Agenda item

To receive a report from the Cabinet Member for Community Services and the Corporate Director for Growth, Environment & Transport on the lessons learnt during the severe weather and flooding over Christmas and New Year 2013-14.

(1)     The Cabinet Committee received a report of the Cabinet Member for Community Services and the Corporate Director of Growth, Environment and Transport which contained a full review of lessons learned from the Christmas & New Year 2013-14 storms & flooding (and previous severe weather events) and recommendations for how the County Council, in collaboration with its partners, can be better prepared to manage such future events and flood risk.  Paul Crick, Director Environment, Planning and Enforcement, and Stuart Beaumont, Head of Community Safety and Emergency Planning, were in attendance to introduce the report and in particular referred to the following:

(2)     The storms and floods in the Christmas and New Year period 2013-14 had been a toxic mix of wind and rain with the wettest December for 79 years and the highest peak flows ever recorded at the Leigh Barrier.  The response from officers had been first class with KCC mobilising an army of volunteers.  Many lessons had also been learned.

(3)     Although the report focused on the events from 23 December 2013 onwards, to provide further background and context, reference was also made to the preceding severe weather events on 28 October (St Jude storm) and 5 & 6 December (east coast tidal surge).

(4)     During the storms and floods 929 properties, both residential and commercial, were flooded in Kent compared to 1000 properties in 2000.  Surrey had been the worst hit area of the country with 2,313 properties flooded while Thames Valley had 930, West Sussex had 130 and East Sussex had 97 properties flooded.

(5)     28,500 properties were without power during the storms and floods and 50,000 sandbags were provided to protect at risk communities.  Although there is no legal obligation on any organisation to provide sandbags and other practical support (e.g. pumps, dehumidifiers), public expectation was, understandably, to the contrary.  This had been exacerbated throughout the response by a general lack of awareness, miscommunications & inconsistency of approaches adopted. 

(6)     It had been observed that there was a general lack of flood awareness and individual/community resilience.  For example, in some parts of Kent, 40-50% of the homes and businesses at risk of flooding in Kent were not signed-up to the Environment Agency’s (EA’s) Floodline Warnings Direct (FWD) Service and so were unlikely to receive any prior warning of flooding.

(7)   In response to questions raised and comments made the Committee received the following further information from officers:

(8)     The report made 17 recommendations, 12 relating to the emergency response and 5 around future flood management. 

(9)   Some of these recommendations were outside KCC’s control or remit; with reference to recommendation 13 assurances from the Environment Agency would be key to KCC committing any future funding towards flood defence schemes.  Cabinet, at the beginning of the month, had received assurance of the EA’s commitment to work with KCC going forward.  The issue with funding schemes was complicated; it was now unlikely that the government through the EA would fund 100% of flood schemes, in some cases to achieve 50% funding would be lucky.  Looking into other sources of funding such as community infrastructure levy, development and FDGiA fund was a priority for KCC.

(10)   The implementation of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) had been delayed by government by approx 9 months.  KCC were adopting the SuDS ahead of the game. 

(11)   The Kent Resilience Forum (KRF) was a partnership made up of a number of organisations and agencies including KCC, Kent & Medway Fire & Rescue Authority (KMFRA) and Kent Police based at the KMFRA base in Tovil.  The EA and Public Health had also put staff into the KRF and would form the basis for the emergency reservists mentioned in recommendation 2.

(12)   It had been decided that, six months on from the event, was the right time for the Committee to receive the report but an update would be brought back to the November meeting.

(13)   RESOLVED that the Cabinet Committee endorsed the recommendations outlined in the Action Plan and, once approved, receive further options papers/progress reports on delivery against the Action Plan.