A committee of MPs assessing the government's response to devastating flooding in Southern England earlier this year has stated that "protection must take priority over cost-cutting."

 image expired

Speaking to Farming Online at the height of flooding, an Environment Agency spokesperson said that the Agency's remit covers protection of life and property, which does not necessarily include land, and for that reason relief efforts focused on more populated areas. In its report this week, the EFRA Committee criticised urban-bias in flood defence policy and lamented that, "In the face of limited budgets, low-priority areas such as farmland are sacrificed in favour of urban, highly populated areas."

During the winter floods, communities secretary Eric Pickles, standing in for the environment secretary, was highly critical of the Environment Agency response to flooding. Shadow secretary Maria Eagle accused Pickles of having "spotted a convenient scapegoat to distract attention from the government's own failure."

Environment Agency Chair Lord Smith also hit back at Mr Pickles, claiming that any shortcomings in the Agency response to flooding were rooted in government cuts and restrictions imposed by the cost-benefit analyses the Agency is obliged to undertake by the treasury. Seizing this point, EFRA MPs said, "The current method for allocating flood defence funding fails to recognise the importance and value of agricultural land."

Funding for climate change adaptation measures had been cut by 41 percent in the run-up to the floods, since Defra secretary Owen Paterson assumed office in 2012. Greenpeace claimed in February that Paterson's department had 'buried' a document detailing 1,400 recommendations for flood relief projects across the country before the wettest winter on record led to widespread flooding from December 2013

This week, MPs warned that flood defence maintenance spending is dangerously low, that there is confusion over who is responsible for different areas of work and questioned the government's "dubious" claims to have spent record amounts on flooding.

Committee calls on Defra to protect flood jobs

On Tuesday (17^th June), EFRA Committee chair Anne McIntosh said, "We have repeatedly called on the Government to increase revenue funding so that necessary dredging and watercourse maintenance can be carried out to minimise flood risk, yet funding for maintenance remains at a bare minimum. Ministers must take action now to avoid a repeat of the devastation caused by the winter floods."

Though controversial dredging activity has begun in Somerset, locals have been critical of its slow progress. Although government ministers and community leaders demanded dredging take place on the Parrett and Tone, two rivers on the Somerset Levels, hydrologists repeatedly cautioned that dredging would not have prevented flooding in the region, and warned that it could still make the flood situation worse downstream if carried out inappropriately, as well as impacting on biodiversity.  Even so, the Efra committee called on the government "to address the current backlog of dredging and watercourse maintenance as well as to maintain the growing numbers of man-made flood defences" in its report on Tuesday.

"Regular work to dredge and keep rivers clear can be an essential flood prevention measure, yet this is exactly what gets squeezed out when budgets are tight," added Ms McIntosh, conservative MP for Thirsk. McIntosh added, "The Government needs to recognise the importance of regular maintenance work and put it on an equal footing with building new defences. local knowledge is key and flood risk management priorities must reflect the local circumstances."

EFRA MPs suggested maintenance activity should devolved to 'internal drainage boards’ and local landowners wherever possible, though government proposals and pilots in this area have met with mixed reactions. Sceptical groups have said the proposals could amount to the government replacing expert Environment Agency oversight with 'big society' waterway maintenance as the agency's budget (which has been cut by over £40 million) is slashed further.

The Committee said Environment Agency funding cuts should not lead to unintended consequences where funding is redirected to one operational area to the detriment of another, and asked for reassurance from Defra that frontline flood jobs at the Environment Agency will not be cut.

Last month it was revealed that just £530,000 had been paid out from the government's £10 million recovery fund to help farmers and landowners whose businesses had been affected by the floods. The EFRA MPs said they are concerned that flood funding in Britain still does not reflect the heightened threats posed by climate change.