Flood Resilience

Debate between Ellie Chowns and Simon Opher

Wednesday 28th October 2026 Commons Chamber

[Dr Chowns]

The hon. Gentleman’s point about co-ordination between agencies is absolutely crucial; it is another point that I will be coming to in my speech. This is an issue that crosses boundaries, because river catchments do not respect administrative or sectoral boundaries. We need to have a fully joined-up approach.

Herefordians know what severe flooding looks like. In 2020, Herefordshire experienced the worst flooding in more than 200 years of recorded history. Storm Dennis was absolutely devastating for many families and businesses. Six years on, residents tell me that it is not only the severity of flooding that worries them, but the frequency. The Minister may remember that I raised this issue basically every single month of my first few months in this Chamber because we were facing floods that frequently. Communities that have barely recovered from one flood are increasingly finding themselves preparing for the next. I hope that the Minister will be able to set out today exactly what action the Government are taking to better prevent, prepare for and respond to flooding.

Flooding means different things in different places. In Lyonshall, in my constituency, it means the worry that a new development may not have been built with the infrastructure needed to manage water safely. In Eardisland it means anxiety about whether support will be available when the next flood comes. One issue repeatedly raised with me by residents in Eardisland is the flood recovery framework. Following Storm Bert in late 2024, I attended a public meeting with more than 100 local residents—as ever, the people closest to the problem already knew what needed to be done. After those conversations, I wrote to Ministers to ask whether responsibility for activating the flood recovery framework should rest more with local authorities. From the perspective of someone whose home is flooded, distinctions about national thresholds make very little sense. Local people and local councils understand the impacts better than anyone else.

[Dr Simon Opher (Stroud) (Lab)]

The hon. Lady is making an excellent speech. I would like to talk about natural flood management and how it sits naturally with district councils. In my constituency we have had more than 1,200 interventions over 12 years—I think we lead nationally on this. I want in particular to praise Chris Uttley, who works for the district council, and who does an absolutely fantastic job with natural flood management—he has saved hundreds of homes and businesses from a repeat of the terrible 2007 floods. Would the hon. Lady join me in urging the Government to make it as easy as possible for councils to access the £25 million funding that the Government have earmarked for natural flood management so that we can unlock this tremendous potential in local government?

[Dr Chowns]

I am always in favour of Government making it easier for local authorities to unlock funding, as well as Government providing more funding to enable the good things, like natural flood management, to happen.

To finish my point on the flood recovery framework, will the Minister look again at whether local authorities should have a greater role in activating support under that framework.

Many of the flooding incidents that affect my constituency are caused not by rivers bursting their banks, but by heavy rainfall overwhelming surface drainage systems. As surface water flooding is becoming a greater risk, our planning system and development standards must catch up. Many colleagues across the House have called on the Government to commence schedule 3 to the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 and finally make sustainable drainage systems standard practice. Will the Minister therefore set out whether and when the Government will commence schedule 3 and make sustainable drainage systems standard in new developments?

Better planning must also be part of the solution. People understand that new homes are needed, but they expect flood risk to be properly reflected in planning decisions. This is at the core of the Green party’s policy of having the right homes in the right place at the right price.

I have seen this in my own constituency, when a constituent from Canon Pyon came to see me in my surgery a while back. They had moved into a new development relatively recently, and their neighbour had been flooded out of their house six weeks after moving in because the surface drainage provisions were inadequate—this was in a newly built development. I raised it with the council subsequently. This just highlights that we must integrate flood resilience into development, because we cannot be building developments that are going to flood so shortly after they are built. We need to have it much more clearly specified in the planning process and have much clearer follow-up to ensure that conditions placed on planning applications are actually followed through.

Flood resilience must also be better integrated into how we manage land. One of the absolutely lovely parts of my job is meeting farmers across North Herefordshire. They understand better than most that all of these strands are interconnected. Soil health affects water retention. Water affects crop yields. What happens upstream affects communities downstream, and what happens on one farm can affect flood risk miles away. That is why I am so impressed by schemes such as Wyescapes, which involves farmers working together to hold more water in the landscape to improve soil health, reduce pollution, restore nature and strengthen resilience, including flood resilience, across the whole catchment.

Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Debate between Ellie Chowns and Simon Opher

Report stage
Friday 13th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Ellie Chowns]

I am very short of time, so I think I had better continue.

Turning to new clause 15, which relates to the role of coroners, if the Bill is passed, assisted dying would be a very strictly regulated process—the choice of an individual; not a death caused by others, but by the individual themselves. As Aneez Esmail has pointed out, this would be the most scrutinised type of death in the country, and it therefore makes no sense to require another legal process at the end when there have already been multiple layers of scrutiny before the death.

[Dr Opher]

Will the hon. Lady give way?

[Ellie Chowns]

I am so sorry, but we are very short of time.

New clause 15 is a compassionate and practical clause. There are strong safeguards already in place, and requiring a coroner’s inquest would go against the spirit of compassion that should be driving us all.

I will briefly turn to amendment 42, tabled by the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee), which would remove the backstop commencement. Essentially, the amendment would leave it in the hands of the Secretary of State to decide when, or if, the Bill comes into effect. That would go against the will of the House. If the House passes this Bill, it is perfectly reasonable and workable for the detail of it to be worked out within the next four years. We have already doubled the length of time allowed for that to happen. Amendment 42 is effectively a wrecking amendment that seeks to kick the Bill into the long grass. [Interruption.] That would be its effect.

To conclude, I will briefly address the misconception that seems to have informed some of the comments I have heard in today’s debate, which is the assumption that families would want to pressure family members to die quicker. My mum is a specialist palliative care social worker, and she has told me that in all her years of practice she has never experienced that happening. It is the other way around.