HL Deb 19 June 2003 vol 649 cc143-4WA
Lord Lucas

asked Her Majesty's Government:

With reference to the proposed development on land adjacent to the otter channel, Wittersham Road, Peasmarsh, described in planning application RR/2003/1208:

  1. (a) what was and is the financial relationship between the Environment Agency and any of its staff and the proposer of the above development; what checks the Environment Agency has made as to the proposer's probity and criminal record;
  2. (b) why the Environment Agency commenced work on the proposed development before any planning application had been made;
  3. (c) what benefits to the local environment the Environment Agency believed would accrue from the creation in that location of fishing lakes and wildfowl shooting facilities, and the installation of a caravan;
  4. (d) what benefits to floodplain management and capacity would accrue from the creation of bunded fishing lakes; and
  5. (e) what is the current attitude of the Environment Agency to the proposed development. [HL3290]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Whitty)

The proposed development is the construction of a fishing lake near the River Rother, north of Rye in Sussex. The landowner acquired the site last autumn with the intention of creating a commercial fishing lake. He approached the Environment Agency's local emergency work force office as he wished to benefit from an arrangement whereby the agency and its predecessors obtain clay wherever possible for repairing the river flood defences.

Local agency staff stripped topsoil as a preliminary to excavating clay from the site, but withdrew immediately when it became apparent there was no planning permission for the excavation and prior to any material leaving the site. No other works were carried out by the agency. The agency is liaising with Rother District Council and is actively reviewing its procedures for the local acquisition of flood defence material.

In answer to the specific points raised:

  1. (a) There is no financial arrangement between the Environment Agency and any of its staff and the proposer of the proposed fishing lake nor has there ever been. Where the Environment Agency intends to take adjacent earth material for the repair or improvement of a river embankment, it does not consider checks on the probity or criminal record of the developer to be necessary or appropriate.
  2. (b) The agency understood that planning permission had been obtained by the owner and ceased work on the topsoil scrape as soon as it was ascertained that this was not the case.
  3. (c) The agency believed that there would be a small increase in flood storage capacity. Planning application RR/2003/1208 was for the siting of a caravan only. The agency objected to this on flood risk grounds, but withdrew the objection if (as the owner stated) the caravan would only be occupied during June, July and August which is outside the months of high flood risk.
  4. (d) The proposed fishing lake was not to be bunded and there would be a small increase in flood storage.
  5. (e) The agency will not be further involved in the proposed development from the point of view of flood defence works to the River Rother. The agency will liaise closely with the local planning authority regarding any future proposals for this site.