European Environment Council

Owen Paterson Excerpts

Wednesday 26th February 2014 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Owen Paterson)]

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change and I will represent the UK at the European Environment Council meeting in Brussels on 3 March. Paul Wheelhouse, Minister for Environment and Climate Change in the Scottish Government, and Alun Davies, Minister for Natural Resources and Food in the Welsh Government, will also attend.

Following the adoption of the agenda and approval of the list of “A” items, there will be a policy debate on a framework for climate and energy in the period from 2020 to 2030. Member states will be invited to discuss the framework and in particular consider two questions which have been posed by the Greek presidency. First, whether the framework provides the appropriate balance between ambition and flexibility. Secondly, what the next steps should be for the policy debate, taking into account the need to provide certainty for investors in the longer term and the forthcoming international climate negotiations. This is in the context of discussions on the 2030 framework due to take place in the March European Council.

After a series of AOB points relating to climate, Ministers will break for a working lunch. This will provide Ministers with the opportunity for a discussion on the withdrawal of the existing proposal for a soil framework directive and the means of tackling soil degradation in the future. The UK supports the objective of protecting soil but is concerned that the existing proposal lacks sufficient flexibility and could impose additional regulatory burdens. The UK therefore supports the withdrawal of the current dossier as proposed in the Commission’s communication on regulatory fitness (REFIT).

Following the lunchtime discussion, the Council will hold an exchange of views on the proposal that would allow member states to restrict or prohibit the cultivation of GMOs in their territory. Ministers will consider the presidency compromise proposal put forward after the recent General Affairs Council debate on the cultivation of a specific GM maize crop. During this debate, a significant number of member states expressed their willingness to revisit the EU legislative framework. Ministers will explore whether there is common ground to reopen the discussions on this legislative file and whether the compromise proposal offers a good basis for further technical work.

The Council will then turn to an exchange of views on non-legislative activities with regard to greening the European semester. In light of the annual growth survey 2014, Council has been asked to discuss the Europe 2020 resource efficiency and low-carbon objectives and the possible involvement of Environment Ministers in the European semester cycle. Ministers have also been asked to consider which measures are currently taken at national level in the areas of resource efficiency and climate action to achieve sustainable growth. The UK is already active in these areas and supports the objectives on sustainable growth. This discussion will be followed by a series of AOB points relating to the environment.

Over the course of the day, the following topics will be covered under “any other business”:

Information from the Commission on a clean air programme for Europe;

Information from the Czech delegation, supported by the Polish and Estonian delegations, on a review of the best available techniques reference document for large combustion plants;

Information from the Commission on the EU approach to wildlife trafficking;

Information from the Commission on the state of play of the Kyoto protocol’s second commitment period ratification;

Information from the Commission on a recommendation regarding the exploration and production of hydrocarbons using high-volume hydraulic fracturing.

Flooding (Somerset)

Owen Paterson Excerpts

Monday 3rd February 2014 Commons Chamber

[Maria Eagle (Garston and Halewood) (Lab)]

(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if he will make a statement on the Government’s recent response to the flooding in Somerset and what action the Government have taken following recent Cobra meetings.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Owen Paterson)]

I am very pleased to have the opportunity to reply to this question. Let me begin by expressing my sympathy for the serious difficulties local residents face in Somerset as a result of the continuing widespread flooding of the moors and levels since late December, including impacts on properties, businesses, transport and farm land.

Recent Met Office figures show that Somerset received more rainfall in December and January than it would normally receive over an entire winter. The high tides experienced in early January and early February exacerbated the situation by preventing water from flowing out to sea, resulting in rivers overtopping their banks and flooding the surrounding land. Floodwater has covered more than 65 sq km on the levels and hundreds of people have been affected with about 21 properties still flooded. Some 200 people have been cut off in the villages of Muchelney, Thorney, Oath, Stathe and North Moor. I visited Somerset on Sunday 26 and Monday 27 January to witness the situation at first hand and listen to the views of local residents and experts.

On 26 January I held meetings with local MPs and the leader and chief executive of Sedgemoor district council as well as a range of local experts including farmers and representatives of the local internal drainage boards. I held further meetings on 27 January, including with the leader of the county council. We agreed to dredge the Tone and Parrett rivers and on the need for local organisations to come together on a partnership basis to fund the ongoing dredging and de-silting that would subsequently be needed.

We also discussed the potential for action to hold water back in the upper catchments and to consider a longer term project to create a River Parrett barrage. In the light of that visit I asked my officials to work with local authorities and other local partners in Somerset as well as the Environment Agency, Natural England and other Government Departments to develop an action plan over the next six weeks for the sustainable future of the moors and levels. On 29 January, the Prime Minister confirmed that dredging would take place on the moors and levels as soon as it was safe and practical to do so. This will build on the targeted dredging of the Tone and Parrett that the Environment Agency began in the autumn. It will build on what the Environment Agency already spends annually on flood risk management in Somerset and the £100,000 a week spent on pumping operations on the moors and levels.

Local authorities, residents and emergency services have been working around the clock to ensure that people are safe. The Environment Agency is carrying out the largest pumping operation ever undertaken on the levels. In addition to 40 permanent pumps, the Environment Agency has mobilised a further 22 temporary units increasing its ability to pump up by more than 150%. It is currently pumping 1 million tonnes a day.

I have chaired five meetings of Cobra since last Wednesday to ensure that the Government have fully considered how best we can meet the needs of the local communities affected while the floodwater remains. Following those meetings, the Government have taken a number of actions.

First, we have put arrangements in place to ensure that the local transport needs of the cut-off communities are met. The Environment Agency, Somerset county council and local responders under the leadership of the local gold command are working together and have a presence on the ground. I am grateful to those who have assisted with that—for example, the Red Cross provided a vehicle to deliver heavy goods and food and local fire and rescue services provided a ferry service. We have also considered how the military could be used to help on the ground and they remain on standby if needed.

Secondly, sewage and wastewater services are not available in some areas. Support has been provided to affected properties and all necessary mitigation measures have been put in place to guard against any public health risks of contaminated floodwater. As is normal practice, floodwater has been sampled by the local authority since the incident began and advice is being given regularly by the local authorities. I urge everyone in the affected area to heed the clear advice of Public Health England.

Since the beginning of last December, the UK as a whole has experienced a period of exceptionally unsettled weather and there is no sign at present of its abating. Many parts of the country have been subjected to flooding from the sea, rivers, surface water or ground water, and I am extremely grateful for the excellent response by the emergency services, the Environment Agency, and Flood Forecasting Centre staff, and the leadership shown by many local authorities in responding to the floods.

Latest estimates suggest that over 7,500 properties have been flooded since the beginning of December. However, existing defences and improvements to the way in which we respond to incidents meant that we could protect over 1.2 million properties from flooding in the same period. Some 87,500 properties are currently being protected. That reinforces the importance of continuing our investment in flood defence schemes and forecasting capability. I will chair a further meeting of Cobra to discuss our response to the flooding at 5 pm today.

[Maria Eagle]

This is an unimaginably stressful and distressing time for those in Somerset who have seen their homes and businesses ruined by floodwater, and more flooding has been reported in Devon and Cornwall this morning. The emergency services and Environment Agency staff deserve our thanks for their efforts on the ground in difficult conditions, yet despite those efforts it is clear that residents in Somerset have been badly let down. When the water first rose, it took far too long to provide the pumps, sandbags and other assistance they needed. We have seen meeting after meeting of Cobra, yet there is little coherence in the Government’s strategy for dealing with the crisis.

Will the Secretary of State set out what precise steps he took between 6 January this year, when he last reported to the House, and last weekend, when the Prime Minister was forced to intervene and tell him to get his skates on? Does he still think that calling for a report “within six weeks”, as he did when he visited Somerset last Monday, is an adequate response? The Prime Minister has said that

“dredging will start as soon as it is practical”.

Can the Secretary of State confirm that that is Government policy? I think I heard him say that some dredging took place on the levels this autumn. Will he confirm that my understanding of what he said in the statement is correct? Will he admit that he knew a year ago of the specific threat of serious flooding in the Somerset levels from the Association of Drainage Authorities, which warned of

“de-silting work on rivers in areas such as the Somerset Levels having all but ceased”,

and what did he do about it? Why did he remove the aim to

“prepare for and manage risk from flood and other environmental emergencies”

from his Department’s list of priorities when he got the job, replacing that with four of his own?

Is the Secretary of State still refusing to be briefed by his own chief scientific adviser on climate change and the implications for more extreme weather conditions? Will he confirm that he has had to correct previously published figures on flood prevention funding, contradicting his claims that the Government are spending more in this four-year period than in the previous four years? Will he admit that the corrected figures reveal that funding for flood protection has fallen from £670 million in 2010-11 to £576 million in the current financial year? Will he admit that £67.6 million of partnership funding has been raised since April 2011, not the £148 million that he repeatedly claims?

Finally, will the Secretary of State apologise to those affected by flooding in Somerset for the decision to use a premium rate number for the flooding helpline? Will he name the company that is making money from those who have already lost so much? The Prime Minister has now said the line will cease to be a premium rate line. When precisely will that happen?

The Prime Minister promised the Leader of the Opposition that the Secretary of State would come back to the House with a “full assessment” of levels of support for flood protection by the end of last month. He failed to do so. Does that not typify the Secretary of State’s whole response to the floods? After his botched badger cull and now his failure on flooding, it is no wonder that people are increasingly asking whether the Secretary of State is up to the job.

[Mr Paterson]

I thank the hon. Lady for her questions. Cobra has met regularly since the Christmas period, and obviously the floods and levels were regularly mentioned. The first specific request was at last Wednesday’s Cobra, which was acted on immediately by Government agencies responding to Cobra.

The hon. Lady mentioned the six weeks. I described briefly the fact that I went down to Somerset the Sunday before last, had meetings on Sunday evening, meetings on Monday, and agreed, quite clearly, a plan, which had to be worked up in detail with the Environment Agency and with the internal drainage boards. That is a marked contrast with the previous Government, who sat on the Parrett catchment flood management plan way back in 2008 and did absolutely nothing about it.

We began dredging on key points. The hon. Lady goes on and on about DEFRA’s priorities. I boil DEFRA down to two simple priorities across a kaleidoscopic variety of activities: to grow the rural economy and to improve the environment. I cannot think of any activity that involves spending central Government money that better delivers those two key priorities than what we are doing on flood spending. That is why this Government will be spending £2.4 billion in the first four years of this Parliament compared with £2.2 billion in the last four years of the previous Parliament. The hon. Lady has to nod just once—just give one little nod—to confirm that Labour Members will back this Government’s growing spending plans on flood spending. For us, it is a priority; for them it is not. She has missed her chance, but there is still a chance. Will she please agree to match our increased spending plans for this Parliament?

[Miss Anne McIntosh (Thirsk and Malton) (Con)]

These are sad days for the people of Somerset, but local heroes have emerged. We must not use the Environment Agency as a political football. We need to revisit the balance of spending between urban and rural areas. Will my right hon. Friend allow the internal drainage boards to retain their moneys to themselves before the maintenance of these watercourses and look for a scheme similar to that in my own constituency to store the water upstream if appropriate?

[Mr Paterson]

I thank the Chairman of the Select Committee for her question. She is absolutely right that there is a balance to be struck. The lesson in Somerset is that it is an extraordinary environment. It is completely artificial. It was first dredged by the Dutch before the time of Charles I, way back in the 17th century. Our criteria are not applicable in an environment where the rivers are, in effect, canals. We need to treat it as a unique environment and therefore bring in local knowledge. At the meetings I had last Sunday and Monday, it was very clear that this had to be a combined effort of the Environment Agency doing the dredging, and then, for future years, allowing locals to take over and come to their own arrangements. There will be close involvement of local councils and colleagues from the Department for Communities and Local Government to work out how that will be funded and organised.

[Mr Ben Bradshaw (Exeter) (Lab)]

Will the Secretary of State guarantee that the measures he has announced to address the very serious problems on the Somerset levels will not delay investment in the south-west’s main priority in relation to flood defences—namely, the upgrading of the Exeter flood defence to protect the railway line and thousands of businesses and homes after last year’s floods, which caused huge economic damage and devastation not only to parts of Somerset but the whole of Devon and the whole of Cornwall?

[Mr Paterson]

The right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to remind us of how damaging the floods were last year and the impact on the railway line, which I saw for myself. Significant work is going on on that line as we speak, as has been discussed in Cobra this week. It is absolutely our intention to deliver the very significant programmes that will soon come forward; we will announce the details shortly.

[Jacob Rees-Mogg (North East Somerset) (Con)]

Does not the recent trouble show the problems of having unelected quangos taking decisions that favour environmentalism rather than the concerns of people and businesses? Is it not better to have democratic accountability through a Secretary of State in whom the people of Somerset can have confidence?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. It shows that this is a team effort. The Environment Agency has done remarkable work around the country in protecting 1.1 million houses. I fully respect and publicly thank the chairman and the chief executive of the Environment Agency, and all those working for it. We then have the “but”. The Somerset levels is a unique environment. It is not typical—it is artificial and all below sea level—and it requires a lot more local involvement. That is why I went down there last Sunday and Monday. I think we have come up with an arrangement that will be satisfactory and, I hope, deliver security to all the people on the levels for the next 20 years once we have worked out the detail of how to deliver, first, the Environment Agency doing the dredging, and secondly, democratically elected local councils working with the IDBs to deliver long-term dredging and maintenance.

[Mr Peter Hain (Neath) (Lab)]

Is the Secretary of State aware of modelling done by the university of Cardiff that shows that a Severn barrage, operating on ebb flood, would significantly protect the Somerset levels from flooding and act as a barrier against storm surge, protecting 500 sq km and many properties from flooding? Is that not a reason for pressing ahead with the barrage?

[Mr Paterson]

I admire the right hon. Gentleman for grabbing the opportunity to promote that project, of which he is a very strong supporter. I remind the House that some are very hostile to it because of the barrage’s environmental consequences.

[Mr Ian Liddell-Grainger (Bridgwater and West Somerset) (Con)]

I can only speak as a local Somerset MP, but we have had nothing but help from the Secretary of State. Cobra has done a damned good job and I assure the House that, other than, I think, two days, the Secretary of State has spoken to me every day about what we require to help us in the area. I am very grateful to him for that.

I heard what my hon. Friend the Member for Thirsk and Malton (Miss McIntosh) said, and the Environment Agency people on the ground have done a phenomenal job—they have been superb. The problem lies at the top. There is a disconnect between what goes on here in London and what is going on in the levels in Taunton Deane and Somerset and Frome. We need to sort this out and I hope the Secretary of State and the Prime Minister will get those machines on the levels as fast as possible in order to get this sorted. That will not sort out everything, but it will give people confidence where there is none at the moment.

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his comments. He and my hon. Friend the Member for North East Somerset (Jacob Rees-Mogg) were both present at the two meetings in which we discussed the broad outline of the plan. As he knows, having represented the area for some years, it is simply not possible—[Interruption] regardless of the chuntering from the Opposition Benches—to get machines on the banks in these conditions. We are looking at technologies that could be borne from vessels as a means of getting going. I reassure my hon. Friend that we are absolutely clear—there was virtual unanimity in our meetings—that we want to get on and get the two rivers dredged at the earliest opportunity, and then hand over to the local representative of the internal drainage boards to carry out the routine maintenance. [Interruption.] To respond to the questions being asked by Opposition Members, that will happen when it is safe to do so.

[Kerry McCarthy (Bristol East) (Lab)]

May I press the Secretary of State on what he has said about the public health risk of contaminated water? Last weekend microbiologists found 60,000 to 70,000 bacteria per 100 ml; the World Health Organisation suggests that the safe level is 1,000. Other than raising public awareness of the possible risks, what can the Department do to mitigate the impact?

[Mr Paterson]

The hon. Lady raises a very important point, which has had some publicity. We have already had samples taken from around the levels and Public Health England has been very vocal in making it clear to all local residents that they should be extremely careful with their personal hygiene and, obviously, that they should not drink or bathe in the water. The standards set are for drinking water. The hon. Lady is absolutely right to raise the issue, which we have discussed on several occasions at Cobra. It is vital, given the current difficult circumstances and the enormous amount of water on the levels, to realise that the water is going to be dirty and contaminated. People must be really careful about washing themselves and, in particular, washing wounds.

[Mr David Heath (Somerton and Frome) (LD)]

In Somerset we are getting increasingly bemused by the number of armchair experts from hundreds of miles away who seem to know more about the levels than we do. The right hon. Gentleman knows exactly what I want him to do in terms of dredging and the long-term management of the moors and levels, and I thank him, the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for North Cornwall (Dan Rogerson), and the Prime Minister for listening and acting on that.

On an entirely local issue, I went down to the villages of Long Load and Long Sutton again over the weekend and they are cut off because of a collapsed bridge. They need an alternative crossing over the river or repairs to the bridge. Will the Secretary of State look into that and see whether something urgent can be done?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend and, until recently, ministerial colleague for his support and advice. We have of course discussed this matter frequently over the past year. He better grab me immediately after this urgent question and give me the details, so that I can raise it at Cobra, because it is exactly the sort of thing that we are trying to fix at Cobra.

[Mr Speaker]

I am sure that the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome (Mr Heath) is far too courteous to interpret the Secretary of State literally. Perhaps spectators to the event will be able to testify one way or the other.

--- Later in debate ---

[Chris Williamson (Derby North) (Lab)]

I am grateful to the Secretary of State for praising the work of the emergency services. He may not be aware that the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, who is sitting next to him, is recklessly cutting the number of firefighters: there will be 5,000 fewer in England by 2015 than there were in 2010. Will he ask the Secretary of State to stop those cuts and will he recommend that the Pitt review, which suggested that a statutory responsibility should be given to fire and rescue services, be implemented without further delay?

[Mr Paterson]

I suggest that the hon. Gentleman goes to look in the mirror and reminds himself that his Government left us borrowing £400,000 a minute. I want publicly to praise all those in the fire services: they have supplied specialist vehicles that have been of great succour to those on the levels, and I really admire the work that they have done around the country. The fire services have been key during this very difficult period—over Christmas, the new year and right through January—and I am very grateful to them for the splendid job that they have done.

[Sheryll Murray (South East Cornwall) (Con)]

May I commend the Secretary of State for his consultation with local people in Somerset? Following the consultation that he—or the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for North Cornwall (Dan Rogerson)—had with Cornwall’s local authority in Westminster a few weeks ago, is there any way that he can report back to us about rebalancing the Bellwin formula, which disadvantages Cornwall county council?

[Mr Paterson]

I have many responsibilities, but the Bellwin scheme is not one of them. I will, however, make sure that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government heard that point.

[Bill Esterson (Sefton Central) (Lab)]

A number of homes in my constituency were flooded once the brooks stopped being cleared. What confidence can my constituents have that their homes will not be flooded again, given the scale of the cuts in spending on flood protection that have taken place under this Government?

[Mr Paterson]

I remind the hon. Gentleman that we are spending £2.4 billion, which is more than the previous Government, over this spending round. On local brooks—this picks up earlier questions—we set in train seven pilots last year to see whether some low-risk waterways could be cleared by local farmers or local landowners, with the collaboration of the Environment Agency, so that we get more work done on low-risk areas.

[Mr John Redwood (Wokingham) (Con)]

Will the Secretary of State call in the chairman of the Environment Agency and ask why, from a budget of £1,200 million last year, it spent only £20 million on clearing watercourses? Will he get across to the chairman that we need new budget priorities—not just in Somerset, which is the subject of the urgent question, but in places such as mine—to clear watercourses so that people do not have wet rooms?

[Mr Paterson]

As I have said, I have great confidence in what the Environment Agency, led by the chairman and by the chief executive, has delivered in protecting 1.1 million properties. However, as my right hon. Friend says, we can always do better. One thing I am looking at is getting more low-risk water clearance work done locally, with local councils being more involved, and with local agencies and more IDBs. This is very much a team effort.

[Paul Flynn (Newport West) (Lab)]

Why were there no floods on the other side of the River Severn on the Gwent levels? They have an identical environment, share 2,000 years of drainage history, have had the same weather and tides, and have had no dredging, but have had no floods. Is not the hon. Member for Thirsk and Malton (Miss McIntosh) right to say that the answer lies in the fact that the woods in Gwent are richly endowed with trees, and have not been denuded in the same way as on the Mendips?

[Mr Paterson]

The hon. Gentleman makes an interesting point. I am not an expert on the Gwent levels, but I have made it clear that, for the long term, there is a role for holding water further back in the catchment, as there is possibly a role for building a barrage on the Parrett. Those would be special measures for a very particular landscape, but his own landscape of the Gwent levels have their own characteristics, on which I am not an expert.

[Mr Jeremy Browne (Taunton Deane) (LD)]

As I stood in Burrowbridge yesterday morning with the water in the River Parrett again breaching the banks, the residents expressed considerable relief that the Prime Minister had committed in this House on Wednesday to the dredging of the River Parrett and the River Tone. However, I must say to the Secretary of State that there was scepticism and even cynicism about whether that would happen, when it would take place and on what scale. I would be grateful if he would take this opportunity to reassure the residents of that village and people across the Somerset levels that dredging will take place to the level that they think is appropriate to reduce the risk of flooding next year.

[Mr Paterson]

I am very happy to repeat that it is our clear intention to dredge the Tone and the Parrett as soon as it is safe to do so. That will be conducted by the Environment Agency. It is looking at technologies now. Part of the plan is for routine maintenance to be carried out in future years by the internal drainage boards, which do a very good job and have many experienced local people on them. That is absolutely our intention. However, the hon. Gentleman knows as well as I do that the banks are not safe at the moment, so if we are to use any technologies immediately, they will have to be vessel-borne.

[Bill Wiggin (North Herefordshire) (Con)]

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the lessons that are coming out of the horror in Somerset are equally applicable across the whole country? Will he ensure that the Environment Agency starts to do the things that he has been talking about so well?

[Mr Paterson]

I stress again that this is a team effort. The Environment Agency has done a great job at protecting 1.1 million properties. However, it is quite clear from going around the counties of rural England, including Herefordshire and Berkshire, that there is exasperation at the lack of work on low-risk rural waterways, which stopped under the last Government. It is clear that that work is much better done by local people. It should be carried out by local landowners in co-operation with IDBs and local councils. That is why I started the seven pilots. We want to apply the lessons from those as quickly as possible across rural England.

[Duncan Hames (Chippenham) (LD)]

Residents of Bradford-on-Avon have been heard to say that they have more in common with those just across the border in Somerset than in the rest of Wiltshire. Since Christmas, they have been dealing with the consequences of a 25-year flood event. Whatever action it is necessary for the Secretary of State to commit to in the Somerset levels, will he ensure that funds are available for any measures that are agreed to between the Environment Agency and local councillors to protect Bradford-on-Avon from a repeat of the recent flood damage?

[Mr Paterson]

I obviously cannot pre-empt the priorities that will be decided on by the Environment Agency shortly. I stress that our partnership scheme has brought in significant funds from local councils. I very much hope that the hon. Gentleman’s council is involved in that partnership method of raising money.

[Sarah Newton (Truro and Falmouth) (Con)]

The Secretary of State is absolutely right to say that this is a team effort. Will he confirm today that the money that has been identified for new flood defences is still available if Cornwall council puts forward an appropriate bid for better defences to protect my constituents in Perranporth, who have suffered dreadful flooding all year?

[Mr Paterson]

As my hon. Friend will have noted, we have an ambitious programme of flood defence schemes that goes right through to 2021. Significantly, that has not been matched by Her Majesty’s official Opposition. If her council puts in a partnership bid, I am sure that it will slot into our programme in the coming years, although I cannot promise when.

[Mr Mark Spencer (Sherwood) (Con)]

Once the waters have subsided and the Secretary of State starts to put right the wrongs of the past, will he have an urgent review of the use of sandbags, which are an old technology and are actually quite porous, when new technologies are available? My constituent, Simon Crowther, has flood protection solutions that deliver better results than sandbags.

[Mr Paterson]

My hon. Friend makes a very good point. There may well be better alternatives to sandbags. I would be very interested to hear from him if his constituent’s solution is as easy to move around as empty sandbags, because that has proved to be invaluable in recent weeks.

[Neil Parish (Tiverton and Honiton) (Con)]

The Secretary of State was right to mention the Dutch engineers who drained the levels, because they dug out the ditches and rivers and kept them clean, which was absolutely key. We have now had six weeks of flooding. I welcome what the Secretary of State has done, but we need to change the rules to ensure that farmland and environmental land is protected, because six weeks of flooding destroys not only farmland, but nature conservation and people’s lives.

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his question. I remind him that we are protecting significant areas of agricultural land as we speak, but my view of the future, as he has probably picked up, is that many of the low-risk waterways are much better cleaned out and maintained by local landowners, in co-operation with the Environment Agency. That is probably the best way to go.

[Tessa Munt (Wells) (LD)]

I hope that the Secretary of State will applaud the fantastic work of the Somerset Community Foundation and its hardship fund, which is helping people who are suffering financial difficulties as a result of the flooding. Does he agree that the whole catchment approach should include the Rivers Axe and Brue and that it should involve dredging, repairing the Bleadon sluice gates, installing more flood gates and more pumps for local protection, and ensuring that we value productive land?

[Mr Paterson]

I thank my hon. Friend for that question. She is absolutely right that they are part of the whole catchment of the levels, and the relevant internal drainage board will be involved in the discussions. As she probably already knows, the River Brue is one of our pilot schemes.

[Sir Paul Beresford (Mole Valley) (Con)]

The Secretary of State will obviously be aware, as we all are, that the Environment Agency, local authorities and others will be rethinking their programmes after the flood waters retreat. It appears to me that in the past the payment of funds, and certainly central funds, has gone mainly to major schemes. I am delighted to hear that he is moving towards more minor schemes. Does he agree that the collection of small schemes might be more effective in some areas than one or two large schemes, be they in Somerset or north Surrey?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that question. He is absolutely right that there is merit in a lot of the smaller, low-risk schemes. What we have seen in the levels—it is a completely unique environment—is that the national guidelines were not appropriate for that artificial environment, and the same might apply in other parts of rural England.

[Roger Williams (Brecon and Radnorshire) (LD)]

If the pastures of the Somerset levels remain inundated for much longer, considerable damage will be done. Will the Secretary of State be able to give farmers advice and help to re-establish those pastures so that they can continue in business?

[Mr Paterson]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to make that comment, because several of the farmers I have talked with were emphatic that, following the very wet summer we had last year, the grass could be permanently damaged. We are absolutely prepared to work very closely with organisations such as the National Farmers Union and the Country Land and Business Association to help those famers. I also pay tribute to the agricultural charities, which have also been very helpful on the matter.

[Mr Crispin Blunt (Reigate) (Con)]

I declare an interest as one of the 7,500 people who have had their homes flooded. With Gatwick being knocked out on 24 December and with thousands of houses being planned to be developed in the flood area of the River Mole, the expenditure committed to flood defence is wholly inadequate if we are to continue with the development policy in place at the moment. There needs to be a strategic review for the balance of our priorities as a country.

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. We are absolutely clear that current planning guidance steers property development away from floodplains. In the overwhelming number of cases—over 95%, I think—in which the Environment Agency recommends that a planning application should not go ahead, that advice is accepted.

[Oliver Colvile (Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport) (Con)]

On Saturday morning I visited the North Corner pontoon at Devonport and saw at first hand bits of the sea wall falling off into the River Tamar. Will my right hon. Friend have a chat with Poole city council and the Environment Agency to ensure that some work is done fairly promptly, because otherwise it will have a significant impact not only on flooding, but on the dockyard, which is bang next door to it?

[Mr Paterson]

My hon. Friend makes an important point. I am afraid that around the coast we have seen significant damage done to our coastal defences, and we are working closely with the Environment Agency and local councils to ensure that it is repaired speedily.

[George Hollingbery (Meon Valley) (Con)]

We all, of course, have enormous sympathy with those in Somerset and elsewhere, including places such as Hambledon in my constituency which has been flooded by ground water for three weeks now, and expects to be flooded for at least another three weeks, or perhaps six or eight. Does my right hon. Friend agree that there is at least a crumb of comfort in the fact that the recent Water Bill contains provisions for the creation of Flood Re, which should allow the continued provision of affordable flood insurance to most properties in Somerset and elsewhere?

[Mr Paterson]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Flood Re will, I hope, bring relief to 500,000 people with high-risk properties, and as he knows, the Bill is going through the other place this afternoon.

[Mr Ben Wallace (Wyre and Preston North) (Con)]

I grew up on the Somerset levels, and when I was a child, farmers were responsible for managing and carrying out drainage on their small waterways. Unfortunately, over the decades, the advice they have received has started to become more conflicting and the different priorities of Natural England and the Environment Agency have caused great confusion and inconsistency. In future, after the emergency has passed, will my right hon. Friend ensure that on dredging policy those two agencies sing from the same hymn sheet?

[Mr Paterson]

My hon. Friend makes a fair point, and I assure him that Natural England will be involved in the discussions that start tomorrow. The Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for North Cornwall (Dan Rogerson), will chair the first meeting to deliver the plan within six weeks.

[David Mowat (Warrington South) (Con)]

The Environment Agency correctly identifies housing as the principal driver of where flood defences should be built, and the Secretary of State saw the scheme in Warrington that was completed three months ago and prevented the flooding of 1,500 houses. For the avoidance of doubt, will he assure the House that there will be no knee-jerk reaction to change criteria after the tragedy in Somerset?

[Mr Paterson]

I saw the real value of those schemes when my hon. Friend kindly invited me to his constituency, and I assure him that it is our intention to continue similar schemes around the country.

[Rehman Chishti (Gillingham and Rainham) (Con)]

On the better use of technology, will the Secretary of State clarify and confirm that the Government have allocated £4.6 million towards the better use of space technology for weather prediction? It would mean that the United Kingdom is one of only a few countries in the world doing that.

[Mr Paterson]

The Government invest significant sums in forecasting, and, as someone who has received storm forecasts on a daily basis and paid close attention to them in recent weeks, I know that their accuracy is extraordinary and of huge value. I thank all those who have been active in drawing up those forecasts at short notice.

[Dr Thérèse Coffey (Suffolk Coastal) (Con)]

If there had been a change of wind in Suffolk, we may have suffered similar levels of flooding to that experienced by constituents in Somerset, which might explain the Gwent issue. Will the Secretary of State assure me that in future he might look again at having the Environment Agency and Natural England as two separate bodies? He is currently advertising for a chairman of the Environment Agency, so this could be an opportune moment to merge the two.

[Mr Paterson]

A triennial review concluded last year that it was better to leave the two organisations as independent because it would be a hugely complicated task to legislate to bring them together. However, the review made it clear—this touches on an earlier question from my hon. Friend the Member for Wyre and Preston North (Mr Wallace)—that there needs to be more co-operation between the two organisations, and that significant efficiencies could be made by working together.

Agriculture and Fisheries Council

Owen Paterson Excerpts

Thursday 16th January 2014 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Owen Paterson)]

I represented the UK at the Agriculture and Fisheries Council on 16 December in Brussels. Richard Lochhead MSP, Alun Davies AM and Michelle O’Neill MLA also attended. I covered the agricultural issues while the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Camborne and Redruth (George Eustice), covered the fishery issues which were reported on in separate letters dated 20 December 2013 and the last three any other business items on nutrition and labelling, animal plant and control package: smarter rules for safer food, and market access from Russia.

The legislative “A” points were approved, which included the package of five common agricultural policy regulations. The four main regulations were published on 21 December, while a transitional regulation was published on 27 December. Also approved was the cohesion package on which I abstained. Germany and I voted against the extension of the scope of the European globalisation adjustment fund.

The non-legislative “A” points included a Council regulation to fix certain agricultural prices and refunds, which Germany and I abstained on.

Promotion of agricultural products

The Council noted the Commission’s proposal for a new regulation on promotion of agricultural products. I welcomed the focus on exports and simplification but queried the budget increase. The Commission stressed that its aim was to boost efficiency and value for money, including through producers involvement as they would have more incentive to put together good schemes if they were to bear more of the cost.

Any Other Business

National emissions ceilings directive

Germany requested that the Commission report to the Agriculture Council on the progress of its proposal to revise the national emissions ceilings directive. Germany was concerned by the potential impact of ammonia emission ceiling reductions on Europe’s agricultural industry. I supported the request. The Commission noted that the impacts on agriculture were fully considered within the Commission.

Organic agriculture

The Commission presented the results of its consultation on the future of organic agriculture regulation. It found that the majority of respondents were in favour of greater harmonisation and removing derogations from the legislation. I urged pragmatism and recommended focusing on opportunities for growth and exports including with China.

Dairy sector—September 2013 conference

The Commission presented the findings of its recent conference which considered the future of the dairy sector following the end of quotas in 2015. Many member states argued that while they were not calling for the return of quotas, they did see the case for some “collective management” of the sector or for greater focus on producer returns. I urged the EU not to move back towards market management, but to leave producers to take advantage of growing global demand for dairy products.

Local farming and direct sales labelling scheme

The Commission presented its report concluding that a specific, voluntary labelling scheme may help producers to market and sell their products locally and in short supply chains. The presidency urged member states to save discussion of this until early 2014 as the incoming Greek presidency had committed to taking this issue forward.

Rice: problems in the sector

Italy presented a paper highlighting the problems faced by the EU rice sector with significant increases of duty free imports from some countries, particularly Cambodia and Burma. Italy suggested it might be time to consider safeguard measures. The Commission assured the Council that it monitored the EU rice sector, but noted that the EU was not self-sufficient in rice, and it would be premature to consider safeguard measures.

Nutrition labelling

The Italian delegation introduced a paper expressing concerns about the UK’s voluntary front of pack nutrition labelling. They cited concerns over: disruption to the internal market, consumer confusion and incompatibility with European quality schemes. My hon. Friend clarified the UK’s position: the scheme was voluntary and experience over eight years of similar colour coded schemes by most domestic retailers had not caused any disruption to the internal market. However 17 member states supported Italy. The Commission in its response made clear that such voluntary schemes were left to the discretion of individual member states and that it would take action in any cases where the internal market did become seriously disrupted. The Commission reported that it had received assurances from the UK about the voluntary nature of the scheme and its monitoring arrangements.

Animal, plant and control package: smarter rules for safer food

The Council took note of the presidency’s progress report on the five elements of the smarter rules for safer food package. Member states intervened on a variety of issues in the package: a positive list of plant products allowed in order to give greater protection against imports of pests; concerns over the introduction of fees in the controls package; concerns with the high number of delegated acts and the value of merging separate pieces of legislation.

The Greek delegation informed the Council that the package would be a priority and hoped to produce a preliminary compromise text to enable the Italian presidency to begin negotiations with the European Parliament.

Market access to Russia for plants and plant products

The Commission updated the Council on negotiations with Russia on the export of plants and plant products from the EU. Russia had phytosanitary concerns and blocked imports of some plant products. Russia was, at the same time, insisting that the EU accept imports of some Russian products which the EU had phytosanitary concerns about. The Commission would continue with the negotiations, being “cautiously optimistic” that the export ban would be lifted in the near future.

Environment Council

Owen Paterson Excerpts

Wednesday 15th January 2014 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Owen Paterson)]

I represented the UK at the European Environment Council meeting in Brussels on 13 December. Paul Wheelhouse, Minister for Environment and Climate Change in the Scottish Government, and Alun Davies, Minister for Natural Resources and Food in the Welsh Government, also attended.

After adopting the list of legislative and non-legislative “A” items, Environment Ministers held an exchange of views on a proposal for a regulation on monitoring, reporting and verification of C0₂ emissions from ships. I set out the UK’s objective of securing a global agreement under the International Maritime Organisation but confirmed the UK’s view that the scope of the Commission’s proposal is broadly appropriate. The majority of other member states who spoke agreed with the UK that a global measure is the main objective and that the scope of covering ships over 5,000 gross tonnage, but not gases other than C0₂, is appropriate. Views diverged with regard to transparency of information. Denmark emphasised the importance of exposing data to public scrutiny, while Cyprus and Malta highlighted the commercial risk of disclosing data for individual vessels.

The Commission introduced its proposal on tackling invasive alien species (IAS), underlining its intention to focus only on species non-native to the EU. During the orientation debate, there was universal support for an EU system to tackle IAS. It became apparent, however, that there is a need to revise the principles used to devise the list of species and acknowledge the importance of regional co-operation, which was strongly supported by most member states. The majority of member states, including the UK, indicated their opposition to capping the total number of IAS on the proposed list of Union concern. There was a large group of member states, including the UK, also in favour of extending measures to IAS native to the EU. The Commission recognised that a cap is problematic. It also noted the support for including non-EU IAS and agreed to consider if and how this could be achieved through existing provisions.

In other business, the presidency provided an update on the failure to reach agreement in the Energy Council of 12 December on the proposed directive to address the indirect land use change impacts of biofuels. The presidency then introduced the outcome of the 19th session of the conference of the parties to the UN framework convention on climate change (C0P19). Looking ahead at the timeline for developing the EU’s contribution, Germany, France, Denmark, Belgium, Sweden and the UK all emphasised the importance of the March Council and of the June ministerial meeting.

The presidency gave an update on the state of play and way forward on EU ETS/aviation. France, Germany, Finland and the UK all argued that the Commission’s proposal does not reflect the political nature of the issue and underlined the importance of making progress in the International Civil Aviation Organisation on a global solution. Also under other business, the Commission introduced its new proposal on plastic bags, which has been adopted in response to calls from the Council and the huge reaction to the Commission’s public consultation. I welcomed the flexibility included in the Commission’s proposal and highlighted the progress made nationally in reducing carrier bag usage. I also stressed the UK’s willingness to work together with other member states and the Commission to develop a truly biodegradable plastic bag.

Greece presented the work programme for its presidency. They hope to seek agreement on EU ETS/aviation, the shipment of waste, the protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade and fluorinated gases. Ministers then broke for a working lunch, during which we discussed the post-2015 development framework.

Woodland Planting

Owen Paterson Excerpts

Thursday 9th January 2014 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Owen Paterson)]

Today I am announcing that I intend to maintain levels of woodland planting that we fund in England through pillar 2 of the common agricultural policy, rural development, in 2014-15.

Following negotiation of the EU rules governing the transition from the old to the new common agriculture policy and clarification from the European Commission of their impact, we can now approve new applications for tree planting grants in 2014.

We will therefore continue processing existing applications for woodland planting grants made by 31 December 2013. If this fails to deliver a level of funded planting in line with the overall annual rate under the existing rural development programme we will look at inviting further applications later in 2014 before the new programme comes into effect.

We also intend as part of the new rural development programme to offer tree-planting grants in 2015 in advance of new environmental land management agreements coming into effect in January 2016. We will work with interested parties on what this could involve before we submit the programme to the Commission for approval.

The total Government investment in creating and managing woodland under the rural development programme in 2014-15 will amount to £30 million. This consists of £6 million on new planting and £24 million on woodland management, including maintaining more recent woodland planting. This will fund the creation of 2,000 hectares of woodland, equivalent to about 4 million trees, and the protection or improvement of 200,000 hectares of existing woodland. It will help with extending woodland cover to 12% of the country by 2060.

I remain committed to protecting, improving and expanding England’s woodland assets as set out in the Government forestry and woodlands policy statement of January 2013.

Oral Answers to Questions

Owen Paterson Excerpts

Thursday 9th January 2014 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Owen Paterson)]

About 5 million properties in England are at risk of flooding. The flood defences protected more than 1 million properties during recent events. More is being spent during this spending review period than ever before. That will better protect 165,000 houses from flooding. In the six-year period from 2015-16, we will invest a record £2.3 billion in capital improvement projects, which will improve the protection for a further 300,000 households.

[Bill Esterson]

That is a remarkable answer, given that on 9 September, the former Minister, the hon. Member for Newbury (Richard Benyon), told my hon. Friend the Member for Vale of Clwyd (Chris Ruane) that total expenditure on flood defences was projected to fall from £646 million in 2010-11 to £546 million in 2015-16. Given those figures and the scale of the recent flooding, will the Secretary of State say how flood defences such as those in my constituency will be repaired? Will he confirm whether he will press for additional funds for flood defence repairs?

[Mr Paterson]

I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his question, because it gives me the chance to tell the House, yet again, that the Government are spending more in this spending round than was spent by the previous Government and that we plan to increase the amount to a record £2.3 billion up to 2021. Thanks to the fact that we have galvanised local councils through the partnership funding scheme, there will be all sorts of opportunities for his constituents to work with him and his local council to access more funds for flood schemes.

[Miss Anne McIntosh (Thirsk and Malton) (Con)]

It is remarkable that the flood defences have held to the extent that they have during the battering that the country has taken. Will my right hon. Friend give a commitment to the House that he will review the budget for repairs to existing flood defences and look favourably on schemes such as the maintenance by drainage boards of the regular watercourses that protect farmland and other properties?

[Mr Paterson]

I thank the Chair of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee for her question. What she says about maintenance is absolutely correct. In November, it was found that 97% of the defences were in a good condition and would remain so within our existing budgets. I repeat again that we have made a clear commitment up to 2021. I would love to see the shadow Secretary of State stand up and say that the Labour party will back that commitment.

[Jessica Morden (Newport East) (Lab)]

10. Although there were major flood alerts, there was a lucky escape for the vast majority of residents of my constituency. I thank all those involved, particularly Natural Resources Wales, which has improved defences in recent years and, crucially, ensured that there have been no flood protection job losses. Given how severely Wales was affected by the floods, the size of our coastline and our exposure, will the Secretary of State consult the Welsh Government closely about the resource to be given to Wales in the future?

[Mr Paterson]

I thank the hon. Lady for her comments about those who have worked so hard, and that situation was reflected across the country. As she rightly says, this is a devolved issue, and the Welsh Secretary and representatives of the Welsh Government have obviously been involved in our numerous Cobra meetings. I will be happy to pass on her comments, but I suggest that she takes up the matter directly with the Welsh Government and the Welsh Secretary.

[Mr Mark Williams (Ceredigion) (LD)]

The Secretary of State will be aware of the extensive damage along the west Wales coastline, particularly in Ceredigion in the Aberystwyth and Borth areas. Flooding is a devolved matter, as he says, but is the prospect of a bid to the European Union solidarity fund, specifically set up for the restoration of defences and infrastructure, a feature of the discussions that he has had and will have with colleagues in Cardiff and the Secretary of State for Wales?

[Mr Paterson]

My hon. Friend makes a good suggestion, which is well worth the Welsh Government and the Welsh Secretary taking up. We are happy to help liaise with him, but ultimately we have to respect devolution, and if it is an issue of money for Wales, it is down to the Welsh Government to negotiate it.

[Maria Eagle (Garston and Halewood) (Lab)]

When he became Secretary of State in September 2012, the right hon. Gentleman reviewed his Department’s priorities. Why did his new list of four priorities make no reference to preparing for and managing risks from flood and other environmental emergencies, as the old list of priorities and responsibilities had done?

[Mr Paterson]

That gives me a perfect opportunity to explain the huge gain for the economy from our ambitious flood schemes. Very shortly after I took over, I met the noble Lord Smith, the chairman of the Environment Agency, at a brilliant £45 million scheme in Nottingham, which was not just protecting 12,000 houses but, on the other side of the river, freeing up a whole area of blighted land, which is now up for development.

My first priority is to grow the rural economy, and I am delighted to say that our ambitious schemes will help to do that. I just wish that, in her second question, the hon. Lady would say the Labour party endorse our plans.

[Maria Eagle]

When asked by the Select Committee on Environment, Food and Rural Affairs where the £54 million of extra savings from his departmental budget announced by the Treasury in June 2013 would come from, he said:

“We will concentrate on my four priorities, so it is as simple as that. Pretty well every single activity in Defra has to be focused through those four priorities.”

Those priorities do not include flood protection. How can people facing an increasing risk of flood damage due to the effects of climate change have any confidence in a Secretary of State who has downgraded flood protection as a priority and thinks that climate change is benefiting Britain?

[Mr Paterson]

Dear, oh dear, this is lame stuff. We are spending £2.3 billion over the course of this Parliament, with £148 million of partnership money. We have an extra £5 million for revenue, and in the course of the recent reduction across Departments I specifically excluded flood defence, so the reduction is spread across the rest of DEFRA. Uniquely, we have a programme going right out to 2021, with £2.3 billion. Yet again—this is the fifth opportunity—the hon. Lady has not agreed to match our commitment. If you want flood defences, you vote Conservative.

[Mr Gary Streeter (South West Devon) (Con)]

Every time—[Interruption.]

[Mr Streeter]

Every time we have floods in the far south-west, our vital rail link with the rest of the country is either severed completely or severely disrupted. Is my right hon. Friend confident that, within the existing resources and his excellent existing budget in the Department, sufficient priority is being given to flood prevention measures for vital transport infrastructure?

[Mr Paterson]

My hon. Friend makes an important point. When I went to Exeter, I saw the real damage to the economy of the south-west caused by the important link to Exeter being interrupted by floods last year. I can reassure him that there have been senior Ministers from the Department for Transport at our Cobra meetings, and they are fully aware of the consequences and have been working hard to ensure that our transport links have been restored rapidly.

[Jim Fitzpatrick (Poplar and Limehouse) (Lab)]

4. What his Department’s latest evaluation is of the badger cull pilots.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Owen Paterson)]

We are waiting for the independent expert panel to report its findings, and we will consider all information the pilots have generated and decide on our next steps in due course.

[Jim Fitzpatrick]

Everybody wants bovine TB to be defeated, but there is great scepticism out there that this tactic was ever going to work. Will the Secretary of State say when we can expect all the evidence to be published on the risks associated with culling?

[Mr Paterson]

That is a perfectly valid question but we must wait for the independent panel. That panel is independent and I do not want to put any pressure on it. It has a large amount of data from the two pilots that it will analyse for safety, humaneness and effectiveness. We must be patient and wait for it to report.

[Neil Parish (Tiverton and Honiton) (Con)]

The Secretary of State is to be congratulated on taking action to hold the pilot culls, but it is now necessary to analyse them and in particular to look at the Somerset scheme, where trapping was very effective. In Devon we need a full-scale cull to get control of this disease, as they have done in the Republic of Ireland.

[Mr Paterson]

I thank my hon. Friend for his comments and he is right to say that we cannot ignore this disease, as the previous Government did. He is absolutely right to draw the House’s attention to the Republic of Ireland. I met Simon Coveney, the Irish Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, at the Oxford Farming Conference, and he told me that thanks to the policies adopted by the Republic of Ireland, the disease there is at its lowest level since records began.

[Barry Gardiner (Brent North) (Lab)]

The Secretary of State has delivered an unscientific cull that has spectacularly failed, that his own Back Benchers are openly questioning, that has weakened the reputation of DEFRA and Natural England for evidence-based policy, and from which the Prime Minister’s office is reported to be working up an escape plan. Will he now commit to bring the report of the independent expert panel to this House for a debate in Government time, and put to a vote any further proposals on badger culling?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his question but I remind him that last time this issue came before the House, the Government had a good majority of 61. I am not prepared to put any pressure on the independent panel; it is up to it to take its time to evaluate the evidence and report to us, and we will come back in due course.

[Andrew George (St Ives) (LD)]

If the panel finds that the pilots were ineffective, what will the Government do?

[Mr Paterson]

I thank my hon. Friend for his question. We will obviously analyse the reasons the panel puts forth in its report. He asks a hypothetical question, and all I can say is that we just have to look at other countries. There is no doubt that if we look at Australia, the scientific evidence shows that it is now TB free. We can look at the United States and the white-tailed deer, the brushtail possum in New Zealand, or Ireland, which I have just cited. The Republic of Ireland is a scientific, practical example because by bearing down on the disease in cattle and in wildlife, it has got it down to the lowest level since records began. We will follow its example.

[Grahame M. Morris (Easington) (Lab)]

5. What progress he has made in requiring water companies to introduce social tariffs; and if he will make a statement.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Owen Paterson)]

The Government do not require water companies to introduce a social tariff. Water companies are best placed to take decisions on the design of social tariffs as part of their charges schemes, in consultation with their customers. Social tariffs are funded by cross-subsidy between customers, so it is vital that they take account of local circumstances and the views of local people. Most water companies will have a social tariff in place by 2015-16.

[Grahame M. Morris]

I am grateful to the Minister for that answer but I draw his attention to the fact that a cost of living crisis is affecting about 2 million households in England and Wales who are classed as living in water poverty, which means they are paying at least 3% of their household income in water bills. Will the Government think again and consider supporting Labour’s proposals to introduce a reduced social tariff to help families who are struggling to pay their water bills?

--- Later in debate ---

[Andrew Griffiths (Burton) (Con)]

6. How many cattle were slaughtered as a result of bovine TB in 2013.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Owen Paterson)]

Between January and September 2013, 24,618 cattle were compulsorily slaughtered as reactors or direct contacts in Great Britain. That is an average of more than 90 cattle a day. In Staffordshire over the same period, 2,245 cattle were slaughtered for TB control purposes.

[Andrew Griffiths]

Each one of those instances is a tragedy. Farmers in Burton, Uttoxeter and across the country are having their lifetime’s work destroyed by this disease. Does the Secretary of State share my concern that the Opposition seem to criticise constantly the work to tackle this disease, while having no plans of their own and offering no support to my farmers?

[Mr Paterson]

I entirely endorse my hon. Friend’s comments, particularly as my constituency is so close to his. Having got this disease down to 0.01% in 1972 when we had a bipartisan approach—in those days, there was absolute unity on the need to bear down on the disease in cattle and in wildlife—it is tragic that we let that go. Since then, 305,000 perfectly healthy cattle have been hauled off to slaughter at a cost of £500 million. If we do not get a grip on this, as my hon. Friend says, we are heading for a bill of £1 billion. We just wish that we could get back to that bipartisan approach, which has been endorsed by every other country I cited in my previous answer.

[David T. C. Davies (Monmouth) (Con)]

TB is causing chaos in the county of Monmouthshire. Does my right hon. Friend agree that we need a completely open-minded and united approach? If culling works, then all sides of the House should support it. If it does not work, after we have seen the independent survey, we should unite in supporting an alternative.

[Mr Paterson]

I have to respect the rules of devolution and the Welsh Government are pursuing a vaccination policy. Our belief is that vaccination is, sadly, expensive and pointless on diseased animals. There is an interesting role for ring vaccination once the pool of disease has been reduced, and I think we can probably learn from both areas.

[Mrs Mary Glindon (North Tyneside) (Lab)]

7. What plans he has to propose changes to the responsibilities of the Food Standards Agency following the Elliott review into the integrity and assurance of food supply networks.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Owen Paterson)]

This is an interim report which Professor Elliott plans to discuss further with interested parties in the coming months. The Government are interested in hearing the views of others, as we consider all of Professor Elliott’s interim recommendations, before responding to his final report in the spring.

[Mrs Glindon]

Given the emphasis on criminality in the food chain in the Elliott review, what are the Government doing to ensure that unscrupulous people who deliberately defraud the public will be brought to justice?

[Mr Paterson]

The hon. Lady makes an important point. I can tell her that investigations continue at a number of sites across the UK. The City of London police are the co-ordinating police force for all of those investigations and five arrests have been made. The Food Standards Agency continues to liaise with the City of London police and, through them, is sharing information on UK investigations with Europol.

[Mr Jim Cunningham (Coventry South) (Lab)]

8. What assessment he has made of how easy it is to access and use food banks.

--- Later in debate ---

[Robert Neill (Bromley and Chislehurst) (Con)]

9. Whether his Department has any plans to strengthen the enforcement provisions of the 2010 environmental permitting regulations.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Owen Paterson)]

There are no current proposals to alter the enforcement provisions of the 2010 environmental permitting regulations. The 2010 regulations and the Environmental Protection Act 1990 together provide a range of enforcement powers at regulated and illegal sites. I would consider the case for strengthening these or other regulatory provisions if there is evidence that exercising them is proving insufficient in preventing harm to health and the environment.

[Robert Neill]

If the Minister wants evidence, would he like to look at the waste-for-fuel site in my constituency, which has so far had 15 fires in the past two years, at a cost of £568,000 to the fire service and 1,900 hours of firefighters’ time—more than the clear-up cost of removing this rogue operator—and where repeated attempts by the Environment Agency to secure an injunction have so far failed? Will he press the agency to honour its commitment to give my constituents the results of toxicity testing on that site?

--- Later in debate ---

[Martin Vickers (Cleethorpes) (Con)]

11. What reports he has received on the recent floods in northern Lincolnshire; and what discussions he has had with the Environment Agency on its plans to improve flood defences.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Owen Paterson)]

I visited my hon. Friend’s constituency on 7 December and saw some of the damage caused. The flooding caused an estimated £40 million-worth of damages to Immingham docks. The Environment Agency is currently updating its Humber flood risk management strategy, which looks at long-term justification, funding and solutions for the management of flood-risk communities along the Humber. Data and learning from recent flooding will also be used in the development of the strategy.

[Martin Vickers]

I thank my right hon. Friend for his reply. I draw his particular attention to the village of Barrow Haven, between Barton and Immingham, which has twice suffered floods in the past six years. It is unacceptable that the local community should have to live in constant fear of a repeat. I urge my right hon. Friend, as part of his review to look at involving more local people in the task of how best to alleviate floods. People who serve on drainage boards and the like want to be able to input their local knowledge.

[Mr Paterson]

I enjoyed the visit with my hon. Friend. It was astonishing to see that that was a one-in-500-years incident. I totally endorse his view that there should be involvement of local people. I am happy for him to write to me, and we can negotiate with the Environment Agency. I strongly urge him to get his local councils involved so that they can participate in our partnership regime.

[Lyn Brown (West Ham) (Lab)]

T1. If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Owen Paterson)]

DEFRA’s priorities are growing the rural economy, improving the environment and safeguarding animal and plant health. As the country continues to experience significant flooding, I would like to thank the emergency services, the Environment Agency, local authorities and public utilities for their tireless work in seeking to safeguard both life and property. Despite those valiant efforts, eight people have lost their lives as a result of the severe weather conditions over the Christmas and new year period. I know the House will want to join me in extending our deepest sympathies to their families and friends. With water levels still rising in many areas, I ask the public to continue to take heed of the Environment Agency’s warnings. We must remain vigilant. I shall chair a further Cobra meeting this afternoon.

[Lyn Brown]

Children growing up near busy roads in West Ham are, because of the quality of air that they breathe, likely to enter adulthood with smaller lungs. Now that the Secretary of State has abandoned proposals to reduce air quality monitoring—a decision roundly condemned by professionals—will he explain what action he is going to take to deal with this growing public health crisis?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for raising an important question about what is a real and growing problem in certain conurbations. In fairness, however, it is exactly the opposite of what she says, as we are consulting on how to bring in more effective regimes. She has raised a key question that affects large numbers of people.

[Julian Sturdy (York Outer) (Con)]

T2. Following the new year celebrations, farmers in my constituency have voiced their concerns about the dangers of Chinese lanterns not only to the welfare of their livestock, but to property and, ultimately, their livelihoods. Following bans in Germany, Spain, Australia and much of south America, is it not time to consider banning these flying death-traps?

--- Later in debate ---

[Phil Wilson (Sedgefield) (Lab)]

T6. Yesterday, during Prime Minister’s Question Time, the Prime Minister said that he strongly suspected that the recent abnormal weather events had been a result of climate change. Does the Secretary of State agree with the Prime Minister?

[Mr Paterson]

What the Prime Minister said was that we should consider the practical measures that we are taking, and I entirely endorse his remarks. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will ask those on his party’s Front Bench whether they will now endorse our very ambitious spending plans for flood defences, which they have so far been very reluctant to do.

[Mark Pawsey (Rugby) (Con)]

T5. Will the Minister confirm that his Department intends to exempt small and medium-sized businesses from its proposed tax on plastic carrier bags? Given that biodegradable plastic in the waste stream is a contaminant and will reduce the number of plastic bags being recycled, will he withdraw that exemption?

[Hugh Bayley (York Central) (Lab)]

T7. Will the Secretary of State clarify his earlier statement about an increase in his Department’s funding for flood protection? During the second half of last year, the hon. Member for Newbury (Richard Benyon), who was then a DEFRA Minister, told me in a written parliamentary answer that in the year in which his party came to power, the Department spent £646 million. Spending in the current year is £113 million less, at £533 million. Did the Secretary of State’s earlier statement mean that the Government have now increased funding for flood protection in this and future years, and does that mean that he can now abandon the proposals to cut 1,700 jobs at the Environment Agency?

[Mr Paterson]

I know that those in the Labour Whips Office struggle with slow learners, but I shall put it on the record again: this Government are providing more than any previous Government in the current spending review. We are spending £2.3 billion, which is in addition to £148 million of partnership money. Exceptionally, the present Government have a £2.3 billion programme of capital spending up to 2021. Will Labour Members please ask those on their Front Bench to endorse that spending programme?

[Caroline Nokes (Romsey and Southampton North) (Con)]

In parts of rural Hampshire, the cost of high-speed broadband runs to many thousands of pounds per connection. Can my hon. Friend reassure those living in villages such as Barton Stacey that resources from, for instance, the rural community broadband fund might provide them with high-speed connections?

[Angela Smith (Penistone and Stocksbridge) (Lab)]

T8. Will the Secretary of State clarify how the remarks he made on allowing ancient woodland to be lost to development meet the spirit of his Department’s forestry policy statement which states categorically:“Protection of our trees, woods and forests, especially our ancient woodland, is our top priority”?

[Mr Paterson]

I am absolutely delighted to be able to reassure the hon. Lady and the hon. Members for Huddersfield (Mr Sheerman) and for Bristol East (Kerry McCarthy) that the idea that biodiversity offsetting could be used as a means of imposing unwanted houses on ancient woodland is an absolute travesty. It is absolutely clear: all along we have always said that should we bring in offsetting—I made this clear to the all-party group—all the current protections of the planning regime and all the mitigation hierarchy remain. Only at the very last moment could offsetting be considered, and we have always said that some assets will be too precious to offset and—[Interruption.] Exactly, and that might well be ancient woodland.

The hon. Lady should look at examples of offsetting in countries like Australia, where there has been an 80% shift of planning applications away from fragile environments. Used properly, therefore, biodiversity offsetting could be a tremendous tool to protect those ancient woodlands which she and I value. As someone who has planted an arboretum over recent years, the idea that I am going to trash ancient woodlands is an absolute outrage to me personally.

[Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD)]

Following the damage caused by the tidal surges in the Kent estuary on more than one occasion last week, will the Minister confirm that draft flood defence schemes along the whole of the River Kent will now be prioritised?

Veterinary Products Committee (Triennial Review)

Owen Paterson Excerpts

Tuesday 7th January 2014 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Owen Paterson)]

Today I am publishing the report of the triennial review of the Veterinary Products Committee (VPC), which was launched by DEFRA’s then Minister of State on 26 March 2013. Triennial reviews of non-departmental public bodies (NDPB) are part of the Government’s commitment to ensuring accountability in public life.

The VPC is an advisory NDPB which reports to the veterinary medicines directorate (VMD), an Executive agency of DEFRA. The VPC exists to provide independent expert technical advice to Ministers in relation to aspects of veterinary medicinal products, in order that VMD’s remit can be fully achieved. The Committee requires very broad and also specialised expertise in order to be knowledgeable across the broad scope of issues the Committee may be asked to consider.

The review has found that the functions of the VPC remain necessary and should continue to be carried out independently of Government by an advisory non-departmental public body.

The report of this review will be published online, and copies will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

Flooding

Owen Paterson Excerpts

Monday 6th January 2014 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Owen Paterson)]

I wish you a happy new year, Mr Speaker. With your permission, I should like to make a statement about flooding over the Christmas and new year period.

I chaired a further meeting of the Cobra committee a short while ago. I am sure that the House would appreciate an update on the latest position on the severe weather that affected parts of the country over the Christmas and new year period, which caused extensive damage. Our thoughts are with all those who have been affected and whose homes and businesses have been damaged. Tragically, seven fatalities in England between 23 December 2013 and 5 January 2014 are associated with the severe weather conditions. The House will want to join me in expressing our deepest sympathy to their families and friends.

Late December saw a number of rain bands crossing the country in quick succession, accompanied by strong winds. Their cumulative effect meant that, by the start of Christmas week, the ground was saturated and river levels were high. On 23 and 24 December, there was widespread rainfall across the entire country—there was more than 100 mm on Dartmoor, 90 mm in Cumbria, and 70 mm in parts of the south-east—resulting in a number of rivers bursting their banks.

The band of rain was accompanied by gusts of up to 90 mph in southern coastal areas. The strong onshore winds and large waves, combined with high spring tides, led to a surge that brought coastal flooding to parts of the south and west coasts. Further bands of rain moved across the country over the subsequent week and into the new year. The latest rainfall is still working its way down some of the slower-responding rivers, such as the Thames, and more rain is expected this week. There is a risk of groundwater flooding in Dorset and Wiltshire for some time to come and we need to remain vigilant.

Approximately 1,700 properties have been flooded in England so far, with Kent, Sussex, Surrey, Devon, Cornwall and Dorset particularly affected, although there were also impacts in the midlands and the north-west. In Wales, 140 properties were flooded, and there was also flooding in Northern Ireland and Scotland.

High winds led to many trees being uprooted, causing further problems, particularly for transport and electricity networks. Around 750,000 properties were left without an electricity supply, but electricity companies restored power to 90% of those within a day. A number of properties remained disconnected for longer in some cases owing to dangers connected to flooding and the complexity of the faults.

There was severe disruption to important transport links. Ferries were unable to dock at cross-channel ports and rail services were disrupted. A number of flights were diverted and Gatwick airport experienced severe disruption after losing the electricity supply to its north terminal.

Although it will be of little comfort to those affected by the recent floods, more than 220,000 properties were protected over the Christmas period. When added to the more than 800,000 properties that were protected during the coastal flooding in early December, our flood defences have protected around 1 million properties in total in England during the last month alone.

The Government are grateful for the excellent response from our front-line emergency services throughout the UK, and I pay tribute to the community spirit of all those who have rallied round to help their neighbours everywhere in difficult times. As far as England is concerned, I particularly praise the work of the Environment Agency, the local councils, and the transport and energy companies, whose teams worked tirelessly throughout Christmas and the new year period. The Environment Agency has deployed many hundreds of staff over the past six weeks to support communities.

The joint Environment Agency and Met Office flood forecasting centre consistently provided high-quality forecasts to predict accurately flood risks to allow for timely action on the ground. Some 147,000 homes and businesses have received flood warnings and advice since the beginning of December, enabling both individuals and organisations to take effective action before the storms struck.

More than 100 specialist flood rescue teams were on standby across the country as part of the national asset register managed by the Fire and Rescue Service National Co-ordination Centre. I am also grateful to members of Kent and Surrey fire and rescue services for calling off their planned strikes on Christmas eve, which coincided with peak river levels in those areas. I would also like to thank the military personnel deployed at very short notice to assist with flood defence preparations at Maidstone in Kent. The Thames barrier has been raised nine times in the past five days to safeguard more than £200 billion- worth of property in the capital.

There is still a complex picture across the country. Some areas are now focused on recovery, while others remain at significant risk of flooding, and, in many cases, repeated flooding. The Government are working closely with local councils, the insurance industry and others to ensure that people can receive the help they need quickly.

Today’s Cobra meeting agreed that, while we must remain ready to respond to further bad weather and the risk of surface-water flooding, our focus must turn to getting back into their homes the people who have had their Christmas and new year ruined and to supporting local communities with recovery. Tomorrow, the Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, my hon. Friend the Member for Great Yarmouth (Brandon Lewis) will be chairing a ministerial recovery working group. People who have had their homes damaged should contact their insurance company for advice about claims and seek assistance from the local authority where necessary. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government has triggered the Bellwin scheme to help local authorities with immediate costs caused by flooding, and the Government are in active discussions with Kent and Surrey councils.

The Government emergencies committee, Cobra, has met eight times through the Christmas and new year period. I have held meetings with relevant ministerial colleagues and officials across Government Departments and the Environment Agency on a daily basis. Those meetings ensured that all relevant agencies and organisations were doing everything possible to support affected households. We will undertake a full assessment in the coming weeks, but initial reports have identified a number of positive aspects, as well as some areas where lessons need to be learned.

The majority of local councils and utility companies responded effectively, but the response of a few left room for improvement. All received early warning from the Met Office and the Environment Agency that severe weather was on its way. The Government contacted all local authorities in England to ensure that all possible action was taken to support affected households and to ensure local emergency plans and out-of-hours help were in place to provide immediate assistance. My Department contacted the Association of British Insurers and was assured that the CEOs of all member companies would get loss adjusters to affected properties rapidly. The ABI has ensured that guidance on what those affected should be doing about their insurance has been provided.

People have a right to a reliable energy network. Despite the sequence of major storms that have hit the country in the past few months, the electricity network operators deserve credit for their hard work in reconnecting an unprecedented number of properties—some 700,000—within hours and in time for Christmas. There are, however, lessons to be learned about how customers are supported and informed during power cuts. We welcome the additional compensation some operators have announced and acknowledge that the response of some companies could have been better. The best performing companies set a high standard, which I would like all companies to be able to meet. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change is meeting with distribution network operators and Ofgem to discuss how the response can be improved for future events.

Flood management is a real priority for this Government. It has a vital role to play in protecting people and property from damage caused by flooding, and in delivering economic growth. Over the current spending review period, more is being spent than ever before. In addition, from 2015-16 onwards we will be making record levels of investment in capital projects. We will invest £370 million in 2015-16, and then the same in real terms each year, rising to over £400 million in 2020-21—a record investment. That will reduce the risk of flooding to a further 300,000 households, on top of the 165,000 households protected during the current spending round.

I would like to express the House’s sympathy to all those affected by the floods, and I convey my profound thanks to all those involved in responding across the UK. I can also reiterate the Government’s commitment to continue to invest in our flood defences to help us to continue to respond effectively to any future flooding.

[Maria Eagle (Garston and Halewood) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of his statement and for updating the House at the earliest opportunity following the recess on the latest situation regarding the floods. I join him in expressing our deepest sympathies to the families and friends of those who have died. Our thoughts are also with the thousands of people affected. This is the worst series of winter storms to hit Britain in more than 20 years, so I also join the Secretary of State and I am sure Members on both sides of the House in thanking Environment Agency staff and the emergency services for their work over the past fortnight, since this period of extreme weather began.

Despite all the efforts of agencies and local government staff, however, it is clear that some communities have faced delays and difficulty in securing the help they need. The Prime Minister heard the criticisms for himself when he visited Yalding in Kent, which suffered severe flooding and where more than 100 homes had to be evacuated. One resident told him:

“We were literally abandoned… We had no rescuers, nothing for the whole day… The Environment Agency said it was up to the council and when I did get through to the council they said if you need sandbags, get your own. On Christmas Day we saw absolutely no one.”

Another resident said:

“The people he’s talking to, the Environment Agency and so on, weren’t here… I swam this road on Christmas Day pulling people out on my own. There was no one here on Christmas Day or Boxing Day.”

The Prime Minister was filmed next to an inflatable boat on his visit, but journalists reported that it had been ferried in 10 minutes before and departed soon after he left. Those affected by these floods do not need stunts or the buck-passing we heard from the Environment Secretary when he put the blame on staff absent over Christmas. They want to know that lessons are to be learned about why some communities faced significant delays in securing the help they needed, and they want to know why lessons do not appear to have been learned from previous flooding incidents, despite all the promises from Ministers at the time.

I welcome the fact that the Prime Minister has promised a review to ensure that lessons are learned, but can the Secretary of State assure the House and those forced from their homes that it will begin as soon as the current severe weather has subsided, and will he set out a clear time frame for when it will be concluded? Will he commit to returning to the House to make a further statement on its conclusions? Will he confirm that the review will focus specifically on preparedness for days such as Christmas day and Boxing day, including appropriate staffing levels, especially when storms are predicted?

Will the Secretary of State ensure that the review looks at whether there is sufficient clarity in the division of responsibilities among councils and the Environment Agency? Will the remit be wide enough to look at the performance of the energy companies? As he said, some companies clearly have serious questions to answer about the unacceptable delays in reconnecting homes, which ruined Christmas for many families, and it is also not clear that the Government acted with as much speed and firmness as they should have done in pressing those companies to act.

Will the Secretary of State ensure that the review looks specifically at decisions taken on flood defence expenditure since 2010? His Department’s own figures, verified by the House of Commons Library, which I have here, show that expenditure on flood protection has fallen in real terms from £646 million in 2010 to £527 million this year and will be £546 million by 2015, meaning that we will be spending £100 million a year less at the end of this Parliament than at its start. Will the review therefore look at whether the right choices were made over how best to implement reductions to the Department’s budget, particularly in the light of the Environment Agency’s estimate that every pound invested in flood defences saves the country as much as £8 in flood damage?

Does the Secretary of State still believe that no other areas of his Department’s budget or those of its 28 arm’s length bodies were a lower priority than flood defences when it came to making decisions on reducing spending? Does that include, for example, the £7.3 million he spent in recent months on his failed unscientific cull of badgers—£4,100 for each animal killed?

Will the Secretary of State confirm that the review will consider the warning from the chief executive of the Environment Agency that

“Flood risk maintenance will be impacted”

by further planned budget and staffing reductions? In the meantime, will he reassure those living in areas at risk of flooding that, despite these warnings, he is confident that he can deliver the cuts in a way that will not reduce the Environment Agency’s ability to protect homes and businesses and respond when floods hit?

Will the Secretary of State reassure us that his failure to protect flood defence expenditure over other potential cuts has nothing to do with his personal scepticism about climate science? Has the Secretary of State listened to Sir David King, the Government’s special envoy on climate change, who has today again warned that

“storms and severe weather conditions that we might have expected to occur once in 100 years, say, in the past may now be happening more frequently....and the reason is—as predicted by scientists—that the climate is changing and as the climate changes we can anticipate quite a radical change in weather conditions.”

In the light of that clear warning, does the Secretary of State stand by his view that climate change will benefit the UK because of warmer winters? Will he now listen to the advice from his own independent advisers—the adaptation sub-committee of the Committee on Climate Change—who wrote to him towards the end of last year to express concern that his flood reinsurance scheme misses simple measures that would reduce cost, increase value for money and cope with increasing flood risk?

Finally, will the right hon. Gentleman look again at Labour’s amendments to the flood reinsurance scheme, which Conservative and Liberal Democrat Members opposed in Committee?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to the shadow Secretary of State for her expressions of sympathy and her thanks to those who worked so hard in the Environment Agency and local councils through this difficult period.

The hon. Lady asked four questions about the review. She will have heard me say that the Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, my hon. Friend the Member for Great Yarmouth (Brandon Lewis) is meeting tomorrow to work on recovery, and I shall work across Government with my colleagues to look at some of the lessons learned. The hon. Lady justifiably touched on one area which is, I think, a weakness. Although the Environment Agency and the Flood Forecasting Centre have put out very accurate short-term forecasts and although an efficient system was in place for distributing that information right across those on the ground—district councils, power companies, other utilities, transport companies—we saw a patchy take-up of some of that information and a patchy reaction to it. Some reacted very rapidly and were very effective; others had to be accelerated in their actions after a succession of Cobra meetings. The hon. Lady has touched on an area well worthy of investigation.

On expenditure, the hon. Lady is, sadly, simply wrong. Since I have been in this post—

[Maria Eagle]

You are wrong.

[Mr Paterson]

I will tell the hon. Lady; the chronology is very simple. I met her former colleague, the noble Lord Smith, at a tremendous flood scheme in Nottingham, where £45 million had been spent, protecting about 12,000 properties. What was really revealing was not only the 8:1 gain on the properties protected, as she mentioned, but the huge gain in land on the far side of the river that had been blighted for decades. So there is no stronger enthusiast in this House for flood detection schemes than me. I agree with Lord Smith that if we had a programme of projects that we could press on with rapidly, I would do my best to get money from my colleagues in central Government. [Interruption.] All those Opposition Members chuntering have to get back to some pretty basic figures. When we came into office in 2010, this country was borrowing over £300,000 a minute, and we had to take some pretty difficult decisions. In the light of that and the dire economic circumstances, reductions in revenue inevitably had to be made. Following my meetings with the noble Lord Smith, we got an extra £120 million for capital and have consolidated that into an extended scheme that will see 165,000 properties protected up to 2015. What is absolutely unprecedented is our clear programme of a further £2.3 billion up to 2021 to protect a further 300,000 properties. For all the blather from the Opposition, the simple question for the hon. Lady is whether she will nod now and say that the Labour party will go along with our proposal to spend £2.3 billion on capital up until 2021. Mr Speaker and colleagues, it is very noticeable—[Interruption.]

[Mr Speaker]

Order. There is a cacophony of noise. It seems invidious to single out individuals, but I confess a degree of disappointment as I had always envisaged the hon. Member for Brent North (Barry Gardiner) as a future rather cerebral statesman, but at the moment that point seems to be some way off to judge by the cacophony he is generating. The hon. Member for Garston and Halewood (Maria Eagle) took a little longer than her allotted time, and I allowed for that, but it is only fair to allow the Secretary of State to give proper replies. The House will make its own assessment of those replies, but the right hon. Gentleman must be heard.

[Mr Paterson]

I am very grateful, Mr Speaker, and I will be quick.

The shadow Secretary of State has very publicly not endorsed our programme to increase spending on capital to £2.3 billion up until 2021, so the facts are that in this spending round this Government are spending more than any preceding Government and we propose to spend more up to 2021. That is something on which she needs to reflect before making further criticisms.

The Government believe in the value of flood protection schemes. They deliver a huge advantage for those in private properties and in business and they free up blighted land, and we will continue our programme. It is noticeable, however, that the news today is that the Labour party will not endorse our increased spending programme.

[Miss Anne McIntosh (Thirsk and Malton) (Con)]

May I add my congratulations to the Environment Agency and the emergency services, including the lifeboat crews and coastguards who rescued those who put themselves at risk? It is noteworthy that the flood defences held firm and protected the properties that the Secretary of State has highlighted. Will he commit to reviewing his Department’s maintenance budget to ensure that the flood defences that held will have proper maintenance? Will he allow drainage boards to use their own engineers to ensure that the main water courses are kept clear in the future, as the Select Committee on Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has recommended? Will he give the House some examples of imaginative partnership approaches, such as the Pickering pilot project, which is building a reservoir, starting tomorrow, to keep Pickering safe from future floods?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to the Chairman of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee for her supportive comments. Emphatically yes, we want spending on maintenance to continue. That is why I added a further £5 million to that budget for 2015-16. For further information, although there was a 1% reduction in budgets across DEFRA, I have not passed that on to the flood budget. Again, that shows our absolute determination to protect flood schemes. My hon. Friend is absolutely right to praise partnership schemes. I have been around the country to look at tremendous projects, and only today I was on the Thames where there are prospects of extending the Jubilee river scheme that would require partnership spending by six local councils.

[Joan Walley (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)]

Is it not the case that the sum being spent is way below what the Environment Agency said in 2009 would need to be spent to keep pace with climate change? Is not the real fact that, as the adaptation sub-committee of the Committee on Climate Change’s report states, the

“extreme events seen in recent years will become the new normal”

and that we need to do far more? We need urgently and immediately to review the cuts being made to the Environment Agency.

[Mr Paterson]

I thank the Chairman of the Environmental Audit Committee for her comments. Emphatically yes, we have reacted—look at what we are doing. I agreed a whole range of projects with the noble Lord Smith and we got them passed in a difficult spending round. We have agreed extra funding, as I have just told the Chairman of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, for revenue spending and we have agreed, unprecedentedly, a programme of increased spending on capital up until 2021. We are spending more money in this spending round than in the previous four years, we have brought in partnership funding and we have set out an ambitious programme. We are reacting—the hon. Lady needs only to look at what we are doing on the ground.

[Mr David Heath (Somerton and Frome) (LD)]

Not unusually, a large part of my constituency is under water at the moment, and many people who live on the levels say that the situation is the worst that they can remember. I know that the Secretary of State understands this, but will he push the Environment Agency very hard to go ahead with the plans to clear the waterways and the rhynes and particularly to dredge the Parrett, the Tone, the Brue and the Axe, because if we have not got the capacity to get that water away, it will stay there for a very long time?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. He and I worked closely on this matter when he was my colleague in DEFRA. Together, we have come to a number of schemes that are being piloted—seven across the country—allowing local farmers and landlords to clear their own low-risk waterways, under supervision from the Environment Agency; but obviously, if that work is to go ahead and be meaningful, there must be proper dredging of rivers, and we will work on that with the Environment Agency.

[Caroline Lucas (Brighton, Pavilion) (Green)]

How does the Secretary of State expect people to believe his claims that flood management is a priority for the Government when, in addition to the Environment Agency cuts, he has seen the decision to slash DEFRA’s team working on climate change adaptation from 38 officials to six and when the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government has scrapped the obligation for councils to prepare for the impacts of climate change? Will the Secretary of State not acknowledge that that illustrates an incredibly reckless approach to the risks that extreme weather presents? Will he confirm whether he has found time to hold even one meeting with his Department’s chief scientific adviser on this matter—something that he had failed to do until a few months ago?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for her question. I cannot blame her for the economic mess that we inherited, but sadly, when we were borrowing £300,000 a minute—[Interruption.] Opposition Members are still chuntering. They are still in denial, and they are not apologising to the British people. When we were borrowing £300,000 a minute, we had to make difficult decisions. The hon. Lady must acknowledge, because she has been here while I made these decisions in the past 16 months, that we have increased spending in this round up to 2015 and that we have an ambitious programme of £2.3 billion, as I have just said. Hon. Members should therefore look at what we are doing on the ground and look at the benefits, with 1 million properties protected over Christmas.

[Mrs Caroline Spelman (Meriden) (Con)]

I am sure the Secretary of State would like to clarify for the House that the Opposition’s claim that they could identify savings from arm’s length bodies falsifies the fact that when this Government took office, there were 91 arm’s length bodies under DEFRA’s wing, which I reduced to 28, and that those savings were directed precisely to help to improve flood defences.

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend and predecessor for her comments. She is absolutely spot on. By the very difficult decisions that she took and by reducing the number of bodies that were not absolutely key, she has enabled me to come forward with a programme under which this Government will be spending more in this round than any preceding Government.

[Bill Esterson (Sefton Central) (Lab)]

Significant damage was done in Crosby and Hightown during the December floods. As a result, council officers told me this morning that we were very lucky to avoid further significant flooding this weekend. Cuts to flood defence funding since 2010 mean that many communities have now been left vulnerable to further flooding, so will the Secretary of State ensure that funding is made available for the early repair of the flood defences that have been damaged?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his question. Of course, his local council can now work with the Environment Agency on partnership funding. I am not sure of the exact physical circumstances, but if there is a possible scheme, there is now a real chance of getting that scheme over the wire. He makes a good point about the maintenance of schemes, and that has been a daily question in our Cobra meetings and our DEFRA meetings to make absolutely sure that any breaches were mended. I pay tribute to the Environment Agency for the rapid manner in which it worked through the night, certainly in early December, to put right those breaches.

[Anne Marie Morris (Newton Abbot) (Con)]

Prevention is undoubtedly better than cure, and I wonder whether the Secretary of State agrees that, in addition to wonderful flood prevention schemes, education is critical. In my constituency, one of the fatalities involved a misguided rescue attempt. Does my right hon. Friend also agree that we should ensure that councils work with parishes to make sure that plans are in place? No plans were in place in some of my coastal villages, and that was exactly where we needed them.

[Mr Paterson]

My hon. Friend makes an interesting and valid comment, and I hope that she will contribute to our review. She points out that several absolutely tragic deaths in recent weeks were really unnecessary—if only people had paid attention to the warnings. One cannot fault the Environment Agency for putting out a huge number of warnings using every possible medium, and we need to ensure that those warnings are heeded.

[John Woodcock (Barrow and Furness) (Lab/Co-op)]

The high tides and strong winds of recent days have caused real problems on Walney island, which is home to about 13,000 of my residents. We have had a long struggle to try to get adequate protection against coastal erosion, which threatens many homes on Earnse bay, so will the Secretary of State put a rocket up the Marine Management Organisation so that it issues a licence without further delay to enable such work to begin? Experts say that if we do not act, Walney could be split into two or three separate islands within 20 or 30 years.

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his question. He makes a valid point, and it would be appropriate if he put it in writing to the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for North Cornwall (Dan Rogerson), so that we can take it up

[Sir Paul Beresford (Mole Valley) (Con)]

I thank the Secretary of State for his statement. He will be aware that the river that gives my constituency its name flooded and devastated the north of my constituency, as well as the north of the adjacent constituencies to the east and west. The actions of the utility organisations and councils and neighbours in many areas were terrific and offset some of the damage, but the effects will take a long time to overcome. I am delighted that he talks of a review and more money, but I am cautiously aware that we in Surrey usually do not get a decent slice of what is available, so I am putting in a direct bid now. I will be asking the leader of Surrey county council to work with me, the Environment Agency and the utilities to put together ideas for a report. Will the Secretary of State accept that report and agree to meet a small deputation that will push the report?

[Mr Paterson]

My hon. Friend tempts me with his question, but I commend his plan to talk to his local council. The partnership mechanism that we have introduced has enabled several schemes that had previously stalled to get over the bar, so if there is a suitable scheme for his local rivers I strongly recommend that he work with his council to draw up a bid with the Environment Agency. Such a proposal will be assessed alongside all the other schemes.

[Ms Margaret Ritchie (South Down) (SDLP)]

I thank the Secretary of State for his statement. He referred to the fact that certain areas in Northern Ireland were flooded. As the representative of such a constituency, may I ask him to hold immediate discussions with the Secretary of State for Transport to ensure that any cuts to coastguard services will not have an impact on coastal communities in Northern Ireland that were greatly affected by coastal flooding and surges?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for raising that important point. The Under-Secretary of State for Transport, my hon. Friend the Member for Wimbledon (Stephen Hammond), is in the Chamber, and as the question is about a transport matter, it is probably more appropriate for the hon. Lady to write directly to him.

[Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)]

I commend the Secretary of State for his personal commitment and energy over the Christmas and new year period; while many of us were enjoying our holidays, he was working in his Department. I should also, of course, mention the hard work of the emergency services and the Environment Agency. What discussions has he held with the Association of British Insurers to ensure that those affected by floods will be reimbursed as quickly as possible?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his comments and for reflecting the tremendous work of those in the Environment Agency and the other services. We raised this matter early after the first flood, and ambassadors of the Environment Agency went to check that members of the public were getting satisfactory responses from their insurance companies. The Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for North Cornwall, spoke to the ABI on several occasions to ensure that that was being followed up, and the matter was raised at Cobra this morning. I am pleased to say that, at the moment, we have not heard of any complaints that insurance companies are being slow in sending out assessors. However, at that very difficult time when someone’s property has flooded, the one thing that they want is to get their insurance sorted out, so we would obviously welcome hearing from hon. Members about any cases where there have been problems.

[Clive Efford (Eltham) (Lab)]

In the early hours of Christmas eve, 35 homes in Westhorne avenue in my constituency suffered an avoidable flood when a grill in the Quaggy river became completely blocked. It was only a few hundred yards away from a multi-million pound flood alleviation scheme, but, sadly, the water did not reach there because the Environment Agency had failed to ensure that the grill was kept clear. This has left my constituents in a difficult situation. What they need now is for the Environment Agency to ’fess up and accept its responsibility for the incident so that they can start to make their claims. Will the Secretary of State contact the Environment Agency on my behalf?

[Mr Paterson]

The hon. Gentleman reports on an unfortunate case. The appropriate measure is for him to send the details to the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for North Cornwall, and we will take the matter up with the Environment Agency.

[Mr John Redwood (Wokingham) (Con)]

Does the Secretary of State agree that a number of small schemes to improve the capacity of ditches, culverts and streams could make a lot of difference? My constituency has had huge development on flood plain, and every time we have these situations we always get too many properties flooded because of defective maintenance or because the ditches and culverts are not big enough.

[Mr Paterson]

My right hon. Friend is absolutely spot on. A big difference can be made by micro-management of micro-problems, such as the one cited in the previous question. Not everything can be done by central Government, national institutions, local councils or even parish councils. In rural areas, we are setting up pilots to allow local landowners the right on the ground to maintain low-risk areas and to clear out small rivers.

[Mrs Madeleine Moon (Bridgend) (Lab)]

At the end of last week, high-sea surges and high winds brought water over the coastal protection in Porthcawl, both at West drive and in Newton. Local council staff were out quickly, clearing up the debris along the roadways. The Environment Agency was excellent. None the less, there are huge financial consequences because we have to repair the sea protection and pay for the staff coverage during the clear-up. What money will be available to the Environment Agency and local councils in devolved Administrations to ensure that repairs can be done and compensation paid so that councils can carry on with the much needed flood protection works?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for her question. Nearly all the issues that she raised are devolved responsibilities for Ministers in Cardiff. However, if she wants to write to the Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, my hon. Friend the Member for Great Yarmouth (Brandon Lewis), we will see whether we can help.

[Richard Graham (Gloucester) (Con)]

No one in my constituency of Gloucester or in neighbouring Tewkesbury will ever forget the devastation caused by the floods of 2007 and the remarkable reaction and community spirit from our constituents to deal with it. However, the recommendations of the Pitt report took a long time to implement under the previous Government, and it was not until 2010 that the Environment Agency spent significant sums of money to build up flood prevention measures in the city of Gloucester, notably the Horsbere Brook relief pond, which was opened by my hon. Friend the Member for Newbury (Richard Benyon) in 2011.

Although the floods in 2012 and this year have affected Gloucestershire—anyone who lives by the River Severn should expect some consequences—none of my constituents’ houses have so far been flooded, though I stress the words “so far”. I pay tribute to the work of the Environment Agency, the city and county council, Severn Trent, which spent £15 million on a project to improve drainage and sewers, and many other agencies. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Environment Agency’s work and advance notice and warnings have been significantly improved by better technology which shows where the flooding is likely to impact much more effectively than it did six years ago?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his generous comments. I can confirm that we have implemented nearly all the recommendations of the Pitt report. One of the most important ones was the establishment of the flood forecasting centre, which brings together the Met Office and the Environment Agency. I pay tribute to the centre, whose work I have seen at very close quarters in recent days, for its great accuracy. I also pay tribute to the Environment Agency for the rapid manner in which it got the message out. My hon. Friend touches on one of the most important recommendations that came out of Pitt.

[Diana Johnson (Kingston upon Hull North) (Lab)]

The Government’s new flood insurance scheme excludes properties built after 2009, properties bought under the Government’s Help to Buy scheme, and small businesses and leaseholders. So can the Secretary of State confirm that the Prime Minister’s review will look at, and publish details of, the number of properties that have been flooded in recent weeks and those that will not be covered by the Government’s new insurance scheme?

[Mr Paterson]

We have already had the Committee stage of the Water Bill, which comes back to the House immediately after this statement and that would be the appropriate moment to raise these issues. We have said that we have to have a cut-off point, and it was 2009, when the last Government firmed up on the whole idea of building on floodplains. There has to be a firm cut-off point, and the longer this goes on, the bigger the burden will be on other hard-working families who are helping to pay the cross-subsidy.

[Sheryll Murray (South East Cornwall) (Con)]

My constituency has suffered from two sorts of flooding over this period, and some residents in Calstock and Lower Kelly are almost cut-off because the road collapsed into the river. The council has been really good in working with the local residents, but Cornwall suffers under the Bellwin scheme because a unitary authority was foisted on it by the Labour party, against the wishes of the people of Cornwall. Will my right hon. Friend speak to his colleagues in the Department for Communities and Local Government to see whether something can be done about the disproportionate way in which the Bellwin scheme works against Cornwall?

[Mr Paterson]

My hon. Friend raises an important point, and I am pleased to say that only this morning the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for North Cornwall and the Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, my hon. Friend the Member for Great Yarmouth met the leader and chief executive of Cornwall council to discuss the impact of the Bellwin scheme on Cornwall.

[Geraint Davies (Swansea West) (Lab/Co-op)]

As the former chair of Flood Risk Management Wales, which is charged with investing in flood defences and flood risk-management systems across Wales on behalf of the Environment Agency and the Welsh Government, I am very aware that although the Welsh coastline is more than a quarter of the size of the English coastline, we get only 5% of the money, because that is allocated on the basis of population. Given the severity of the conditions we face, will the Secretary of State look at the case, with the Treasury, for some contingency funding to deal with the damage caused in Wales and review that balance in the light of the growing risk from climate change?

[Mr Paterson]

The hon. Gentleman raises an interesting point, and probably the appropriate route is for him to write to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales, who liaises with the Welsh Government and with the Treasury here in Westminster.

[Jackie Doyle-Price (Thurrock) (Con)]

My right hon. Friend referred to the transport disruption caused by the weather conditions, and I should advise him that high winds have led to the closure of the Dartford-Thurrock bridge on three occasions during this period. Will he ensure that Cobra reviews the resilience of the road network on such occasions, so that that can inform future transport investment decisions?

[Mr Paterson]

Obviously, we had Department for Transport Ministers at every Cobra meeting. It is safe to say that, generally, the strategic road network worked extremely well, but my hon. Friend mentions high-profile routes that are exposed to winds, and my colleagues in the DFT will be examining that as part of the review.

[Alison McGovern (Wirral South) (Lab)]

My sympathies are with all those who have lost loved ones during this period, and I am sure the Secretary of State has said the same. May I tell him that Wirral organisations worked incredibly hard to keep going and to get back to normal during the adverse weather conditions? Unfortunately, their efforts, which should have been supported by the council, have been hampered somewhat by the extremity of the cuts that Wirral council faces at this time. He says that tomorrow the Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, the hon. Member for Great Yarmouth (Brandon Lewis) will be chairing a meeting of a ministerial recovery working group. Will that discuss how to assist the councils that have dealt with the biggest cuts this Government have doled out?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for her question and thank her for her expression of sympathy for all those who have suffered over the past few weeks. The Bellwin scheme is there to help exactly the sort of council she is talking about. She should work with her local council and encourage it to put in an application to the Department for Communities and Local Government. She can write to the Under-Secretary of State any time she likes, because he will take it up.

[Mr Nick Gibb (Bognor Regis and Littlehampton) (Con)]

The Environment Agency’s flood-alert service is a valuable early-warning system, but unfortunately it is not available to many households in Littlehampton and Bognor Regis. Given the serious flooding in my constituency in June 2012 and the fact that it is on a low-lying coastal plain, will the Secretary of State use his influence with the Environment Agency to ensure that the service is available to all my constituents?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for making that useful point. I think that the best thing for him to do would be to write to the Under-Secretary of State, my hon. Friend the Member for North Cornwall, so that we can put that in the mix and work with the Environment Agency on it.

[Ian Paisley (North Antrim) (DUP)]

I welcome the Secretary of State’s statement and add my thanks to the many agencies and staff in Northern Ireland, particularly the Police Service of Northern Ireland, which led the battle against the elements over the past few days and weeks. I congratulate him on ensuring that there was a good state of preparedness on this occasion, as people were warned when floods were imminent, in stark contrast to what had gone before. I hope that that vigilance will be maintained for the future. I ask that he continues to share information with the devolved regions so that that awareness is maintained. Will he condemn those people who took it upon themselves to steal sandbags from parts of the river bank in east Belfast, putting more houses at risk, and then sell them to vulnerable pensioners, which was utterly disgraceful? Will he also keep an especially watchful eye on Rathlin island, which remains cut off from sea transport? If that situation continues over the next few days, will he ensure that my constituents there will continue to receive attention, and hopefully a drop of supplies?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his comments. I am as shocked as anyone else in the House by the revelation that people were stealing sandbags at such a difficult time. We all saw on our television screens the extraordinary conditions in Belfast. There is probably no bigger an admirer of the PSNI in this House than me, so I happily endorse his comments. As far as Rathlin island is concerned, I received a communication on new year’s day from the hon. Member for Vauxhall (Kate Hoey), who wished me a happy new year from her cottage there. I am sure that we will hear from her if she gets stuck. Seriously, if people on Rathlin are having problems with transport, Members should take that up with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, who can then take it up with colleagues in the Department for Transport.

[Roger Williams (Brecon and Radnorshire) (LD)]

I join the Secretary of State in praising the emergency services that helped and protected communities in the face of flood and storm damage. In Wales those were mostly coastal towns that depend on tourism for their living. He has already said that it is a devolved matter, but will he work with his ministerial counterparts to ensure that there is a Barnett consequential for the Bellwin formula so that local authorities can reinstate the infrastructure and the towns can be ready to welcome tourists later in the year?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend, who raises an important Welsh point that we heard earlier. Obviously the Welsh Government were represented in the meetings of Cobra, and I talked with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales only this morning. I think that the appropriate route would be to write to him, because clearly consequentials have been cited in relation to the large Welsh coastline.

[Mr Barry Sheerman (Huddersfield) (Lab/Co-op)]

I remind the Secretary of State that when there has been flooding in my constituency it has been an awful experience, but it can also be months, and sometimes years, before homes are habitable again. It is a miserable process. Does he agree that the Environment Agency has come out very well from the recent troubles with flooding and inclement weather. Should he not now do something to restore morale in the Environment Agency, which he is well known to dislike, because its staff are very unhappy about the way they have been treated by his Government over the past three years?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful for some of the hon. Gentleman’s comments, but I honestly have to disagree. I have been to see people from the Environment Agency on the ground. Last week I was in Addington, where they were manning the control centre. Only this morning, I was near Maidenhead looking at the Jubilee river, in absolute pouring rain. Those guys have been working all over Christmas and their morale was absolutely tremendous. They are, quite rightly, really proud of what they have done. They have worked their guts out under very difficult conditions, and they have delivered. We estimate that approximately 1 million households are protected through the work of the Environment Agency and all those working in local councils. I am always struck by the real spirit among people in the Environment Agency and their determination to deliver, whatever the conditions. That also goes back to what happened at the beginning of January, when they were working overnight filling breaches on the east coast. I have the deepest respect for the hon. Gentleman, who has been in this House for a long time, and I do not like disagreeing with him, but on this occasion I honestly think he is wrong, and I am pleased to tell him so. I really do think that morale among people in the Environment Agency is tremendous—and of course they are buoyed up by the prospect of our very significant long-term programme for flood defences.

[Richard Benyon (Newbury) (Con)]

Twelve months ago I visited the Environment Agency to thank people for their work over last Christmas, and I visited many of the flooded homes, particularly those of farmers on the Somerset levels, who were mentioned by my hon. Friends the Member for Somerton and Frome (Mr Heath) and for Wells (Tessa Munt). We were able to do much to support them. However, we are left with the importance of remembering that the first two years of this Government were spent dealing with drought and the last two years have been spent dealing with really severe floods. It is right that we are encouraging investment in resilience in the water sector, and it has to be right that we continue to prioritise flood spending. Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is worth reminding the House that the previous Government’s so-called Darling plan would have made 50% cuts in capital spending across the Government, which would of course have had an impact on precisely the things that Opposition Members are complaining about today?

[Mr Paterson]

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend. I would like, on the record, to thank him, and my predecessor, for the tremendous work that they put in during their time working on these long-term programmes. What is fascinating about this statement is that it has flushed out the fact that the Labour party will not match our very ambitious long-term programme for flood defences.

[Steve McCabe (Birmingham, Selly Oak) (Lab)]

A constituent of mine has seen his flood risk premiums double to almost £2,500 in 12 months. Does the Secretary of State honestly believe that his Department is doing enough, quickly enough, for people such as Mr Clayton?

[Mr Paterson]

The statement of principles, which was the ad hoc arrangement left by the previous Government, was always going to end on 30 June last year, and I am sorry to say that the hon. Gentleman’s colleagues had done very little to prepare the ground for a replacement. After very detailed negotiation with the ABI, we have come to an agreement on a new programme. The relevant measure is going through the House as we speak, and he will have an opportunity to comment on it in the debate on the Water Bill later this afternoon.

[Peter Aldous (Waveney) (Con)]

Lowestoft in my constituency was badly affected by the North sea storm surge at the beginning of last month. In the past three and a half years the Government have made significant commitments to flood defences in terms of increasing funding and promoting innovative ways of carrying out works. As a result of the recent and ongoing floods, a considerable amount of additional work has been created in relation to preparing damaged defences, working up new schemes that had previously been regarded as long-term projects, and improving risk management procedures. In the light of what has happened in the past four to five weeks, will the Secretary of State be reviewing the funding arrangements for the Environment Agency and local authorities to ensure that they have the necessary resources to carry out this additional work and that local communities can get back on their feet as quickly as possible?

[Mr Paterson]

I am happy to repeat what I said earlier—that this Government will be spending more on flood defences in the course of these four years than any preceding Government, and we have set up a very ambitious £2.3 billion programme going right through to 2021. I very much hope that his constituents, councils and other entities put in bids to participate in these funds.

[Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab)]

People in Brampton in Chesterfield who were flooded in 2007 will have every sympathy with what people who have been flooded in recent weeks are going through, but they are still waiting for the River Rother flood alleviation scheme that the Government boasted about in 2010. In that context, the spending figures are very important. The Secretary of State made some claims that would give the impression that flood spending was going up. Can he confirm that the funding for flood defences in 2010-11 was £646 million, but in 2015-16, in real terms, it will be £100 million less? That is a very significant cut, not an increase, is it not?

[Mr Paterson]

I am sorry to disappoint the hon. Gentleman, but he is wrong. We are going to spend £2.3 billion over the course of this Parliament. The scheme he mentions may be a good candidate for partnership funding, which has helped get a whole number of schemes that were stuck beforehand over the barrier because they depended entirely on Environment Agency funding.

[Dr Matthew Offord (Hendon) (Con)]

I welcome the Secretary of State’s statement and congratulate him on his energetic performance over the Christmas period, when I saw him here and on our television screens informing the public. Does he agree that he saw a lot of surface water on his travels, and will he assure me and the House that he will have conversations with the Department for Communities and Local Government to ensure that local authorities are playing their part in clearing culverts to ensure that standing water on roads does not contribute to the worsening floods?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his comments. DCLG Ministers obviously played a key part in our Cobra meetings, and liaison with relevant local councils was discussed almost on a daily basis. That is a key local government responsibility that has been pursued with vigour by Ministers at the centre.

[Nia Griffith (Llanelli) (Lab)]

Lack of communication is one of the major complaints made by people whose public transport arrangements have been disrupted by adverse weather. Will the Secretary of State tell us what the Transport Secretary is doing to demand improvements from public sector and public transport providers, particularly those running stations and airports, so that people are not left for hours without any information whatsoever or have to surge from one platform to another because of conflicting messages? It is simply not good enough for people to be left waiting for hours and hours without any understanding of what is happening.

[Mr Paterson]

The hon. Lady is absolutely right and I entirely agree with her. There is nothing more frustrating for all the entities involved if telephone calls are not received and information is not passed on. That applies to transport organisations, airports, power companies and, obviously, local councils. That is definitely one of the things we will be looking at. People were really exasperated. The power system went out at Gatwick: there were no screens and no public address system, and people were, quite rightly, absolutely furious. That is a clear area that we want to look at. We will make absolutely sure that all the organisations delivering to the public on the ground have a means—and a back-up, which is really important—of receiving calls and getting information out. The hon. Lady is absolutely right.

[Sarah Newton (Truro and Falmouth) (Con)]

Will my right hon. Friend join me in thanking the hundreds of people who turned out in my constituency and across Cornwall not only to look out for their neighbours, but to support the whole range of organisations that are doing their level best to prevent damage from flooding? Will he also, as part of his review, listen to today’s advice from Falmouth coastguards for people to better understand the risks involved in water sports such as surfing in the recent weather conditions, not just to themselves, but to the emergency services that have to go out and save them should an accident occur?

[Mr Paterson]

I entirely endorse my hon. Friend’s comments about the amazing community-level activity by members of the public who helped their neighbours, families and friends. I also entirely endorse her comments on the need to somehow get the message across that those who do take part in splendidly energetic sports such as surfing also take account of the real dangers that can occur when the weather goes beyond the point at which it is not a safe activity.

[Debbie Abrahams (Oldham East and Saddleworth) (Lab)]

I also extend my sympathies to families and friends who have lost loved ones.

Further to the questions asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Garston and Halewood (Maria Eagle) and others, figures from the 2010 spending review show clearly that central Government spending on flood defences has reduced in real terms—in some cases by up to 20%—compared with, as shown in official documents, the increase of 75% in flood defence spending between 1997 and 2010. The Government have tried to shift the responsibility for investment and financial risk to individuals and communities. In the light of the devastation to individuals, families and communities as a result of the most recent flood, and given that, according to the Prime Minister, politics is about decision making, does the Secretary of State regret any decisions he has made during this time?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for expressing her sympathies, quite rightly, about those who have lost their lives, because that has been really shocking. All I can do is repeat what I said earlier—that in the course of this spending round, this Government will spend more than any other Governments have spent on flood defences. We have an ambitious programme to spend £2.3 billion on capital alone up to 2021 meaning that 165,000 properties will be protected up to 2015, which is 20,000 more than we originally planned, and that a further 300,000 properties will be protected up to 2021.

[Jonathan Evans (Cardiff North) (Con)]

Although my right hon. Friend has made it clear that he does not feel it is appropriate to deal with questions about Flood Re until later in the day, his statement made so many references to insurance that it is important for the Secretary of State and the Government to reflect on areas in which Flood Re does not offer insurance protection, such as properties in two council tax bands in Wales and, for instance, the small guest houses on the front of the marina in Aberystwyth that have been affected by appalling waves today.

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his question. I am perfectly happy to talk about Flood Re; I just thought that as there will be a debate later, and time is short now, it might be more appropriate to ask questions about it then.

My hon. Friend raises the issue of guest houses. We have made it clear that council tax payment is the criterion on which to decide whether one is in or out of Flood Re. I am not totally up to speed on the exact details of the guest houses he mentioned, but he may find that many of them pay council tax.

[Andy Sawford (Corby) (Lab/Co-op)]

In November last year, October this year and again over the Christmas period—[Interruption.] That is the local radio station, BBC Radio Northampton, asking me about this very issue. For the third time in the past 12 months, Gainsborough road in Corby has been severely flooded, and residents were trapped in their homes for a week over Christmas. I have been passed around between the Environment Agency, Anglian Water and the county council, but nobody seems to want to take responsibility. Will the Secretary of State step in to help me stop this pass the parcel and get somebody to address this problem?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his question. I wish him well with his local radio, and I suggest that he writes to the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for North Cornwall (Dan Rogerson) on this particular issue. [Interruption.]

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I think the hon. Member for Corby (Andy Sawford) has elevated “on message” to a new level in that his communication with his local radio station, or a representative thereof, seems effectively to be synchronised.

[Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (The Cotswolds) (Con)]

May I say to my right hon. Friend that there has been more flood prevention work in the Cotswolds in the past two years than there was in the whole of the 13 years of the previous Government? Nevertheless, some of my constituents in Cirencester and the area have suffered sewage and water flooding for the second Christmas in succession. They really appreciated the work of the emergency services, particularly the Environment Agency. Will he ensure that the front-line services the Environment Agency so generously provided over this period will be maintained and, in particular, that flood maps are rapidly updated, so that they can get up-to-date insurance?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his comments, which reflect the very good work of the Environment Agency. I want to quote its chief executive, Dr Paul Leinster, whom I have been speaking to daily—I hope that this will reassure my hon. Friend—who has said: “The planned reductions in posts will not affect the Environment Agency’s ability to respond to flooding incidents and the Environment Agency will minimise the impact on other frontline services through the changes.”

[Mr Mark Spencer (Sherwood) (Con)]

Will the Secretary of State assure the House that he will do everything he can to make sure that local authorities, highway authorities, the Environment Agency and providers of sewerage and water services co-operate and collaborate, rather than pass the buck from one to the other?

[Mr Paterson]

My hon. Friend makes an important point. We have seen variability with the resilience forums. At the one I went to in Kent, it was quite clear from listening in on conversations that some agencies were really sharp, on the ball and participating, but that others were not quite as reactive. That is one area that we need to look at in the review, first, as I said earlier, to check whether information is getting through to some of these entities and, secondly, whether the entities are actually taking action. That is the area on which we need to concentrate.

[Sir Peter Bottomley (Worthing West) (Con)]

Some 20,000 homes are exposed to flood risk in Worthing and district. I hope that my right hon. Friend will join me in thanking David Robinson, the Environment Agency operations director for South Downs and Solent, and the colleagues of Kieran Stigant, the chief executive of West Sussex county council, for their preparatory work last year, which helped to reduce the risk over the Christmas and new year period. Will he join me in thanking the local media and those who came out with chainsaws to clear the roads, who helped to reduce the impact of the horrendous conditions, which included tides that were up to a metre higher than expected?

[Mr Paterson]

I am very happy to join my hon. Friend in thanking and congratulating the senior members of the Environment Agency and all the staff who have worked so hard in his area. I am also happy to congratulate and thank all those on the ground who came out with chainsaws to work in such a public-spirited manner, as has been touched on by other Members.

[Nicola Blackwood (Oxford West and Abingdon) (Con)]

My constituency has also flooded, which has led to one tragedy and widespread disruption and anxiety. I join the Secretary of State in paying tribute to the Environment Agency and the emergency services for their tireless work over the Christmas period. However, despite their ever-increasing water bills, my constituents are again facing foul water flooding from sewers that simply cannot cope with flooding. What is he doing to put pressure on water companies to be more prepared for flood events and to ensure that we prevent these very distressing incidents from recurring?

[Mr Paterson]

My hon. Friend raises a very important point. Very few water shortages have been reported, but we have had incidents of sewage flooding, which she has touched on. Apart from all the other problems of flooding, that is horrendous. We will certainly look at that issue and the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for North Cornwall, will talk to the water companies about it.

[Eric Ollerenshaw (Lancaster and Fleetwood) (Con)]

In thanking the Secretary of State for the £67 million that he agreed to in the autumn for the renewal of the flood defences around Fleetwood at Rossall, may I ask him whether there is any chance of his persuading the Treasury to increase the valuation that it places on agricultural land so that we can justify greater investment that goes beyond 30 years in the sea defences around Glasson and Thurnham in my constituency?

[Mr Paterson]

My hon. Friend raises an important point. We have the conundrum that we must protect agricultural land that is of a lower value than land on which property is built and land in the cities. Of course, the risk that lives will be lost is also lower than in cities. The Environment Agency faces that conundrum. There is a matrix to evaluate each project. The Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for North Cornwall, and I are more than happy to talk to him about the details of the case that he mentions.

[Caroline Nokes (Romsey and Southampton North) (Con)]

Romsey has been very badly affected over the past fortnight by high levels in the River Test, massive surface water run-off and, most particularly, effluent from a Victorian drainage system that simply cannot cope. My huge thanks go to Romsey’s retained firefighters who worked to pump out houses. Will my right hon. Friend assure me that he will work closely with colleagues in the Department for Communities and Local Government to look at areas where housing development is planned on greenfield sites, but where there is already a problem with drainage systems that cannot cope?

[Mr Paterson]

My hon. Friend raises a very important point. It is completely crazy to have new housing projects that do not have adequate drainage for the conditions. The Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for North Cornwall, is listening carefully. As we go through the review, she might like to write to him with her recommendations.

[Bob Stewart (Beckenham) (Con)]

Apart from in Maidstone in my county of Kent, were military forces deployed in the United Kingdom over Christmas and the new year to deal with flooding?

[Mr Paterson]

To the best of my knowledge, the only case was a couple of days ago, when 90 soldiers helped to fill sandbags at very short notice in Maidstone.

[Henry Smith (Crawley) (Con)]

I, too, welcome the comments that my right hon. Friend has made about better passenger information, following the incident in which people were stranded at Gatwick over Christmas and the new year. Will he join me in thanking West Sussex fire and rescue service for rescuing a number of elderly residents in Ifield Green? Will he also join me in recognising that, were it not for the significant capital investment in the Environment Agency’s scheme at Tilgate lake, which was realised over the past few years, the flooding in my constituency could have been a lot worse?

[Mr Paterson]

I thank my hon. Friend, and I am glad he endorses our views on getting information across to the public in various forums, particularly at his nearby airport. I am delighted to hear that the flood scheme worked effectively, and his constituents will be among those in the 1 million properties that were protected during this difficult period.

[Mr Marcus Jones (Nuneaton) (Con)]

Many of my constituents in St Nicolas and Weddington wards are concerned about the spectre of new housing development on greenfield land, when there is already a significant flood risk to existing property. Will my right hon. Friend assure me that priority will be given to ensuring that new housing developments do not cause more flood blight?

[Mr Paterson]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to raise the matter. It is absurd, given the knowledge that we now have, to build houses or anything else on a flood plain. It is good that the Environment Agency objects to planning applications that it thinks are unwise. In the first half of last year there were 26,060 such objections to planning applications, and 99.6% of those objections were endorsed. Our new planning guidance is clear that development should be located away from flood risk whenever possible, and as my hon. Friend suggests, the Environment Agency is active in vetting planning applications.

[Neil Carmichael (Stroud) (Con)]

I certainly congratulate the agencies and the Secretary of State for all that has been done in the past few weeks, but given that a theme today has been that agencies must work together, will he consider asking for a review of how that might be encouraged? I have various examples from my constituency of agencies needing to work together more, such as on drainage in Woodchester, sewerage in Slimbridge and the Severn estuary flood review. That all shows the need to encourage agency co-operation.

[Mr Paterson]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We should get this in perspective by saying that there was good co-operation across the country, with enormous work put in by the Environment Agency, councils and those in the fire brigade and transport organisations. However, we can do better. He is right that there were a number of cases on the ground in which a few organisations could have been better informed, reacted quicker and done more. That is what we want to examine. We need to get the system sorted out so that it is much more homogeneous and uniform, but let us get it in perspective—I think there were only a few cases in which things went really badly wrong.

[Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con)]

Across the country, water and power engineers, local authority and emergency service workers, volunteers and others have done their level best. They are ordinary men and women doing extraordinary things in exceptionally difficult circumstances.

As the Secretary of State said in his statement, the performance of some utilities and local authorities left room for improvement. Where those few councils and utilities have performed badly, almost by definition it will have been because of bad decisions made, usually, by highly paid chief executives. Will the Secretary of State host a meeting, together with other Government Departments, and invite the 10 worst-performing and the 10 best-performing utilities and local authorities, so that one group might mentor the other?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his question, and that is an interesting idea. We will progress the review by examining the cases in which we think things have gone well, and as I touched on in answer to the previous question, I think that there were only a few cases that showed a need to see how we can co-ordinate better. The co-ordination is the key point.

[Dr Thérèse Coffey (Suffolk Coastal) (Con)]

Over Christmas, it was clear that households and businesses in Snape, Eyke and Southwold were still suffering from the floods earlier in December. Can the Secretary of State assure me that the role of internal drainage boards will continue to be enhanced, and will he consider with the Department of Energy and Climate Change and others a sensitive scheme of felling trees in sensitive areas to prevent trees from bringing down power lines?

[Mr Paterson]

IDBs certainly have a great role to play, and I am a strong supporter of them. It is all part of our long-term proposal to push responsibility for low-risk waterways down to as local a level as possible. That is how we can help to free up a lot of those waterways, which have been blocked because work on them was stopped under the previous Government. I am happy to discuss my hon. Friend’s other question with her directly.

[Martin Vickers (Cleethorpes) (Con)]

May I refer my right hon. Friend back to the floods of 5 and 6 December, and thank him for his visit to my constituency in the immediate aftermath? Subsequent meetings with the Environment Agency have suggested that it will prepare both a short and long-term strategy, and my residents—particularly in Barrow Haven, which has been flooded twice in the past six years—are anxious for those plans to be implemented speedily. Can my right hon. Friend give a categorical assurance that he will do all he can to ensure that the Environment Agency carries out that work?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Paterson]

I enjoyed my visit to my hon. Friend’s constituency. It was an extraordinary event—I think people told me that it was the worst weather they had had in 500 years, which shows what the Environment Agency has had to cope with recently. I would not want to jump the agency’s list of priorities, so perhaps my hon. Friend would be happy to write to the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for North Cornwall, who will take up the matter, and the particular details of the project he mentions, directly with the Environment Agency.

[Mr Graham Stuart (Beverley and Holderness) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to be the end-stop to this statement. I have been a critic of the Environment Agency in the past, but will my right hon. Friend join me in congratulating it on its staff and on the way it is working in partnership with East Riding of Yorkshire council to deliver a much more joined-up approach, as mentioned by colleagues across the House? Can he assure residents in Kilnsea which was flooded—businesses were also flooded there—that remote, rural spots such as that will see their flood defences prioritised for investment, and that they will see that bank renewed, which desperately needs to be done?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend and admire his patience in waiting until last. I nearly visited his constituency and saw the advantages of the Hull barrier, which is used as a reservoir at low tide to drain water from his constituency. If he has a particular project in mind, as with the preceding question I think the appropriate route is to write directly to my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, who will take it up with the Environment Agency.

Common Agricultural Policy in England

Owen Paterson Excerpts

Thursday 19th December 2013 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Owen Paterson)]

Today I am publishing the Government’s response to the recent public consultation on the implementation of the common agricultural policy (CAP) in England. This will determine how we distribute £15 billion of funds over the next CAP period. It will see us investing at least £3.5 billion in rural development schemes, of which over £3 billion will be spent on improving the environment.

The decisions I am announcing are:

12% will be transferred from farmers’ pillar 1 direct payments to pillar 2 rural development. This money will improve the environment, grow the rural economy and create jobs.

A review will be held in 2016 into the demand for agri-environment schemes and the competitiveness of English agriculture. This is with the intention of moving to a 15% transfer rate from pillar 1 direct payments to support the final two years of the pillar 2 rural development programme.

5% of the new rural development programme funding will be allocated to the local enterprise partnerships (LEPs) through the growth programme. In total 13% of rural development funds will be spent on growth-focused schemes, including LEADER and farming competitiveness. I will ensure that there is a meaningful role for LEPs to help deliver growth through all of these elements of the programme.

The new CAP greening requirements will be implemented through the basic measures set out in the EU regulation. We will work with interested groups on how we apply the ecological focus area options to deliver real benefits for pollinators without adding complexity.

We will help upland farmers by equalising the upland and lowland direct payment rates. We will take a decision about the moorland rate in spring 2014. This will allow us to carry out further modelling of the impact on upland farms.

We will keep the implementation of direct payments as simple as possible by applying the minimum reduction on basic payments over €150,000 and keeping rules on the new active farmer test to a minimum.

Having considered carefully the wide range of views expressed through the consultation, I believe that this package delivers better value for taxpayers, is fair to English farmers and supports this Government’s commitment to improve our natural environment. Environmental schemes will get a higher proportion of the rural development budget than now.

In addition to making ecological focus areas deliver benefits for pollinators, my Department will work closely with farming and environmental organisations on how the Campaign for the Farmed Environment will deliver targets at local level for protecting watercourses, providing habitat for farmland birds, wildlife and pollinators. We will review the success of this at the end of 2015.

Rural business schemes have already successfully transformed the prospects of thousands of businesses and farms, created 8,500 rural jobs across the country, safeguarding another 9,700. We want to build on this track record of success.

Within a smaller overall CAP budget these decisions will help to grow the rural economy and improve the environment.

Tree Health and Plant Biosecurity Taskforce

Owen Paterson Excerpts

Thursday 12th December 2013 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Owen Paterson)]

I would like to update the House on the progress that my Department has made in implementing the recommendations of the tree health and plant biosecurity taskforce, which published its report in May. This is further to my written ministerial statements of 20 May 2013, Official Report, column 54WS, and 16 July, Official Report, column 78WS, in which I accepted three of the recommendations relating to risk assessment, contingency planning and appointment of a chief plant health officer, and agreed to provide an update before the end of the year. I would like to thank the taskforce for their review of UK plant health controls.

I have made plant health one of my Department’s top priorities. Since then, we have made rapid progress in meeting that commitment and in implementing the taskforce’s recommendations. A single, prioritised plant health risk register has now been produced and we have started to use it to identify risks from specific pests and diseases and agree priorities for action. In addition we have commenced work to put in place new procedures for preparedness and contingency planning to ensure we can predict, monitor and control the spread of pests and pathogens. We expect to see the results of this work next summer and this will help ensure the UK is ready to deal effectively with future incursions of diseases into this country and is also able to respond better to those that are already established. Finally, recruitment for the senior post of chief plant health officer is under way and will be completed early in the new year.

The remaining recommendations are to:

Review, simplify and strengthen governance and legislation.

Improve the use of epidemiological intelligence from EU/other regions and work to improve the EU regulations concerned with tree health and plant biosecurity.

Strengthen biosecurity to reduce risk at the border and within the UK.

Develop a modern, user-friendly system to provide quick and intelligent access to information about tree health and plant biosecurity.

Address key skills shortages.

I can confirm today that I am accepting the remaining taskforce recommendations, and that in order to deliver these, my Department is developing an enhanced plant health programme. This programme will encompass all plants since the threats facing our plants are not restricted to trees. Details of this programme will be set out in a new plant health strategy, which I will publish in the spring of 2014. The strategy will set out a new approach to biosecurity for our plants and will include:

Pre-border activities to reduce the risk of pests and diseases arriving here from overseas, including our work with countries beyond the EU to drive up standards.

Activities at the border to reduce the risk of pests and diseases entering the EU and the UK.

Action inland to step up surveillance and improve preparedness.

All of this will be informed by the risk register, which will be published in January. It will be underpinned by a programme of work to build skills and capacity on plant health and to raise awareness of the threats facing our plants. I have reprioritised resources to enable this.

Since Government alone cannot make the radical changes needed to protect our plants from pests and disease the strategy will include details of what industry, environmental groups and the general public can do to help us to protect our plants from pests and disease. We will be sharing an initial version of the strategy with industry and environmental groups at a summit on 20 January next year to seek their input and to develop areas where they can contribute and we can work together. We will then finalise an agreed strategy at which point I will provide a further update to the House.