NTC Bale-Out Flood Defences Options

[Simon Kirby]

NTC are to consider a bale-out of the Environment Agency's flood defence scheme for Newbury at Monday's council meeting.

The scheme will protect some 450 homes and businesses from a one-in-a-hundred-year flooding of the River Kennet, but the EA are short £500k. WBC won't pay and they're asking NTC if they'd like to contribute.

I'm sure we'll be seeing much more of this kind of funding arrangement. The council tax raised by WBC is capped by central government, but there is no limit on the precept that a parish council can raise, so compliant parish councils are funding their principle council's projects to wriggle around the rules. The parish council is happy because it gives their otherwise pointless councillors something to discuss, and the primary council is happy because it raises more tax than the rules hsould allow. NTC's funding of the WBC warf toilets is a good example of this.

So should NTC fund the short-fall, and if it should where should the money come from?

It could raise £500k with a 50% increase in the precept, and as almost nobody pays any interest to what NTC gets up to it's quite unlikely anyone would notice the increase, hidden away as it is inside their council tax bill. Alternatively NTC could raise £500k with a bit of an ecconomy drive. For example, dropping the mayor for a term would allow them to save around £500k.

[Turin Machine]

And this will affect allotments, How ??

[Guest_xjay1337_*]

And this will affect allotments, How ??

Unfortunately I think it's a bit of a waste of money... If they are short £500k it's obviously a £million+ project and does it really cost a million quid to put some walls up along a river?

Besides, my old house already had gotten completely flooded out and needed a complete ground floor rebuild (it was completely stripped) so... bit late now!!

[NWNREADER]

I ask the question - is that a proper expenditure for a 'parish' council to incur?

[Simon Kirby]

I ask the question - is that a proper expenditure for a 'parish' council to incur?

That was my thought. The parish council doesn't appear to have the power to fund flood defences - see here for a list of powers - and if it hasn't the power any expenditure is ultra vires and the councillors could end up being personally liable. I'm guessing the Localism Bill would create some extra powers, but that's not here yet.

Assuming the parish has the power to fund flood defences, my gut feeling is that this isn't the kind of thing that should be done at the parish level. £500k civil engineering projects are very much what I'd expect WBC to be funding.

[Andy Capp]

I see. An action taken at parish level could adversely impact on another parish (water has to go somewhere).

[Simon Kirby]

I see. An action taken at parish level could adversely impact on another parish (water has to go somewhere).

That's not my problem with this, for me it's about the scale of the role of the parish council. For example, it's a traditional role of the parish to keep ditches clear and they have the power to do so under S.260 of the Public Health Act 1936. Ditches cross parish boundaries, and you might hope that parishes would talk to each other about the water one parish might send the way of another, but in any event ditch clearing, which serves an essential role in flood prevention, is a perfectly reasonable thing for the parish council to get involved in and spend the precept on.

But major civil works is a different matter. The Newbury flood alleviation scheme is a £1.7M project and for me it's the scale of it, both the financial cost and the scale of the civil engineering, that takes this outside the purview of the guardians of our civic litter bins and bus stop notice boards.

But the lack of a statutory power to fund flood defences is the killer. Everything that a parish council does requires an explicit statutory power, and I can't find one that would allow the Council to spend a bean on this - I'd be grateful if anyone could show me otherwise because I'm far from convinced I'm correct on this point. [Ed: OK, there's s139 of the Local Government Act 1972, but that only buys you a very small bean.]

[Richard Garvie]

It's not for the town council to spend this money.

[On the edge]

I think the gist of Simon's argument is that if one 'authority' can't meet its obligations from its allocated budget it shouldn't try and get another 'authority' to stump up instead.

This end us with massive unnecessary and pointless debate. If an agency finds its self short of funds - it should go back to its own political masters - not try and pass the buck elsewhere.

Trouble is NTC have made a rod for its own back by funding all sorts of things that are properly the responsibility of others. Public lavatories, neighbourhood wardens to name but two.

Regrettably the District Auditor seems only considers the arithmetical correctness of accounts and pays little heed to the correctness or otherwise of the funding.

[Darren]

Just do what has happened for years. Let Northcroft be a flood plain

[Simon Kirby]

Just do what has happened for years. Let Northcroft be a flood plain

It's not just Northcroft that floods, it's 450 homes and businesses that flood in the once-in-a-hundred-year event. The EA site is currently down for maintenance, but you can find the maps if you search for "Newbury Flood Alleviation Scheme".

[blackdog]

It's not just Northcroft that floods, it's 450 homes and businesses that flood in the once-in-a-hundred-year event. The EA site is currently down for maintenance, but you can find the maps if you search for "Newbury Flood Alleviation Scheme".

You forgot the allotments!

[Andy Capp]

You forgot the allotments!

It wasn't funny the first time someone on here made a jape like that (which was some time ago).

[blackdog]

It wasn't funny the first time someone on here made a jape like that (which was some time ago).

Not aimed to be funny - two allotment sites will be flooded in a 1:100 year event, one of them floods for more often than that.

[Cognosco]

Not aimed to be funny - two allotment sites will be flooded in a 1:100 year event, one of them floods for more often than that.

Not if NTC put in new drainage system - unless it drains uphill - Oh! hang on.......

[Andy Capp]

Not aimed to be funny - two allotment sites will be flooded in a 1:100 year event, one of them floods for more often than that.

I'm sorry if I misunderstood your stance, but a few people on here have made comments that to me seemed puerile. Simon Kirby has obviously redacted his argument, yet some people feel the need to be snide. I think Simon has always argued reasonably and eloquently, unlike the local council it seems. If someone feels strongly about something, we shouldn't be shouting them down.

[Cognosco]

I'm sorry if I misunderstood your stance, but a few people on here have made comments that to me seemed puerile. Simon Kirby has obviously redacted his argument, yet some people feel the need to be snide. I think Simon has always argued reasonably and eloquently, unlike the local council it seems. If someone feels strongly about something, we shouldn't be shouting them down.

Quite so! Any one has the right to freedom of speech on here, providing it does not break the rules of course, if you have no interest in the topic of the debate then do not reply. I do not object to difference of opinon and would defend anyone who is told they are unable to have their say even if I utterly disagreed with them.

As long as they can take the banter that is?

[user23]

Not aimed to be funny - two allotment sites will be flooded in a 1:100 year event, one of them floods for more often than that.

Nice recovery there.

[Biker1]

I don't understand.
Why does NTC need to bale out flood defences?
Do the flood defences not work so they need baling out?

[Cognosco]

I don't understand.
Why does NTC need to bale out flood defences?
Do the flood defences not work so they need baling out?

If NTC got involved with flood defences then I think you already know they probably would not work or function as any normal person would like to think they would!

So yes it may be a good idea for a plan B for Councillors to arrange buckets and waders to help bale out any flood defences they get involved with.