Plenary, 19 Jan 2000

Meeting date: Wednesday, January 19, 2000

Official Report 561KB pdf

---

Inverclyde (Flooding)

The final item of business today is a members' business debate on motion S1M-371, in the name of Duncan McNeil, on flooding in Inverclyde. I ask those members who are not staying for the debate to leave quickly and quietly.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament notes that the recent flooding in Inverclyde dealt a blow to the area; recognises that this is a long-term, recurring problem; notes that, were it to persist, it may adversely affect investment in the area, and agrees that a multi-agency approach offers the best opportunity to facilitate a permanent solution.

I welcome the opportunity to have this debate and to speak as a member of the Scottish Parliament not for a dreary little shipbuilding town or a miserable rainy backwater, but as a representative of—

On a point of order, Presiding Officer.

I am sorry Mr McNeil—

Shall I start again?

No. I have a point of order. Hold on for a minute.

I would like it to be recorded in the Official Report that in the second vote I voted against the motion. There was a problem with the voting box.

We were one vote short compared with the previous vote.

That was mine.

So you would have voted against?

Yes.

Mr McNeil, I am sorry that I interrupted you but that was a legitimate point of order.

That is okay. We all make mistakes.

As I was saying, I am here not as a representative of an old shipbuilding town, but as a representative of the export manufacturing capital of Scotland. Some people find that hard to believe, but I can assure them that it is true. In recent years, Inverclyde in general, and Greenock in particular, have overcome many of the problems that were the result of the decline of the traditional industries.

We are now beginning to recover. We used to build ships; we now build microchips and computers. We continue to succeed in attracting major high-tech investment—IBM has its base in Greenock, and One2One and National Semiconductor are also there, to name just three. They have all invested heavily in Greenock. Empty shipyards have been turned into mortgage centres; derelict docks have been replaced with the college campus; and unemployment and degeneration have been replaced by new jobs and fresh opportunities.

When I look at how far we have come, I am proud of our achievements. We have begun to reverse the decline and have taken the first real steps along the road to sustainable prosperity. However, I feel apprehensive. I am concerned that all the hard work of the people of Greenock could be for nothing, and that we could end up back where we started. The reason can be summed up in a single word—water. It seems that every time we have heavy rain in Greenock, transport links are cut and we become Scotland's newest island. That poses a threat to our local economy and is simply not good enough for the export capital of Scotland. The significance of that cannot be overplayed.

Let us be absolutely clear what we are talking about: this is not a debate about a few minor roads in a housing scheme being closed, as inconvenient as that might be, and as real as the problems might be to constituents; we are talking about the A8—the only route in and out of the area—being impassable. That raises the stakes. Rather than bemoaning a hindrance, we are talking about a real threat to investment, jobs and continued regeneration.

Last summer, approximately half a million visitors attended the Tall Ships event and saw with their own eyes the giant strides that our community and our area have taken. They saw the new Inverclyde and went away with a positive image, which put us on the map as a tourist and leisure area. But what would have happened if we had had a wet weekend? Only a fraction of those visitors would have been able to attend, denying us all those benefits.

Many parts of the constituency are affected by the problem. We will shortly have an improved and expanded marina at Inverkip, which will address our niche market of sailing. How can we maximise that development's potential and convince those who might wish to use it to berth their yacht when we cannot even guarantee that it will be open 52 weekends of the year?

There has also been a huge expansion in housing in the Wemyss Bay and Inverkip areas. Those houses are essential to address the long- term depopulation that damages Inverclyde's

economic viability. Isolating those new developments would leave hundreds of people stranded. It would keep workers from their place of business, pupils from schools and would-be consumers from the Oak mall and the Waterfront complex.

Gourock is a transport hub with connections to Glasgow and the islands. What future will the exciting new developments at Gourock have if we do not get the transport links sorted? Greenock is also hard hit. People who work in courts, schools, the emergency services, businesses and many other places all suffer extreme inconvenience and financial loss. I will return to those issues later.

Not only the roads are affected. Water running down from the hills to the sea has caused railway stations to close and has risked undermining the track. If Inverclyde is cut off, the damage to commerce is significant. Every day, 10,000 people commute from Inverclyde and 7,000 come in—so 17,000 people are on the move twice a day, yet the road link is not secure. That figure excludes non-commuter commercial traffic. Deliveries to and dispatches from various businesses must also be made daily.

At the moment there are several semi-derelict sites that are crying out for redevelopment, with the potential to deliver jobs and to attract investment. How can we attract companies to a site that is rendered inaccessible every winter because of flooding? I am full of admiration for the invest in Inverclyde campaign, but selling an underwater business park is beyond even the talents of those who run the campaign.

Furthermore, the threat to the retention and expansion of investment is not the only issue raised by the flooding. Local businesses, public services, emergency services, councils, official bodies and others are subject to inconvenience, disruption and financial loss.

I must admit that on the morning on which I was stranded I had no appreciation of the number of agencies and services that must be mobilised in such situations. However, as I sat, stranded in my car, on the morning of Tuesday 30 November— the day of the last severe flood—I saw police officers, firefighters and workers from the local council and West of Scotland Water all striving in abject conditions to alleviate the problem. I feel that it is necessary to put on record that this debate is in no way a criticism of the efforts of those workers. I congratulate them on their efforts. Indeed, I only missed a couple of meetings, while they struggled with the elements.

The police have confirmed that 40 police man hours are wasted in setting up diversions and roadblocks every time the A8 floods. That is 40 hours that would be much better spent fighting crime. Money is being poured down the drain. The local chamber of commerce has also expressed concern over the cost to businesses from part closures of the A8.

Glenbrae Children's Centre was flooded not once, but twice during November. The first flood, on 4 November, caused £9,000-worth of damage and the centre was closed for a week. The second flood,.on 30 November, was more serious. The centre was closed down and the children farmed out to other accommodation.

Have I run over my time?

I have been generous because of the interruption. You have another minute.

I have tried to describe the effects of flooding on the community. When we have ice, rain and snow, preventive measures must be put in place. Similar preventive measures need to be put in place when Lloyd Quinan's former colleagues inform us that rain is on its way—that is very important. It is clear that many agencies and bodies are affected by flooding problems. Any permanent solution must involve partnership between those agencies, perhaps a strategic forum comprising officials from interested parties.

We need to address the issue of planned maintenance and regular monitoring. That always seems to happen after the event, rather than in anticipation. In the longer term, it is clear that having a single route into the area is the real problem. Every time we experience flooding difficulties, we are completely cut off. If we had another road we could bypass some of the problems. Such situations might be inconvenient, but at least the community would not be stranded.

I call Colin Campbell, to be followed by Annabel Goldie. Please keep your speeches fairly short.

I will keep it short. I share Duncan McNeil's view on this. But for the fact that my father removed to Paisley for an additional £50 a year in 1938, I would have been a Greenockian too—nobody is perfect. I have great pleasure in supporting Duncan's motion and I shall repeat some of his propaganda.

Inverclyde is ideally situated for commerce and industry and has excellent examples of both, in mortgage centres, electronics and shipbuilding. Its transport links are without parallel. The A8 links it with the M8, and it is feasible to drive on dual carriageway from Inverclyde to Exeter or other points as far south. It takes 15 to 20 minutes by road to Glasgow airport, and there are frequent

train services. There is a container terminal that operates a regular transatlantic service.

Interested parties in the locality, as Duncan said, have set up the invest in Inverclyde scheme to induce more people to come to the area.

Unfortunately, Port Glasgow—which I will stick to because I have contested that part more frequently than anywhere else—is susceptible to regular flooding at its entry. At the junction of the A8, the foot of the Clune Brae and Castle Road, where Ferguson Shipbuilders Ltd lies—which should perhaps more appropriately be called a confluence—the Blackstoun roundabout floods to a depth of several feet. That has happened twice recently and is a fairly regular feature of Inverclyde life. It was put to me as a valid local issue the first time I stood in a European election campaign in the area. The records of the Greenock Telegraph suggest that such flooding has gone on for decades, if not centuries.

The drivers of the lead westbound vehicles on the blocked A8 have, until recently, faced enormous posters exhorting them to invest in Inverclyde, while they are unable to reach their objective without a labyrinthine deviation through the back streets of Inverclyde.

During the recent flooding in Inverclyde, the centrally integrated traffic control signs on the M8 westbound approach to Glasgow airport announced "Greenock A8 Closed" and the A737 Irvine to Paisley approaching the St James's roundabout showed the same message. Every potential investor going to the airport or travelling on the roads knew that Inverclyde was inaccessible. Radio listeners and television viewers received the same message. Such situations cannot help Inverclyde's economic recovery.

I was aware that local authorities submit flood prevention plans to the Scottish Executive, but I presumed that the Executive prioritised flood prevention schemes and asked a question to that effect in December. The reply, on 11 January, said that as the responsibility for flood prevention plans lies with local councils, the Executive does not prioritise the schemes. I find that surprising, although I understand the reason behind it.

I also asked the Executive to list the schemes that it intends to support in the west of Scotland. The answer indicated that only two local authorities, East Dunbartonshire and Renfrewshire, had completed and submitted their plans. Inverclyde Council did not figure in the answer. Although I know that it is carrying out preparatory investigations, I believe that the council has been slow off the mark in authorising its officials to put in train the necessary flood prevention arrangements. Neighbouring

Renfrewshire's flood prevention schemes are well under way and some are complete.

In conclusion, if members will pardon the pun, all hands must be put to the pump to resolve the matter. I agree with Duncan McNeil that a multi- agency approach is required and I seek assurance that the Scottish Executive will play its part quickly when Inverclyde Council produces its plans.

I, too, thank Mr McNeil for lodging the motion and for bringing the problem to the attention of the chamber. He, Colin Campbell and I all share not just a deep knowledge of, but a profound affection for, Inverclyde.

I have one experience that perhaps Duncan does not share—that of playing hockey in Battery park, in appalling weather, in a gym slip and black stockings. At least, I hope that we do not share that experience. As I reflected on the many years that have passed since I did that, it occurred to me that the weather has deteriorated. Conditions have become wetter and, sadly, Inverclyde has been a victim of that, as has been manifest in the problems caused by the acute flooding in December.

I echo what Duncan McNeil said—the transport infrastructure is crucial to Inverclyde's economy, because the area is a jewel in the enterprise crown. We must recognise that Inverclyde is a real success story of grit and determination by people in the area to turn round adversity and bring something positive to the area. Inverclyde has a lot going for it and all members who are taking part in the debate are anxious to ensure that that is not impeded or obstructed.

Undoubtedly, the recent flooding in the area led to gridlock and chaos for commuters, businesses and schools. I am aware that the Executive met representatives from Inverclyde Council on 17 December with a view to setting up a study to recommend improvements to prevent further disruption. We would all like to know the outcome of that meeting.

I understand that the Executive has not requested a report from West of Scotland Water on the causes of the flooding and has not assessed the impact of the flooding on local business. Although I understand that, technically speaking, that might not be the responsibility of the minister's department, members are profoundly concerned that the Executive take on board more actively than it has done so far the difficulties that we have identified.

The nub of the problem is simple. I agree with Duncan McNeil that we need a multi-agency

approach. I would like the Executive to clarify the outcome of the meeting on 17 December. Will the Executive encourage collaboration among itself, the local council, West of Scotland Water and the local emergency services, including the police, to prepare for, and pre-plan management of, flooding when it occurs—as occur it will—and to identify what measures can be taken to reduce and, if possible, eradicate flooding?

On a more serious note, will the Executive accept that, even if that were achieved, failure to improve the M8 at the Kingston bridge bottleneck will create as significant a barrier to commerce and industry in Inverclyde as any unaddressed issue of flooding?

I congratulate Annabel Goldie on yet again plugging the M74.

Duncan McNeil said that, in the recent floods, Greenock became an island, cut off from the rest of Renfrewshire. He will know—although other members will not—just how devastated people in Renfrewshire feel about being cut off from Greenock.

Although Duncan McNeil described the economic consequences of the flooding, we should not underestimate the personal tragedy that the flooding brought to householders, whose homes were in some cases destroyed. My constituency, which is near Duncan's, also suffered badly. I saw, and continue to see, the problems caused by the flooding.

Duncan is right to say that we need a multi- agency approach. As Colin Campbell said, flood plans have been prepared in the Renfrewshire Council area. The Scottish Office and then the Scottish Executive have financially supported such work, but more needs to be done. Areas such as Paisley and Greenock require financial assistance to ensure that flooding does not cause personal and economic devastation. Duncan is equally right to say that a range of other agencies must consider their responsibilities and make plans.

Annabel Goldie made a good point about the responsibilities of others. We should require local authorities to plan for flood emergencies, as we do for civil emergencies, and ask them to tackle and eradicate the problems of flooding in areas that we know are particularly affected. We should not leave the matter to chance or to good will.

Duncan discussed some of the bigger infrastructure issues, but some small things can be done to help. In one place in my constituency, the Scottish Executive and the council are prepared to implement flood prevention measures but, because of objections by some householders, the matter has to go to appeal. The appeal will not be heard for five or six months, but the work to solve problems for next winter needs to start in the next couple of months. In such situations, the Scottish Executive should consider giving priority to appeals that could help to eradicate damage that will affect people. There would be no financial burdens associated with such a step.

I congratulate Duncan, who has eloquently identified the problems in Inverclyde. However, we must all work together on this issue.

I thank Duncan McNeil for giving members an opportunity to discuss this important issue. Some of the detailed points raised by members in the debate are precisely those to which I wish to respond. We need more clarity on the role that we can all play.

I will kick off by saying that Duncan McNeil's comments on the economic achievements of Inverclyde—the success that has been generated locally in terms of inward investment, such as the call centre that is being established—are well noted. A lot of work has been done and the Executive fully recognises the importance of transport infrastructure and investment in encouraging new businesses to come to Inverclyde and existing businesses to develop and grow. His points on housing, education and tourism are also extremely relevant, as flooding has a direct impact on a whole range of interests in our communities. We must reflect on Hugh Henry's point about the devastation that flooding can cause individuals by destroying houses, for example.

The Executive takes flood prevention and the consequences of flooding extremely seriously. Before Christmas, Greenock, Port Glasgow and Gourock experienced exceptionally heavy and sustained flooding. Transport was disrupted and property both threatened with floods and flooded. However, it is not the first time that floods have occurred. Duncan McNeil made a critical point at the start of the debate. We need to consider how to tackle flooding in future. That will involve identifying those areas that are at risk from flooding—we must take a long-term view but also act now.

We know that people do not regard flooding as a top priority until it happens. Part of the trick will be to ensure that we consider prevention rather than tackle the problem after it has occurred. The comments made on that point by Duncan McNeil, Annabel Goldie, Colin Campbell and Hugh Henry were all correct.

It is important that, as Minister for Transport and the Environment, I advise members that I heard about the flooding in Inverclyde on the same day as we launched the Executive's climate change study reports. Unless we begin to tackle climate change, the future will hold more severe flooding and heavier and more sustained rainfall. We take the view that we must start the work on this long- term issue now, although much has been done in the past few years.

The Executive must play its part as well. Duncan McNeil highlighted extremely effectively the significance and importance to Greenock and Port Glasgow of the A8. The problems are partly caused by the fact that the A8 is a low-lying route and tends to bear the brunt of major flooding. Unfortunately, the flooding this year was more severe than usual. I recognise the importance of the fact that, when the A8 is impassable, there is no suitable method of traffic diversion into the area.

I hope that members will be pleased to hear that immediate action was taken to minimise the likelihood of the road flooding again. Known trouble spots have been checked and pipes and culverts have been cleaned to ensure that they operate at maximum efficiency. However, initial investigations by Inverclyde Council have identified that, in addition to the possible problems caused by watercourses and culverts, there may also be problems with the sewerage system, to which Duncan McNeil alluded. That is why the work of West of Scotland Water in continuing to support and assist the investigations, as well as in carrying out works to prevent its sewers flooding, is incredibly important. The surface water drainage system in parts of the area is old and records are not always available. The information made available by the investigations will be critical in enabling us to move forward.

Several members mentioned a multi-agency approach. I absolutely agree that such an approach represents the effective way in which to tackle the risks to property and infrastructure. Progress has already been made in Inverclyde. Annabel Goldie referred to a meeting held in December. It has been agreed that the council should appoint consultants to examine the worst- affected areas, to report their findings and to make recommendations for remedial action, which will be acted on by the agencies involved. assure members that the meeting, whose participants included the Scottish Executive, Inverclyde Council, Strathclyde police and West of Scotland Water, is not the end point; it is the point from where we will move forward. We have a multi-agency approach and the challenge is to ensure that we take that approach forward effectively.

I hope that the consultants will make their recommendations within a couple of months. The timetable for implementing the flood prevention scheme—or any measures that arise from it—will depend partly on its complexity and partly on the extent to which agencies can programme in the work.

The Executive will of course be responsible for any measures required to improve the A8, subject to the availability of funding. The Executive is also providing grant support for eligible, confirmed flood prevention schemes. What Hugh Henry said about that was very relevant.

There has been investment and Renfrewshire Council has identified flood prevention schemes, under which councils are eligible for up to 50 per cent of funding. The point is to get the process moving, to get the schemes under way and to get the Executive to consider them.

Councils have an important role to play in implementing legislation to tackle flood prevention. Although we can debate this matter in Parliament and discuss the issues once floods have occurred, the key thing is advance planning, with local authorities working out the local priorities. They can identify the areas—which they know best— that require attention and then approach the Executive with flood prevention schemes.

The Flood Prevention and Land Drainage (Scotland) Act 1997 translated many of the permissive powers that councils had into duties. The act requires local authorities to assess watercourses in their areas and to find out whether they are liable to flood non-agricultural land. It requires councils to maintain those watercourses, ensuring that the likelihood of flooding is reduced, and to prepare and publish reports at intervals of not more than two years, identifying the measures that they have taken and those that they think important to prevent or lessen the impact of flooding. The reports should specify all occurrences of flooding of non-agricultural land. That information is being collected; we need it to be translated into flood protection schemes.

To date, Inverclyde Council has proposed no schemes and has not asked the Scottish Executive—or its predecessor, the Scottish Office—for additional funding. However, I know that the council is addressing flooding concerns and that it is proposing to submit two flood prevention schemes to the Executive for confirmation in the next 12 to 15 months.

Hugh Henry's points on the planning process were relevant. Once schemes have been submitted to the Executive, they need to go through the planning process. It is important that the Executive processes inquiries as swiftly as possible, and it is up to the council to attempt to

secure agreement locally, because the schemes are critical in tackling the long-term problems of flooding.

Work is proceeding to tackle the problems of flooding, but we also need to take a long-term view. The Executive has set out guidance in its national planning policy guideline No 7, on planning and flooding. That guidance enables local authorities to begin to address the issue.

Annabel Goldie's anecdote about playing hockey in appalling weather conditions—some time ago—is relevant, as many playing fields and other areas where there is currently no construction might be prone to floods. It is important that, any time a new development is identified and proposed for a site, the local authority examines the potential risk and works with the Scottish Environment Protection Agency.

We should tackle the long-term problems with existing developments—we will tackle all the problems that Duncan McNeil mentioned in his speech—and look to the future. At a local level, that means planning and flood prevention schemes. At a big-picture level, it is a matter of how we tackle issues that may seem intangible, such as climate change.

I thank all the members who took part in this debate, which I think has been constructive. I hope that they can now make progress with related issues concerning constituents or local councils.

Meeting closed at 17:33.