HC Deb 17 July 2001 vol 372 cc93-5W
Malcolm Bruce

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what action his Department intends to take to develop Planning Policy Guidance Note Number 25; and if he will make a statement. [4008]

Ms Keeble

[holding answer 13 July 2001]: The Government today published the new Planning Policy Guidance Note (PPG) 25 "Development and flood risk", following the fast-track consultation in February-March this year. It substantially follows the recommendations of the Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs Committee in their December 2000 report on "Development on, or affecting, the flood plain", and strengthens the guidance that was previously contained in Department of the Environment Circular 30–92, which is now cancelled.

The new PPG makes clear that building should be wholly exceptional in areas of flood plain that are currently undefended or defended to a relatively low standard and thus effectively function regularly as flood plains where water flows or is stored at times of flood.

A risk-based sequential test outlines the appropriate planning responses to levels of flood risk to help to ensure that the problems that have occurred due to inappropriate development in flood-risk areas are reduced in future. This test gives clear priority to the development of areas that are not at high risk of flooding. It is intended to operate alongside the sequential test in PPG 3 "Housing", by which previously developed land is the first choice for housing, and to be consistent with sustainable development objectives in other PPGs.

Application of this test through the development plan system and in the determination of individual applications will require planning authorities and developers to consult closely with the Environment Agency. Applicants will be required to assess the flood risk and impact of their proposals and to incorporate sustainable drainage systems as far as possible. Where flood defences and other mitigation measures are needed because of development, these should be fully funded as part of the development, including the necessary arrangements to maintain them for a 30-year period, after which they will be regarded as public assets and liabilities. The Government are preparing supplementary guidance on flood-resistant construction techniques to enable buildings to cope better with flooding and to recover faster.

The emphasis on looking at flooding on the wider scale of the whole river catchment or coastal cell will be complemented by the initiative on catchment flood management plans being undertaken by the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Environment Agency.

The implementation of PPG 25 will have some impact on construction costs and the running costs of planning authorities and the Environment Agency. However, the events of last autumn have clearly demonstrated that these are far outweighed by the future costs to householders, businesses and a range of public authorities, including local government and the Environment Agency of not adopting it as current policy on development and flood risk.

Mr. Shaw

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions when he will publish new planning guidance on flooding. [4646]

Ms Keeble

The Government today published the new Planning Policy Guidance Note (PPG) 25 "Development and flood risk", following the fast-track consultation in February-March this year. It substantially follows the recommendations of the Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs Committee in their December 2000 report on "Development on, or affecting, the flood plain", and strengthens the guidance that was previously contained in Department of the Environment Circular 30–92, which is now cancelled.

The new PPG makes clear that building should be wholly exceptional in areas of flood plain that are currently undefended or defended to a relatively low standard and thus effectively function regularly as flood plains where water flows or is stored at times of flood.

A risk-based sequential test outlines the appropriate planning responses to levels of flood risk to help to ensure that the problems that have occurred due to inappropriate development in flood-risk areas are reduced in future. This test gives clear priority to the development of areas that are not at high risk of flooding. It is intended to operate alongside the sequential test in PPG 3 "Housing", by which previously developed land is the first choice for housing, and to be consistent with sustainable development objectives in other PPGs.

Application of this test through the development plan system and in the determination of individual applications will require planning authorities and developers to consult closely with the Environment Agency. Applicants will be required to assess the flood risk and impact of their proposals and to incorporate sustainable drainage systems as far as possible. Where flood defences and other mitigation measures are needed because of development, these should be fully funded as part of the development, including the necessary arrangements to maintain them for a 30-year period, after which they will be regarded as public assets and liabilities. The Government is preparing supplementary guidance on flood-resistant construction techniques to enable buildings to cope better with flooding and to recover faster.

The emphasis on looking at flooding on the wider scale of the whole river catchment or coastal cell will be complemented by the initiative on catchment flood management plans being undertaken by the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Environment Agency. The implementation of PPG 25 will have some impact on construction costs and the running costs of planning authorities and the Environment Agency. However, the events of last autumn have clearly demonstrated that these are far outweighed by the future costs to householders, businesses and a range of public authorities, including local government and the Environment Agency of not adopting it as current policy on development and flood risk.

Forward to