. There can be nothing more frustrating than, to use her words, a forlorn pile of soil sitting there doing nothing. I share her frustration, and I hope that we can find the contractor that is needed.

Does the Minister agree that many flood schemes have not been completed, including a number in my constituency of Carlisle, as a direct result of the economic chaos created by the previous Government, which has forced the Environment Agency to cancel a quarter of the planned schemes?

It is great to see my hon. Friend in the Chamber. She is right. The economic chaos that we face, and which continued as we changed Government, Prime Ministers and Chancellors, did not provide the stability needed to get on with these schemes and deliver them. The change that people required has now taken place, and we have stability and new Ministers—hopefully, I am not going anywhere quickly—so I hope we can get on and deliver. I hope that my hon. Friend will be persistent in pursuing this issue. I had a careful look at the Tenbury Wells scheme mentioned by the hon. Member for West Worcestershire and how complicated the measure would be. As she said, it would potentially involve people having to move house and, at times, parts of their garden being removed and roads being closed. I understand that the necessary consultation has been undertaken with residents, in the detail needed. Nobody wants a scheme that will be expensive and disruptive, or that does not perform as expected. Anything put in place must also be in keeping with that beautiful part of the country. As a result, design costs have increased repeatedly. There is always the difficulty that we want something that is as good as possible at ensuring flood alleviation, designed in the best possible way, in keeping with the character of the town and that causes minimum disruption. My understanding of the situation is that the scheme has become much more expensive as time has gone on; that is something that we might want to discuss in more detail when we meet. It is important that we get it right, and that it is affordable, given the amount of money that has been allocated. I am happy to take forward that conversation. I would not want to be the Minister for delivering something that residents would not want to have in their community. As the hon. Member will know from the National Audit Office report, “Resilience to flooding”, which was published last November, we have inherited a floods capital programme that faces extreme delivery challenges. As has been mentioned, the NAO cites a number of projects that have not gone through, partly because they could not be delivered within the timeframe, partly because of inflation, and partly because of covid and other challenges in government. That has had an impact, so I am reviewing absolutely everything that is going on in the Environment Agency and looking at all the schemes. I want to update hon. Members on all that as quickly as possible, and if anyone wishes to see me about individual schemes, they are more than welcome to do so.

I congratulate the Minister on her new job; she is doing a fantastic job so far and saying all the things that I, as a neighbour of this scheme, want to hear. She talked about reviewing the project, and I think we would all agree that there is no harm in that, but it is probably worth bringing up my experience just down the river from Tenbury Wells in Bewdley, where flood defence schemes are being put in place very successfully, and are working well for the town and the community. However, one issue keeps coming up: the disruption caused by having to switch to one-way traffic on the bridge results in a slight drop-off in trade in the town. It is very early days for the Minister, but as part of the review, it might be helpful to reassure traders. Perhaps her Department could look at not necessarily financial compensation, but something that could help businesses that struggle with cash flow during lean periods because of the works, in order to get them through. Ultimately, we will get far better economic value from a town that has flood defences, because it will not flood any more, but in the interim, this issue is problematic. I ask her respectfully to have a look at that in her review, so that we can help traders to get over the hump—that difficult moment—of the flood defence works.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his kind words, and I recognise the difficulty that these works cause to businesses. That goes to the point that I made to the hon. Member for West Worcestershire: the design has to be right, and works have to be done in conjunction with the community. That is why works sometimes become more expensive. However, I will take away the point the hon. Gentleman makes. On the funding formula, I said many times in opposition that I was keen to look under the bonnet, and now I am delighted to get that chance for a detailed look at exactly how things work. That is something I am reviewing. As is always the case, pulling one lever can have unintended consequences elsewhere, so I hope the hon. Gentleman will forgive me for not giving the details of exactly which levers I intend to pull. However, I am actively gaining a clear and transparent understanding of how the funding works, who the winners and losers are under the formula that we have, and our priorities.

In my intervention on the hon. Member for West Worcestershire (Dame Harriett Baldwin), I referred to insurance premiums. If we sort the flooding out, insurance premiums will fall and there will be less cost. That must be a factor for constituents and their living costs. Is that something the Minister will look at, please?

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his second intervention in this Adjournment debate; we are doing well. I have been passionately supportive of the Flood Re scheme, but it is meant to come to an end in 2039, and I am looking at that in real detail. The whole point of the Flood Re scheme was that we would be able to build resilient properties, which would not be reliant on it, but that has not happened—I think we need a level of honestly about that—so I am looking at the Flood Re scheme at the moment. We want to ensure that wherever people live in the United Kingdom, they are able to find affordable insurance for their property. That has to be a priority. In the last few minutes that I have, I will touch on one of the other big problems we face, which is the maintenance of existing flood defences. We have talked a lot in this debate about the capital building, and the need to build new flood defences, but we have a significant issue with the flood defences that we already have, and it has been exacerbated by the problems we had as a result of the two storms. One of my big concerns is the deterioration over the past few years of some of our key infrastructure. That is another priority for me. In opposition, I talked about our flood resilience taskforce and what Labour would do, and I am pleased to say that Labour is getting on with this as promised. We will look to create the taskforce as soon as possible, ahead of the wettest season. The flood resilience taskforce will look at co-ordination across Government and across agencies on the ground, and will work with stakeholders in fire and rescue services, to inform policy and establish national standards. A difficulty I often noticed in opposition was with Government Departments maybe not always working together as one when they should. To finish, this Government are dedicated to collaborating closely with the Environment Agency and, of course, the hon. Member for West Worcestershire to advance the Severn Stoke and Tenbury Wells schemes in her constituency. More generally, however, this Government commit to works that will ensure that communities throughout England receive the protection that they need, especially as the risk of flooding rises due to climate change. I salute her and every other Member present for their persistence on this matter. Question put and agreed to.

19:28:00