Minutes:
(Item 8)
Richard Penn (Environment Planning and Engagement Manager), Laura Jones (Team Leader, Integrated Environment Planning, Environment Agency) and Henry Bethall (Flood Resilience Team Leader) were in attendance for this item.
1) A number of points were raised on the presentation:
a) The Environment Agency’s roles encompass flood defence construction and maintenance, acting as the navigation authority in Kent, regulating water companies, waste management and industry, providing advice and guidance, enforcing and prosecuting environmental legislation, and monitoring the aquatic environment.
b) The 2030 strategy key aims included: healthy air, land and water, nature recovery, sustainable growth, and climate resilience in conjunction with the shared responsibilities that encompassed the lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA), highways teams (KCC), water Companies and Internal Drainage Boards (IDBs).
c) Current Environment Agency reach covered over 1,800 km of main rivers, 800 km coastal waters and had played a major role in the delivery of Regional Flood and Coastal Committees (RFCC) and aid in developing and delivering flood defence programmes. The RFCC would continue to play a vital role in the pipeline of contracts delivered via central government funding.
d) Discussed the key partnerships in place for the property level protection and the role of joint funding that would be required to enable delivery.
e) Water quality and basement plans aimed to enhance nature and protect the water assets that underpinned health, wellbeing, and economic stability. The plan had set out the legally binding environmental objectives that were to guide water regulation and planning and formed part of the Government’s 25-Year environment plan.
f) These objectives provided a foundation for economic development and aligned with investment programmes such as the Water Industry National Investment Programme (WINP) and Strategic Water Resources (SWR). Objectives were updated every six years using the latest evidence and local targets, the next review and public consultation would begin after 2027.
g) The discussion highlighted the wide range of partners that contribute to the framework across the Southeast, emphasising the collaborative role of catchment partners in managing water resources. It was explained how regulatory measures are applied to the water industry, covering key areas such as discharges, abstractions, industrial processes, waste management, and agriculture.
h) Continue to work with the Kent Resilience Forum on initiatives such as flood wardens and wider community resilience, recognising the opportunities to build stronger relationships in this area. There is a clear need for a broader conversation on growth and water resources, and I would welcome the chance to engage further on this important issue. In addition, forthcoming local natural recovery strategies represent a significant step forward, offering a real opportunity to link water management with the wider landscape and environmental priorities.
i) Improving bathing water quality remains a key objective, though results this year have been mixed and are still awaited. Overall, these developments highlight both the challenges and the opportunities in strengthening the resilience of the water industry.
2) Members made a number of questions in regard to the presentation:
a) Sea water quality at Deal and Walmer has declined from “Good” rating in 2021–2022 to “Poor” in 2024 and had remained poor, with official advice against bathing and it was asked on what the current situation was. Officers highlighted bathing water quality was a priority for the Environment Agency, particularly in areas where standards were not being met and had impacted in a significant economic way and affected public confidence in the organisation.
b) Whilst specific details were not available during the meeting, the agency confirmed that failures could result from multiple factors, including storm overflows, misconnections, private drainage issues, agricultural runoff, and other non-descript pollution sources. Further detailed information would be provided in future updates.
c) Members discussed the subject of wastewater asset inspections and asked how many have taken place in Kent and what the current results look like. Additional questions were raised on a timetable framework of the Environment Agencies testing and awarding of bathing waters and if any similar actions could be supported or taken out by other authorities.
d) Presenters responded that compliance assessments reports on inspected assets would encompass any breaches of permit and capture any remediate actions required. The data was available to review via the Environment Agency website.
e) On the subject of bathing water changes, future regulations were currently under consultation for change and recent discussions with external partners around community testing would be explored.
f) The concerning cancellation of water testing in early 2025 was flagged by Members who queried if staffing shortages had been addressed and if the overall resourcing of the Environment Agency was robust enough to deal with future demands. Further concerns on bathing water quality on the Medway and coastal regions were discussed.
g) Presenters raised that no resourcing concerns had been raised but did acknowledge that testing had been impacted by lack of available laboratory testing staff during the specific test period, but this had now been resolved.
h) Monitoring bathing waters was subjected to a funding envelope and prioritised on national and local requirements. Citizen science testing was encouraged however the testing for new areas of bathing water would be subject to incoming new regulations.
i) Members queried on the local Nature Recovery Strategy (LNRS) and Supporting Sustainable Economic Growth (SEG) and highlighted ongoing concerns around the impact of climate change on ‘Carbon Catchments’ such as Swanscombe marshes and the additional impact of London’s growing infrastructure impacting on Kent. The Environment Agency acknowledged the concern and would look to expand further at a returning committee.
j) The discussion close out and commended the Environment Agency on the work completed to date and the difficult role they play throughout the county.
RESOLVED to note the Environment Agency presentation