Agenda and minutes

(Assistant to the Chief Executive)  To report the appointment of any substitute members for the meeting.

It was reported that Councillor Mrs R Brookes was substituting for Councillor K Angold-Stephens.

(Assistant to the Chief Executive). To declare interests in any items on the agenda.

In considering whether to declare a personal or a prejudicial interest under the Code of Conduct, Overview & Scrutiny members are asked pay particular attention to paragraph 11 of the Code in addition to the more familiar requirements.

This requires the declaration of a personal and prejudicial interest in any matter before an OS Committee which relates to a decision of or action by another Committee or Sub Committee of the Council, a Joint Committee or Joint Sub Committee in which the Council is involved and of which the Councillor is also a member.

Paragraph 11 does not refer to Cabinet decisions or attendance at an OS meeting purely for the purpose of answering questions or providing information on such a matter.

No declarations of interest were made.

To note the minutes of the meeting held on 20 July 2009.

RESOLVED:

That the notes of the last meeting of the Panel held on 20 July 2009 be agreed.

Recommendation:

1.                  That the Terms of Reference for this Task and Finish Panel be reviewed; and

2.                  That the Panel agrees a preferred starting time for the Panel meetings.

In order to help the Panel, a set of ‘Notes for guidance’ for the operating of a Task and Finish Panel is also attached.  This sets out how a Task and Finish Panel should ideally go about scoping its programme of work, gathering information and evidence.  The note also suggests how final reporting back to the main Overview and Scrutiny Committee and the larger Council is undertaken.  A draft layout for a Final Report is also attached as a useful practical example of what the Panel are required to produce.

(1)        The Panel reviewed the Terms of Reference. They noted some anomalies and made the following changes:

• That the current item 2 be deleted and replaced with: “That the Task and Finish Panel respond to the Flood and Water Management Bill consultation.”
• That item 5 had the words “including flood risk assets within the District Public Infrastructure and residential properties” added to the end after “…forms of flooding..”.
• That the following sentence in item 7 be deleted: “Essex County Council have not, so far, indicated the likely split of responsibilities between County and Districts but it is reasonable to assume that Districts will have a role to play in implementing the recommendations, specially a District like EFDC which takes flood risk management seriously.”
• That the word ‘this’ be replace with ‘the’ in the last sentence of item 7.
• Under Aims and Objectives, the second to last paragraph should read “the Budget Process of 2010/11”.
• That officers consult with the finance section to establish if the Panel should put an interim bid in for next years budget round.

(2)        On consideration, the Panel decided that they would prefer a 7.30 start time for their meetings.

To receive a presentation on the background and future work needed for the Pitt Review.

The Assistant Director Technical Services, Kim Durrani, took the Panel through the impact of the Pitt Review on the Council. He noted that the panel had jumped ahead of the process by responding to the Flood and Water Management Bill at their first meeting.

The Bill was devised to try and manage and/or control local flooding and heavy rainfall which resulted in the 2007 floodings. It was estimated that in the United Kingdom during the July 2007 flooding event, 40% of flooding was due to fluvial (fluvial covers ditches, streams and rivers) and 60% to surface water flooding. Consequently the government asked for a review from Sir Michael Pitt; some of the recommendations from which are being added to the Flood and Water Bill. The Bill seeks to address all forms of flooding as in the past efforts were focused on dealing with only fluvial and coastal flooding.

Councillor Mrs Brookes asked for clarification as to what was a ‘1:100’ risk. This is complex; an extreme flood event is often categorised as having a probability of occurrence of greater than 1 in 100 years. This is a way of expressing flooding probability and means that if there is a 1 in 100 chance of flooding in any given year, this can also be described as having a 1 per cent chance of flooding each year. However, if a flood occurs, it does not mean another flood will not occur for 99 years. A 1 in 100 year flood should more correctly be termed a flood with a 1% probability in any given year.

National Modelling indicates 1900 properties are at ‘significant risk of flooding’ in the Epping Forest District. EFDC with their local knowledge estimated that 823 properties were at risk from ordinary water courses and 1882 properties at risk from rivers and other watercourses.

The Pitt Review recommends that the Environmental Agency should have overall control over all flooding with County or Unitary Councils acting as Lead Authorities. As EFDC has gained detailed local knowledge over the years; it might not be wise to leave it all to County or Regional level.

Councillor Mrs Grigg noted that over the years, a lot of flood defences had been constructed in the district and the council had built up a lot of expertise in the field.

Implementing the current recommendations by Pitt and the Bill would also give County the responsibility for flash flooding and emergency response, officers thought that that a local response would be better and quicker to mobilise. But not every district would have this ability.

The Government had given local authorities a steer, saying that “implementing Pitt doesn’t need to wait for the Bill”.

Officers highlighted some of the pertinent recommendations made by the Pitt Review:

• Officers accepted recommendation 14 that local authorities should lead on the management of local flood risk.
• Recommendation 15 entailed a lot of work especially in establishing ownership and legal responsibility.
• Recommendation 16 required maps and a flood risk register which was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

No other business was raised.

To agree a date and time for the next meeting of this Panel.

The Panel decided to arrange another meeting either on 10^th or 15^th December 2009 at 7.30pm. The Democratic Services Officer to liaise with members to establish a viable date.