FRR2009 – Letter/Press Release – from Ewan Larcombe - 6/12/2009
Flood Risk Regulations 2009 – effective 10th December 2009.
The truth - it is more important that we be seen to remain humble and subservient to our EU masters.
I often say ‘do not worry about what the Government tells us, worry instead about what they do not or will not tell us!’
Have you heard that failure to implement European Directive 2007/60/EC of 23 October 2007 promptly has now left the Government ‘open to infraction and reputational damage’? Probably not!
In spite of numerous flood events our Government has failed to implement the EU Directive 2007/60/EC (on the assessment and management of flood risks) for over two years.
We were consulted about the draft Floods and Water Management Bill, but that legislation may not make its way through Parliament bearing in mind the short time available between now and the next election.
‘Warning!’ shouts the Civil Servant – ‘Catch-22 predicament on the horizon and approaching fast. If we decided not to do any further work to meet the requirements of the Directive, not only would we fail to achieve the benefits of this extended approach to flood risk management, we would also lay ourselves open to infraction and reputational damage. Moreover, public interest in flooding has been heightened by flooding in recent years, most notably the flooding in 2007 much of which resulted from surface water. Though action is already under way to address this, there could be significant reputational damage to the Government if it failed to act on the requirements of the Directive which address this issue.’
‘Think of something fast!’ says the Civil Servant. So now we (the docile masses) are burdened with the Flood Risk Regulations 2009 No 3042 made 13/11/2009, laid before Parliament 19/11/2009, and coming into force on 10/12/2009.
Four weeks only – with no consultation or debate – anybody would think we had a war, pestilence or natural disaster. The truth – it is more important that we be seen to remain humble and subservient to our EU masters.
This is surely an example of discreet rubber-stamping with indecent haste after we have run out of time. But from December 10th the lead local flood authority is going to have to prepare preliminary assessment maps and reports, with a duty to identify flood risk areas. Then they will have a duty to prepare flood hazard maps and flood risk maps, and finally they have a duty to prepare flood risk management plans.
And how does the Government then respond to dissenting lead local flood authorities? They say ‘For local authorities Defra is committed to fully funding new burdens, and will keep the situation under review.’
In other words, you and I pay the increased costs of the new FRR 2009 legislation in order to keep the EU bosses happy.
But still I keep asking myself ‘will all these new regulations really reduce the probability of flooding?
From Ewan Larcombe
67, Lawn Close, Datchet SL3 9LA
01753 544302
07968 661431
Press release from Ewan Larcombe 67, Lawn Close, Datchet SL3 9LA 01753 544302 07968 661431 www.jubileeriver.co.uk
NOTES TO EDITORS:
(Ewan Larcombe – age 59, married to Irene (for nearly 40 years) three children, eight grandchildren, BSc (Hons), MIET, elected to Datchet Parish Council in 1986. Chairman Datchet Parish Council during the 1992 Public Inquiry into MWEFAS – now called Jubilee River - a £110m world class award winning flood alleviation scheme that fell apart on first use. Hundreds of home downstream flooded for the first time since 1947. There was a £2.75m out-of-court settlement for substandard design, and now the EA wants to spend £300m on more channels (just put LTFRMS into Google))
The Flood Risk Regulations 2009 No. 3042 - coming into force 10/12/2009 (External link)
The Flood Risk Regulations 2009 No. 3042 - in force 10/12/2009 (Link to Statutory Instrument)
External link to the memorandum http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/em/uksiem_20093042_en.pdf
’We would lay ourselves open to infraction and reputational damage’ *
’There could be significant reputational damage to the
Government if it failed to act on the requirements of the Directive’ *
(* from the explanatory memorandum)
NOTES: from EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM TO THE FLOOD RISK REGULATIONS 2009 No. 3042
PURPOSE: *Its purpose is to transpose the EC Floods Directive (Directive 2007/60/EC on the
assessment and management of flood risks) into domestic law and to implement its
provisions. In particular, it places duties on the Environment Agency and local authorities
to prepare flood risk assessments, flood risk maps and flood risk management plans.
Avoiding the risk of infraction and reputational damage
The work that is already done in England and Wales with regard to assessing and mapping flood risk, and providing plans for its management, already goes a long way towards achieving compliance with the Directive. However, it falls short of achieving full compliance in relation to flood risk from surface water, groundwater and ordinary watercourses. Also, flood hazard mapping is not fully developed and nor is there the level of public participation that is required by the Directive.
If we decided not to do any further work to meet the requirements of the Directive, not only
would we fail to achieve the benefits of this extended approach to flood risk management, we would also lay ourselves open to infraction and reputational damage.
If we failed to transpose and implement the Floods Directive to the satisfaction of the European Commission then Article 228 proceedings may be initiated. This means a risk of being taken to the European Court of Justice who can impose a lump sum fine and/or penalty payment (periodic payments until the breach is rectified) on the UK. Such fines can be considerable; for example, Greece was recently fined €20,000 a day for breaching EU waste requirements.
Moreover, public interest in flooding has been heightened by flooding in recent years, most notably the flooding in 2007 much of which resulted from surface water. Though action is already under way to address this, there could be significant reputational damage to the Government if it failed to act on the requirements of the Directive which address this issue.