Previous Reference: 2 May 2017

The report of the Chair of the Environment and Waste Management Overview and Scrutiny Committee (Document “AM” 2016/17 – previously circulated) presents the findings of the Water Management Scrutiny Review.

Recommended –

(1)  That the findings and recommendations contained within the draft Water Management Scrutiny Review Report appended to Document “AM”(2016-17) be adopted.

(2)  That the Water Management Scrutiny Review Report be submitted to the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee for consideration.

(Mustansir Butt – 01274 432574)

The report of the Chair of the Environment and Waste Management Overview and Scrutiny Committee (Document “AM” 2016/17) presented the findings of the Water Management Scrutiny Review.

Members were aware that, at its meeting on 19 January 2016, Council had agreed that the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee undertake an in-depth review in to the effectiveness of Bradford Council and its partners in dealing with the floods across the District in December 2015.

As part of that Scrutiny Review, members had explored how the Council could learn from the approaches taken during the winter 2015 floods, to assist the Council and its Partners to better deal with future floods.

Council had also agreed that the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee would receive the final review report, prior to its submission to full Council.

In addition the Environment and Waste Management Overview Scrutiny Committee had undertaken a wider scrutiny review into Water Management across the District.  The draft Scrutiny Report following that review was appended to Document “AM”.

It was acknowledged that a great deal of work and effort had been undertaken during the review; however, it was questioned if there should be firmer deadlines and achievable outcomes within the recommendations.

In response it was clarified that the final recommendation contained in the draft report was that the committee receive a further report, before the end of April 2018, which monitored progress against all the recommendations contained in the review.  It was felt that this would provide the opportunity to flag up issues where policy could be implemented.  Partners could be invited to discuss that report and judgements could be made at that time. It was stressed that the role of the Committee was to consider potential policy implementation and that resource committal was the Executive’s role.

A Member referred to the role of the community in response to the floods.  He referred to the decreased staffing resources in the Emergency Planning Department and the reliance on members of the community in emerging issues.  He referred to Recommendation 10 “that the Council review its record to date in enabling community engagement around the challenges of water management and flooding and explores the options for developing more resilient local networks in future years”.  He explained that Leeds Council employees were allowed 10 working days per annum to volunteer and questioned the policy for Bradford’s own employees to volunteer in the community.   He stressed that the flooding issues were not only about people living near to water.  An example of the concreting of grassed areas on higher levels resulting in water flowing into lower lying areas of the district was cited.

The representative of the Environment Agency reported that her organisation had a long term plan for the next six years around the engagement of communities.  She referred to Community Resilience meetings, chaired by the Council’s Assistant Director, Waste, Fleet and Transport Services and that she felt assured that work was being undertaken on the review recommendations.

A representative from Silsden Parish Council addressed the meeting and reported concerns about flooding in the Craven area including:

·         That according to the Council’s Principal Drainage Engineer the worst flooding in December 2015 had occurred at Stockbridge in Keighley.

·         Silsden Beck, as a tributary to the River Aire, had contributed to the high levels recorded on the river.

·         The significance of flooding in Silsden had not been highlighted, in particular the constraint of the culvert and the high risk posed by additional housing development if the existing problems were not addressed.

·         Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) funding for flood prevention measures and drainage improvements in Wharfedale was £100 per square metre.  In Silsden it was set at £20 per square metre.  When that figure had been challenged it was stated that a higher figure was possible for Silsden but the Council chose not to use that figure.

·         Extensive work in Skipton had been undertaken without the use of CIL funding and it was felt that the work required in Silsden should also not be taken from the CIL.

·         Residents were frustrated that long standing infrastructure problems in Silsden had not been addressed despite warning from the community. If that work had been undertaken prior to the floods in December 2015 much of the damage incurred would have been avoided.

In conclusion he stressed his belief that flood prevention measures and funding to date was inadequate to address the current and future anticipated developments in the area.  The Chair agreed to pass the information he had shared to the relevant Portfolio Holder and to liaise on the issue on his behalf.

A Member raised concerns that the floods which had occurred in December 2015 had been worsened by gullies being blocked with contaminated water.   He stressed that maintenance should be a day to day priority and that the review’s recommendations provided an opportunity to ensure that this occurred.   It was acknowledged that Recommendation 13 requested that both capital and revenue funding streams were reviewed to ensure that rises in water flows and climate change were addressed.  There was the opportunity to review that recommendation but he was concerned that this would not occur prior to winter 2017/18.

The Overview and Scrutiny Lead reported that many of the issues raised by Members were included in the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s review and this would be discussed in October 2017. 

A Member questioned what action would be taken if no progress was made on the recommendations and he was advised that there was a lot of work being undertaken on flood alleviation schemes and that the Bradford Flood Programme Board were engaged with officer from Leeds City Council.   Measures being undertaken on Supplementary Planning Guidance were also reported.

A suggestion that the Corporate and Environment and Waste Management Committees reports be amalgamated was discussed.  It was agreed, however, that, although the topics were linked, the Corporate review was the immediate response to the floods whilst the report currently being discussed was broader and wide ranging. 

Members discussed the work planning item on the Committee’s agendas and agreed that it provided the opportunity for them to raise any issue they wished to consider in more detail prior to the review being revisited in April 2018.  It was suggested that Supplementary Planning Guidance could be a topic for discussion prior to that time. In response to a request that emergency status should be raised in response to flood issues it was agreed that the issue could also be discussed as part of the work planning process. 

It was agreed that the Overview and Scrutiny Lead would advise Members of the arrangements for the Executive and Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee when flood/water management issues were being discussed.

Resolved –

(1)  That the findings and recommendations contained within the draft Water Management Scrutiny Review Report appended to Document “AM” (2016-17) be adopted.

(2)  That the Water Management Scrutiny Review Report be submitted to the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee for consideration.

(3)  That the Water Management Scrutiny Review Report be submitted to the Executive for endorsement.

ACTION: Overview and Scrutiny Lead