Agenda and minutes

1.  Introduction

Mrs Hohler made introductions and spoke about the ongoing small cross-party Flood Risk Group which was planned to report back to the Environment & Regeneration Policy Overview Committee, which would be Chaired by Mr R E King. She referred to several threads of work which linked together around the work being done by the Select Committee and the Pitt Review:-

(a)   On 18 November there would be a conference about flooding, with reference to the Pitt Review, which Mrs Hohler and Miss Holliday both hoped to attend.  The Select Committee wanted to ensure that it was known that their work had preceded the Pitt Review!  Mrs Hohler undertook to write a report of the conference and feed it into the work of the new Flood Risk Group. A copy of a report of the Conference is attached to these minutes at Appendix 1

(b)   Mrs Hohler referred to a Lord Lieutenant’s Rural Group on which she had served for 3 years, which the Environment Agency had attended this year.  This also tied in with the Select Committee’s work.

2.  Update on KCC Flood Risk Select Committee Recommendations

Members stated that they were very impressed with the progress made and the clarity of the report.  They discussed progress made against each recommendation, as set out in the action plan. A copy of a report is attached to these minutes at Appendix 2.

Recommendation 1: Mention should be added of the Flood Risk Officer (FRO) post which the Select Committee had recommended be created.  This was not in the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTP) as no formal proposal had yet been made.  The Select Committee would formally propose this to the Leader at the same time as stating the need for a permanent, ongoing Flood Risk Group to carry on the work recommended by the Select Committee, and that the Flood Risk Officer (FRO) post should support the work of the new Group. The single point of contact that this would establish should also be well publicised.

It was agreed that a copy of the report be sent to the Confederation of Cinque Port Towns.

Recommendation 2: the Select Committee was satisfied that, at this point, there was no need to do any more with this recommendation.

Recommendations 3, 4 and 5: the Select Committee agreed that progress on all these recommendations was fine, but added a note to Recommendation 4 to say that the budget for gulley clearance had been increased.

Recommendation 6: the Select Committee was impressed with the work done in Thameside and was happy with the progress on this recommendation.

Recommendation 7: the Select Committee agreed that progress against this recommendation was fine.

Recommendation 8: the Select Committee agreed that progress against this recommendation was fine.

Recommendation 9: the Select Committee agreed that progress against this recommendation was fine.

Recommendation 10: there was a link between Recommendations 10 and 30.  A report from Emergency Planning to the new Flood Risk Group was needed, so evidence could be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1.