To receive a report.

The Chairman welcomed Helen Todd, Humber Strategic Manager from the Environment Agency (EA) to provide Members with an update on the Humber 2100+ Infrastructure Project.

Members received a presentation, and the key considerations related to the project were highlighted as follows:

• Humber context
• How tidal risk was managed currently
• Objectives and the steps involved
• Sustainability Appraisal
• Implications statements

A copy of the presentation is attached as Appendix A to the Minutes.

Members were also referred to the Step 1 Endorsement Report, pages 31 to 38 of the agenda refer.

Members were invited to put their comments and questions forward.

• Following a query with regards to whether Members were being asked to endorse the contents of the report or just note them, the Chairman advised that the report presented was for noting, however requested that Committee considered giving their agreement to support the Step 1 Endorsement report contained within.

• In response to a query on the financial cost and the carbon cost and its calculation, the Humber Strategic Manager explained that there were many mechanisms in place to establish the financial cost and that they were now developing a similar methodology for carbon cost which would be based on the emerging and tried and tested methods.

Members were further informed that there was a carbon burden and with that associated financial costs with that burden for decarbonisation. 

• Referring to page 34 of the report, a Member queried if figures were available that related to providing defence improvements.  Helen Todd advised Members that these were at a strategic level and the costs would need to be built up, however there were spreadsheets with costings detailed that could be shared with Members.  The Principal Planning Policy Consultant agreed to circulate the costs information to Members.

• A Member queried whether the outcome and integrity of a project would be compromised with the carbon cost.  The Humber Strategic Manager explained that the carbon consideration was moving at a fast pace, however the EA was already using the most innovative and cost effective way of investing to balance the financial and carbon cost and different factors were continually being considered to build the case.

• In response to a query from a Member regarding the methodology of flood risk and whether it was used by other countries around the world, the Humber Strategic Manager advised that the EA followed the government’s DEFRA policy which would be similar to government policy in other countries.  Members were further advised that the Environment Agency had links with other countries and had worked very closely with colleagues in Belgium and Holland over the years to share their knowledge.

• The Chairman commented that the Dutch flood defences were interesting, and it would be very useful for the Committee to go and see them at Camperdown.  He further commented that the Humber Strategy had been in existence for 25 years and was still at the Step 1 Endorsement Report stage.  He considered that there was a lot to learn from the Humber Strategy as it would help with the Lincolnshire Coast 2100 version when it commenced. 

Members were referred to the flood likelihood maps on pages 48 to 51 of the Agenda and the Chairman commented that it was quite alarming to see how little would be left of the Humber landscape if the protection was not put in.

• A Member queried whether the modelling work had been undertaken with regards to where the defences were needed.  The Humber Strategic Manager confirmed that the modelling work to understand flood risk had been completed and showed what defences were currently in place and the likely deterioration of those defences.  Members were informed that the details of what needed to be done in each place had not yet been set, and that some very different decisions needed to be made going forward. It was further highlighted that the rise in sea levels would make it more complicated.

• Following a query on how much funding was available from the government, the Humber Strategic Manager advised that the government funding only provided a certain amount of money and work would need to be undertaken to look at how multiple benefits including recreation or tourist benefits could be achieved by carrying out a specific piece of work.  Alternative funding mechanisms would also need to be explored.

• In response to a query with regards to the relationship between the Environment Agency and the local councils in the partnership, the Humber Strategic Manager informed Members that in Hull and East Riding over £50m had been invested in EA led projects from the Humber Bridge down to Saltend.  The projects included a section funded by the Highways Agency for a concrete barrier across the carriageway of the A63 which provided the safety requirements, a flood defence and an evacuation route.  Hull was also a good example of where the collective working in partnership had brought in funding to enable the investment to happen and generated more inward investment into the area off the back of the reduction in flood risk.

• Following a request, the Chairman provided his views on the project. 

• Following a query as to whether the various flood defences needed to amalgamate, the Chairman highlighted the importance of them working collaboratively.

• A Member queried whether the Internal Drainage Board (IDB) would receive any funding in addition to the Humber 2100+Project.    The Chairman advised that the Humber 2100+ project was completely separate to the IDB.

• A Member queried whether the industries based on the Humber would be contributing to the funding of the Humber 2100+ project.  The Humber Strategic Manager informed Members that there was a liaison forum made up of stakeholders, groups and organisations and they were trying to build up the involvement of private businesses within that group.  

N.B. Councillor Paul Rickett left the Meeting at 7:11pm and returned at 7:13pm.

• Following a query on devolution and how that might affect the parties involved in the project, the Humber Strategic Manager advised that the EA was closely monitoring the situation.  The next step would be to undertake a governance review to look at how governance was currently structured and how it may need to change in the future.  Members were further informed that a joint committee was being set up with the Mayor of Lincolnshire, the Mayor of Hull and East Yorkshire and the Leaders of the four largest unitary authorities.

• The Humber Strategic Manager further commented that with regards to the continuity of the project, the EA was proactive at engaging with and briefing new Members as they became involved in the project.

The Committee Chairman asked for Members’ support for the Step 1 Endorsement Report, following which a show of hands was taken.

RESOLVED:

• That the report be noted.
• That Members supported the Step 1 Endorsement report as contained within the Humber 2100+ Infrastructure Project report.