Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, whether her Department has taken steps to establish (a) programmes and (b) facilities for training emergency services on flooding and flood resilience.
Answered by Rebecca Pow - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The Environment Agency is actively engaged in partnership working with the emergency services and the military to ensure resilience and a readiness to respond to all environmental emergencies, including flooding. Environment Agency teams carry out joint training with the Fire and Rescue Service and other organisations. This involves the deployment of assets such as temporary barriers and mobile pumps to prepare for flooding. The Environment Agency’s work with the Fire and Rescue Services and the National Fire Chiefs Council has resulted in the supply of equipment and training to Fire and Rescue Services. The Environment Agency provides evidence and advice to inform the Government and support others to develop skills and capacity. The Environment Agency’s mapping and modelling services inform and warn communities and emergency responders about flood risk.
The Environment Agency also works as part of Local Resilience Forums alongside all emergency responders and other partners. Together they plan for prevention, control and reducing the impact of flooding on local communities. A similar approach is being developed with all emergency services, embedding the Joint Emergency Services Principles - ‘working together, saving lives, reducing harm’. The Environment Agency and Met Office work in collaboration as part of the Flood Forecasting Centre to provide a five-day national flood risk assessment. This provides a strategic summary for planning purposes, outlining all the relevant information from across England.
Asked by: Charlotte Nichols (Labour - Warrington North)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if her Department will make an assessment of the potential merits of introducing a (a) ban and (b) tax on artificial grass for commercial and domestic use.
Answered by Trudy Harrison
While the use of artificial grass is not a criminal activity and we have no plans to ban, limit or tax its use, the Government does recognise that, in itself, artificial grass has no value for wildlife. Its installation can have negative impacts on soil health, biodiversity and drainage for flood prevention or alleviation if installed in place of natural earth or more positive measures, such as planting flowers or trees or providing natural water features. The Government has not assessed the potential costs and opportunities of restricting the use of artificial grass products.
Improving biodiversity is a key objective for the Government. We prefer to help people and companies make the right choice, rather than banning or taxing items outright. For example, the Environment Act 2021 introduced a number of policies that will support the restoration of habitat. Biodiversity Net Gain, Local Nature Recovery Strategies and a strengthened biodiversity duty on public authorities will work together to drive action, including to create or restore habitats that enable wildlife to recover and thrive, while conservation covenants will help secure habitat for the long term.
Asked by: Charlotte Nichols (Labour - Warrington North)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if she will make it her policy to (a) ban the sale of or (b) tax artificial grass which is installed in commercial and domestic properties.
Answered by Trudy Harrison
While the use of artificial grass is not a criminal activity and we have no plans to ban, limit or tax its use, the Government does recognise that, in itself, artificial grass has no value for wildlife. Its installation can have negative impacts on soil health, biodiversity and drainage for flood prevention or alleviation if installed in place of natural earth or more positive measures, such as planting flowers or trees or providing natural water features. The Government has not assessed the potential costs and opportunities of restricting the use of artificial grass products.
Improving biodiversity is a key objective for the Government. We prefer to help people and companies make the right choice, rather than banning or taxing items outright. For example, the Environment Act 2021 introduced a number of policies that will support the restoration of habitat. Biodiversity Net Gain, Local Nature Recovery Strategies and a strengthened biodiversity duty on public authorities will work together to drive action, including to create or restore habitats that enable wildlife to recover and thrive, while conservation covenants will help secure habitat for the long term.
Asked by: Richard Holden (Conservative - North West Durham)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment his Department has made of the potential merits of restricting the use of (a) astro turf and (b) other plastic-based artificial grass products.
Answered by Trudy Harrison
The Government has not assessed the potential merits of restricting the use of astro turf or other plastic-based artificial grass products. However, we do recognise that these products, in themselves, have no value for wildlife. Their installation can have negative impacts on soil health, biodiversity and drainage for flood prevention or alleviation if installed in place of natural earth or more positive measures such as planting flowers or trees or providing natural water features.
Improving biodiversity is a key objective for the Government. We prefer to help people and companies make the right choice, rather than banning or taxing items outright. We are seeing more organisations, including the Royal Horticultural Society, helping to communicate the risks and issues surrounding the use of artificial grass in place of natural landscaping. While we have no current plans to ban the sale of artificial grass, in our recent call for evidence on commonly littered and problematic plastic items, we asked the public if there were any further plastic items we should consider for future policy action. We will review the feedback from the call for evidence and publish a response in due course.
In the 25 Year Environment Plan, we committed to introduce stronger new standards for green infrastructure and to support local authorities to assess provision. This new Green Infrastructure Framework will be launched by Natural England in December 2022. This will show what good green infrastructure looks like and help local authorities, developers and communities to improve provision in their area.
The Environment Act 2021 contains an ambitious package of reforms to restore and enhance nature and green spaces. This includes a new mandatory requirement for biodiversity net gain in the planning system, to ensure that new developments enhance biodiversity. In future, developments which involve the laying of artificial grass at the expense of natural landscaping, and are above a de minimis threshold, will be required to enhance biodiversity in other ways, through the biodiversity net gain requirement. This will incentivise more nature positive development.
Asked by: Fleur Anderson (Labour - Putney)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, whether the Government has made an environmental impact assessment of the use of plastic grass in (a) residential and (b) commercial settings.
Answered by Rebecca Pow - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The Government has not made an ecological assessment of the impact of the use of plastic grass in residential or commercial settings. We do however recognise that, in itself, artificial grass has no value for wildlife. Its installation can have negative impacts on soil health, biodiversity and drainage for flood prevention or alleviation if installed in place of natural earth or more positive measures such as planting flowers or trees or providing natural water features.
Asked by: Tulip Siddiq (Labour - Hampstead and Kilburn)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, whether the Build Back Better scheme to provide up to £10,000 for properties to install flood prevention measures will be available only to properties covered by the Flood Re scheme or to all flooded properties.
Answered by Rebecca Pow - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
Flood Re is a joint government and industry reinsurance scheme designed to help UK households at high risk of flooding to access affordable insurance. New regulations came into force on 1 April to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the scheme and promote uptake of Property Flood Resilience measures.
Flood Re can now pay claims from insurers which include an amount for resilient repair (Build-Back-Better) up to a value of £10,000 over and above the cost of like-for-like reinstatement for actual flood damage. This will help flooded households become more resilient and allow homeowners to return more quickly after any future flooding
Build-Back-Better will be available through a range of major insurance brands. To ensure consistency and fairness for all customers, insurers who choose to participate in Build-Back-Better are required to offer it on all policies across their home insurance offerings and not just on policies ceded to Flood Re.
Asked by: Rachael Maskell (Labour (Co-op) - York Central)
Question to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities:
To ask the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, what steps he is taking to help ensure that new planning developments must focus on surface water flooding prevention.
Answered by Stuart Andrew - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Culture, Media and Sport)
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was amended in July 2021 to make clear all sources of flood risk, including surface water, should be considered, to ensure that any new development is safe for its lifetime without increasing the risk of flooding elsewhere.
The NPPF prioritises the use of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) for all development in areas at risk of flooding. The Framework is also clear that SuDS should be incorporated in all major developments, unless there is clear evidence that this would be inappropriate.
Local Plans should be informed by a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA), which should take account of climate change in levels of flood risk by applying guidance provided by the Environment Agency. The SFRA should inform the strategic identification of land for development in the Local Plan.
In October 2021 the Government commenced a review of the case for implementing Schedule 3 to the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 concerning SuDS. This will look at the benefits and impacts of implementation as well as alternative methods for ensuring that SuDS are incorporated in future developments. The review is expected to conclude August 2022.
Furthermore, as part of our wider ambitions for an improved planning system we intend to review the NPPF to ensure that it contributes to climate change mitigation and adaption as fully as possible.
Asked by: Dave Doogan (Scottish National Party - Angus)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what steps his Department is taking to ensure that HMNB Clyde is protected from flooding; and how much do those measures cost.
Answered by Jeremy Quin
We closely monitor and track potential risks to our infrastructure, including flooding both now and into the future.
HM Naval Base Clyde has an extant Climate Infrastructure Risk Assessment that has modelled the potential impact of Climate Change on Sea Defences and Site Infrastructure. This has been independently validated by Ministry of Defence specialists and the Assessment concludes that HMNB Clyde's Sea Defences are adequate to meet potential sea level changes.
The risk of flooding has been integrated within new build project work at the Base, including increased provision of surface drainage and risk mitigating landscape features.
Specific funding for flood prevention is incorporated within Maintenance work and new build projects and is not separately identified.
Asked by: Ruth Jones (Labour - Newport West)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the adequacy of funding for flood prevention measures.
Answered by Rebecca Pow - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The Secretary of State is in regular contact with his Cabinet colleagues on a range of issues, including funding for flood prevention measures. This Government is investing a record £5.2 billion in around 2,000 new defence schemes which will better protect 336,000 properties. At present, we anticipate that floods capital and revenue investment from all sources will collectively exceed the level of investment up to 2027 that was recommended by the National Infrastructure Commission and the Environment Agency’s investment analysis.
Asked by: Rachael Maskell (Labour (Co-op) - York Central)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if he will focus new funding for flood prevention on flood mitigation through upper catchment management.
Answered by Rebecca Pow - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
Flood and coastal risk management (FCERM) investment takes place where the risk is highest, wherever it is across the country. This Government is investing a record £5.2 billion in FCERM schemes. As part of that investment, we are committed to doubling the number of schemes which include nature-based solutions, such as upper catchment measures.
The Environment Agency’s FCERM Strategy encourages greater use of nature-based solutions that take a catchment led approach to improve resilience to both floods and droughts.
The recently completed £15m national pilot programme of Natural Flood Management work has demonstrated the growing impact that these types of interventions can have, not only on managing flood risks but also helping to restore nature and reduce carbon emissions.