Last month was the wettest January since records began more than 100 years ago – and the deluge is showing no signs of letting up. Amid the whirlwind of Cobra meetings, destroyed infrastructure and devastation to land and properties, accusations are flying that the Environment Agency (EA) and water companies are not doing enough.
The EA was first in the spotlight, but a hatchet job from Channel 4’s Dispatches last week swivelled the guns in the direction of water companies. The programme outlined how infrastructure investment was static, dividends were spiralling and water companies were allegedly not doing enough to prevent sewer flooding.
But companies would beg to differ. Across England and Wales, water and sewerage companies spent £176 million on reducing flooding risk for properties last year – 5.6 per cent of the total gross capital expenditure on wastewater. This figure is set to double this year, according to submissions to Ofwat.
It’s not even as though water firms have direct responsibility for flood management. These lines of command are Byzantine. Organisations responsible for different types of flooding include water firms, local councils and the EA – and often, responsibilities overlap.
When river or sea defences are breached, responsibility lies with the EA, but the consequence of the breach is that sewers overflow. At this point, it becomes the responsibility of the water companies. But as consultant Alan Bland says, sewers cannot be designed to cope with surface flooding caused by the failure of flood defences.
Southern Water is at the sharp end of this year’s deluge, haemorrhaging £70,000 a day on keeping its sewers flowing. All it can do, it says, is address the symptoms of flooding by pumping out water and sealing manhole covers, while the malady of extreme weather on top of failing drainage systems and overwhelmed flood defences are the cause – and beyond its control.
Another company hit hard by sewer flooding recently, Thames Water maintains that it is working closely with the EA and local authorities. The company, which is currently fighting a £14.1 million fine for alleged misreporting of sewer flooding, says although there is clarity over responsibilities for groundwater and floodwater, it will step in and “get involved” beyond its statutory remit if customers face sewage flooding.
A number of recommendations in the 2008 Pitt Review, which could have gone some way to clearing up the confusion, have been dropped. These include the implementation of a “single unifying Act that addresses all sources of flooding, clarifies responsibilities and facilitates flood risk management”, which was omitted from the 2010 Flood and Water Management Act. A proposed Cabinet Committee to deal with flooding never materialised. Bland says everyone knows what they are supposed to do – they just don’t always do it. For example, planning authorities gave the green light to build more than 38,000 homes on flood plains in England in the ten years to 2011.
When it comes to flooding, water companies have limited responsibilities and even less control.