Agenda item

(1)       Mr Tant introduced the report by saying that it was appropriate at the start of the new Council to bring forward suggested topics for future consideration.   He referred to paragraph 6 of the report and said that, although Sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) were a very important topic, there had been no significant change since the previous occasion when it had been discussed.   In his view, it would be better to consider a report when once a change either occurred or was proposed.  

(2)       Mr Bowles commented that the first 5 topics in paragraph 6 of the report were all very important. He made particular reference to “the role and structure of the Environment Agency.” 

(3)       Mr Pugh said he was particularly keen to consider a report on coastal erosion risk and management. 

(4)       Mrs Brown said that it was very important to have a firm understanding of the role and structure of the Environment Agency as their work was crucial whenever flooding took place.   For this reason, the Committee should aim to monitor this question on a regular basis rather than rely on very occasional reports.  

(5)       Mrs Doyle commented that reports on the role of the Internal Drainage Boards would encourage them to play a full part in the wider work of the Committee. 

(6)       Mr Tant explained that the Environment Agency de-maining project Kent pilot related to their identification of a number of hitherto main rivers as posing a low level of risk.   They had therefore identified 5 pilot areas in England (including Kent) where they were planning to “de-main” some main rivers in order to return them to the status of ordinary watercourses, allowing them to be maintained by other authorities such as IDBs.  One of the pilot areas was within the River Stour IDB, which was expected to finish in the Autumn.  A report to one of the next two Committee meetings would be appropriate.  Mr Tant clarified that this did not apply to the River Stour itself, which would retain its main river status.

(7)       Mr Harwood informed the Committee that the Environment Agency had recently named Duncan McClintock as their Liaison Officer with Kent County Council for resilience and emergency planning matters.   

(8)       Mr Harwood then said that tidal flooding was identified in Kent’s Emergency Planning local risk register as the top risk in the light of the county’s 326 miles of coastline and 369 square miles of land located within the tidal flood plain.  This risk had been the theme of the previous year’s Exercise Surge, whose lessons and resultant changes to practice would be reported to the Committee in due course.

(9)       Mr Lewin referred to Minute (4) (12) from the previous meeting of the Committee and asked for the topic of the Thames Barrier and also the Medway Estuary and Swale Strategy to be born in mind during agenda planning. 

(10)     Mr Pugh said that the last flooding surge had been very close indeed to flooding Lower Halstow. Mr Harwood confirmed that on 6 December 2013 there had been inundation of some coastal areas in the Faversham and Isle of Sheppey localities.  This had been caused by the coincidence of the high tide and the heavy amounts of water being pushed down the North Sea by a storm event.   If these two events had been more closely aligned, the consequences would have been even more serious than had been the case.  Emergency Plans had to be constantly updated in the light of lessons learned from this and similar events.

(11)     RESOLVED that the report be noted and that the comments made by Members of the Committee in response to its suggested future activities be taken into account during agenda planning.