---

Flood and Water Management Bill

My Lords, the noble Lords’ amendments are useful in allowing us to consider catchment areas. I understand that this country, as far as water management goes, is widely admired for its organisation by catchment area rather than by political boundaries. To my mind, that is entirely correct, as water plainly does not know whether it is in one district council area or another. As far as I can see, the Bill is structured in a way that allows co-ordination between authorities which will be affected by each other’s decisions. The noble Lord, Lord Greaves, raised an interesting question about how differences will be resolved should two areas find themselves with incompatible approaches. What means will be used to resolve the differences? Will the Environment Agency have a role to play? I will be interested to hear the Minister's comments. I also have some questions about downstream authorities. I can see an analogy between a flood and a car crash involving several cars. Who bears responsibility? Is it the last car in the line or the one immediately behind you? Likewise, if flooding affects a downstream area, where does the responsibility lie? Is it with each authority lying further upstream or with the one receiving the water? Or, is there a different level of responsibility depending on what actions each authority took or failed to take? If my land at the bottom of the valley suffers flooding damage due to decisions or mistakes elsewhere, what avenue of redress can I pursue? I fully expect that the Minister will be able to provide reassurance on this point, perhaps explaining the co-ordinating role played by the Environment Agency, with its national strategy, and the responsibilities of the lead local authorities to co-operate with each other. However, it would be very useful to have on the record a clear step-by-step guide to how the schemes will be managed. Will the department be producing guidance and, if so, when might we expect to see it?