Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Earl Cathcart (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 6 April 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Flood and Water Management Bill.


Flood and Water Management Bill

My Lords, Amendment 100 seeks simply to raise the question of how the utility companies can play their part in contributing towards flood management. It proposes that the Secretary of State may, by order, require utility companies to report on how resilient their infrastructure is to withstand flooding. I accept that the Bill has been constructed so that stakeholders will be consulted on the national strategies, but I raise this point as an opportunity to debate what interaction there will be with the utility companies. Plainly, we must look at the water companies and sewerage undertakers as they will, necessarily, be involved in any flood planning or post-flood considerations. We must—as I am sure the strategies will—consider the effects of leakage from water supply pipes and how saturated the ground around them can become, which of course lessens the absorbent capacity of the soil in the event of high levels of rain or groundwater. That will have an impact, of course, and it will be essential to know whether the water and sewerage infrastructure, much of which is Victorian, is holding up, before and after flooding. One presumes that if it was discovered that there had been damage to a major sewer or drain, that would mean a change in priorities for the authorities and it would be important for that to be reported. As well as the obvious utilities such as water and sewerage, my amendment is also intended to cover gas and electricity. As a result of flooding, it is possible that there will be a loss of power in wide swathes of the country, at considerable cost and inconvenience. It is important for the resilience of power lines, gas pipes and other utilities essential for the smooth running of a modern economy to be assessed and for information about their general health to be made available to the authorities, which will then be able to make decisions based on the reports’ findings. I accept that the Minister may not wish to accept the amendment in the form in which it has been tabled, but I hope that he will find the suggestions useful and that, in turn, he may be able to give assurance on the record that such concerns will be taken into consideration. I beg to move.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
718 c581GC 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Codes of practice Agriculture Conservation Coastal areas Concessions Coastal erosion Fees and charges Flood control EU law Land drainage Insurance Inland waterways Horticulture Environment Agency Droughts Floods Irrigation Pilot schemes Planning Standards Water Voluntary organisations Telecommunications Wildlife Water companies Sewers Scouts and guides Social tariffs
Legislation
Flood and Water Management Bill 2009-10
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk