Candidates for Parish and District Council elections (and Layla Moran MP) were asked to let us know their view of the Oxford Flood Alleviation Scheme and what they would do about it if elected
District Councillor
Below are the responses we received from individually emailing all prospective District Councillors, asking them for their views on the proposed Oxford Flood Alleviation Channel (OFAS). Thank you to people who responded. We assume that, where people have not responded, this means that they do not think that OFAS is an important issue.
Debby Hallett (Lib Dem)
The suitability of the Oxford Flood Alleviation Scheme is a massive issue, about which people hold strong opinions.
First off, it’s not Vale that will be voting on this; rather it is a planning committee at Oxfordshire County Council who will decide. So no one from the Vale district council or any parish council will get a vote on it. I have been trying to find out an approximate time table for that decision, and first contacted the County Council cabinet member responsible; he said he didn’t know anything about it. (!) I then contacted officers, to be told there’s a tentative date of 5 June.
As a politician, my aim is to support the views of my residents. In this case, views are certainly split. I personally do not have the environmental, flooding, biodiversity, or any other expertise to form an opinion alone, so I rely on experts. But even THEY are divided.
Therefore, my main goal in all this, at the moment, is to do what I can to ensure decision makers have all the relevant information that they need to understand the main ramifications of this scheme, so that the decision they ultimately make will be an informed one. My opinion is that any lay person (meaning someone who doesn’t understand for themselves the issues involved, such as me) who thinks they know more than all the various experts, is motivated by something other than seeing the best decision made. That’s my personal point of view.
North Hinksey Parish Council originally objected in May 2022. South Hinksey Parish Council have recently objected. These views can be seen on their websites. Both are mainly against the deep channel, for the harm it causes and the cost. I can’t see that Kennington PC have expressed a view.
Some people are concerned that if we reject the current scheme, there will be no scheme at all, that something is better than nothing. I’m not sure I agree with that. Is it better to have a bad plan, one that damages the environment, costs lots of public money, and provides some benefit to some flood victims? Or, is it better to commit to no plan now, and re-think the approach to a flood alleviation scheme that will do better in terms of environment, efficacy and cost? I think most local people think this plan would be better without the deep channel, but it is very difficult to convince others to change their minds, and the EA seems determined to move forward with the deep channel. County councillors who sit on the planning committee, the people who’ll decide this planning application, may be more amenable to the electorate’s input and views. Activists may want to communicate directly with members of the County Planning Committee.
As to what I can and will do -- Vale officers, at my request, are organizing a meeting of EA reps, relevant Vale officers, and relevant members, to gather for a Q&A session about this project. All of the concerns that have crossed my desk are fair game for questions.
I’m happy to represent your views too. If you can send me any questions you have for them, I will see they are included.
Katherine Phillips (Green)
The Oxford Flood Alleviation Scheme impacts on an area much loved and used by people in this and the adjoining wards including off road routes such as Willow Walk and the Monks Causeway and beautiful green spaces such as Hinksey Meadow.
Climate change will cause increasingly frequent, dangerous and extreme weather events. In this context we need to keep people safe, and protect their homes and businesses from the increasing risk of very severe flooding whilst also recognising the urgent need to protect the natural world from the harms caused by unnecessary and reckless development and to enhance it’s resilience to climate change. I share many of the concerns raised about this complicated scheme in a very sensitive area and would use every possible opportunity to challenge the destructive elements of the current plan, examining whether they could be reduced, amended or (preferably) omitted. I would use our strong links with the administration at County Hall to push this in as high profile way as possible.
Emily Smith (Lib Dem)
The OFAS scheme is not something District or Parish Councillors will get to vote on. The scheme is being designed and delivered by the national Environment Agency, and the planning application currently on the table will be decided by Oxfordshire County Council.
I am not an engineer or ecologist; but the role of councillor is to consider the views of the technical experts, and to represent the views of residents to the decision makers. So, I will try to set out my current thinking on OFAS.
Climate change is leading to more extreme weather, and we will see more floods happening in the coming years. Each time Oxford and the Vale floods we in Botley and South Hinksey experience disruption to traffic and local business, homes and personal belonging are ruined. Not to mention the fact people have sadly lost their lives during local floods. There is a financial cost to the taxpayer when public services respond to flooding - and there is a climate cost to the emergency response and clean up. Therefore, my starting point is to welcome investment into our community to protect us from flooding.
Over recent years I have been to many meetings with individuals, parish councillors, the EA, Council officers, surgeries, etc to listen to residents and to pass on questions and concerns. The EA have made some changes because of collective lobbying but, as I spelt out in my formal response to the planning application, there are still many outstanding issues with the scheme currently being considered by the County council. Impact on biodiversity, traffic on the A34, noise and disruption during construction phase are the most common raised with me. These all need to be resolved through the planning process before the scheme should be given the go ahead.
More recently, additional evidence about the environmental impact of the channel through Hinksey Meadow has been submitted to the County Council. This raises further questions about whether the environmental harm of the proposed scheme is worth the gain in terms of the level flood protection, so if re-elected, I would continue to listen to the experts both in favour and opposed to the scheme, those residents' campaigning for changes to the scheme, and of course those residents who are directly impacted by flooding.
If there is a way to substitute the channel with alternative flood protection for homes and infrastructure in North Hinksey I would support that. I tend to favour solutions that are as natural and non-invasive as possible – so I am not sure solutions that involve pumps which require ongoing maintenance are the best approach.
Whether or not there are changes to the scheme before it goes before the County Planning Committee the important thing is that the decision makers, know all the facts and views of local people. To that end I would make representations based on the information I have gathered from the community, and play my part in ensuring the committee are well informed before making a decision – both on the current application and the expected additional application covering the use of rail (rather than road) to remove soil from the site if the channel goes ahead.
If planning is not granted, I would seek to engage with the EA to ensure our local concerns are considered as part of a redesign. If planning is granted, I would also want to work with the EA to push for as much mitigation as possible and help ensure good lines of communication between residents and the contractors during the construction of the scheme.
In short, I support national government investment into a flood scheme to protect local people, homes, and infrastructure. But, there are clearly significant problems with the scheme on the table which need to be addressed before any planning permission is granted – biodiversity impact at Hinksey meadow, traffic and pollution during the construction phase being the most concerning.
District councillors do not get a vote on this. So, if re-elected, I would continue to raise residents' concerns throughout the planning process to help ensure members of the planning committee understand all the implications of the scheme before making a decision. I would also help keep local people informed of opportunities to engage directly with the County Council.
If this or an amended scheme is given the go ahead I would do what I can to ensure good lines of communication between the community, the Environment Agency and their contractors so that problems arising during construction can addressed promptly.
Alexander and Elina Turner (Conservatives) – no response
Nekisa Gholami Babaahmady – no response
Jamie Spooner – in the process of drafting a response
Parish Councillor
Below are statements made by prospective Parish Councillors about the OFAS on Facebook, in The Sprout, or emailed to us.
Calum Byrom
What springs to mind is the dictum, ‘extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence’. For a project of this size and cost, with the associated long term disruption to the local community and impact on the local environment, there needs to be clear and compelling justifications and the outcome should not be open to question. From the evidence I’ve seen so far, it feels like we are a long way from this point, so it is hard to have any confidence that embarking on this work is a sensible plan of action.
Rod Chalk
My view is that I support 85 % of the flood alleviation scheme but object to the 2-stage flood channel. Modelling shows that this adds little benefit to the water carrying capacity already present in the natural flood plain and that it provides protection for only an additional 50 households. The cost, disruption and permanent environmental damage is not worth these minimal benefits. I support a flood scheme minus the channel, or better still a more effective solution such as a pumped pipeline which takes proper account of climate change and has none of the catastrophic environmental effects of the channel. If elected I will press for this.
Chris Church
Doing nothing cannot be an option. People’s homes have flooded and we’ve had Botley Rd closed by flooding in 2007 and 2013 (?}. The consultations have been going on since about 2015 and I have attended a lot of meetings with the Environment Agency and others. The design has improved but there are still problems. The current Parish Council has objected to the current plans. Ultimately until a clear final plan is put on the table it is impossible to have an absolute position though I recognise that some landowners have very strong views.
Julia Clark
I am opposed to the 2 channel element of the Flood Alleviation scheme because it will have an irreversible and damaging impact on the environment, rare habitats and wildlife, for unproven and limited benefit.
The destruction of 2 hectares of the rare grassland of Hinksey Meadows can in no way be compensated by offsite mitigation. The loss of 2,000 trees and the transportation of 700,000 tons of displaced soil in what aspires to be a carbon free city is wholly unacceptable.
This part of the scheme is too costly, environmentally destructive and has unproven benefits.There needs to be a public enquiry and the EA need to rethink their strategy.
I have long opposed the building on flood plain, most recently the Seacourt Park and Rise extension and work to preserve our precious Green Spaces and rare habitats as Chair of the Oxfordshire Badger Group.
Martin Dowie
I am opposed to OFAS as it presently stands (OCC planning application no. MW.0027/22). I support the Parish Council objection to the planning application (27 May 2022). Although I recognise the need for some flood alleviation measures and support many aspect of the scheme, I do not believe that the excavation of a large secondary channel is necessary or desirable. Other options need to be actively pursued.
Chris Hall
Given that we are going to have more flooding and sea level could rise by one metre I’m in favour of building as much climate change resilience as possible - however I don’t know the proposal in any detail and would want to be sure that any measures are not imposed on us in the same high handed holier than thou manner we got the LTNs.
John Marriott
The significant direct/indirect impacts to the habitat at Hinksey Meadow from the Western Channel are of concern. Lack of clear evidence for the two channel scheme and alternative proposals. Significant loss to the environment (estimated at 2000 trees, mature woodland and the rest). There is concern that the removal of spoil by lorry is unworkable (a lorry every 3 minutes, 40 mph speed limit on the A34, already a pollution hotspot for nitrogen oxides).
Would always work to support resident’s views. Supportive of alleviation in principle. Access to and enjoyment of green spaces are one of the reasons many people choose to settle here. Seems a project at great cost both to the environment and financially.
David Pritchard
There may be a need for some flood alleviation measures, but the use of a 2-stage new flood channel across Hinksey meadows is not one of them. Calculations show that it will have little extra carrying capacity beyond the flooding that normally takes place at times of high rainfall, and the wanton destruction of a valuable site of scientific interest cannot be justified, particularly when most of the area to be excavated will be dry for most of the year. Recent modifications to Willow Walk with enlarged culverts beneath it will help the flood waters to move downstream.
I am also impressed by the lack of general maintenance of the waterways, with reeds being allowed to grow freely in e.g. the Seacourt Stream. A little more spent on maintenance rather than a big capital scheme would produce much greater value for money.
There appears to have been little thought about measures upstream to slow the draining of water into the tributaries of the Thames, or to provide more areas around them for flood alleviation. Apparently only some 50 houses will be saved from flooding by the proposed measures, which suggests that other, cheaper, methods could be used to provide protection, saving tens or more of millions of pounds.
Jamie Spooner:
I agree with the necessity to address the environmental issues that cause significant problems and costs to the residents and businesses of Oxford and it’s surrounds.
The scheme offers a long term solution that tackles the flooding issue and offers serious consideration to the environment and biodiversity and is admirable in its aim.
It is backed by many organisations and their respective experts but I am aware there are also organisations and experts opposed to the scheme.
I am not qualified in respect to any expertise in this area but I recognise that there are serious local concerns about a section of the channel that particularly impacts Hinksey Meadows and also around the potential impact it will have on the flora and fauna in the area alongside further implications of noise and disruption to residents.
These concerns go in to quite technical detail and have led to mitigating solutions being proposed to reduce the impact of the scheme on both the environment and local residents.
If these mitigating solutions are proven to be viable and effective I would support their further exploration by decision makers with a view to implementation.
As District and Parish councillors have no vote in the implementation of this scheme my role, if elected, would be to act as a conduit for all local views and proposals to be shared with relevant agencies and decision makers on behalf of residents throughout the scheme’s implementation pre and post planning permission if granted.
If permission is denied then I would make sure decision makers are fully informed of local concerns and alternative proposals for consideration if the scheme is to be redesigned.
Throughout, I would feedback relevant information to enable the local community to be kept up to date with ways in which they can engage in the process.
Nick Wedd
My view is that I support 85 % of the flood alleviation scheme but object to the 2-stage flood channel. Modelling shows that this adds little benefit to the water carrying capacity.
I don’t believe that the secondary channel will do anything to increase water carrying capacity, at least in Hinksey Meadow. During moderate flooding, long before peoples' homes are affected, Hinksey Meadow is a waterway, 300 yards wide and maybe a foot deep in water which is moving extremely slowly downstream. Making parts of it two feet, or four feet, deep will do nothing to improve flow rate.
David Kay, Adam Rankin
The current parish council Planning Committee has objected to specific elements of the OFAS. Martin Dowie, David Kay and Adam Rankin are members of that Committee standing again in this election. Martin Dowie also opposes the OFAS in its current form in his election leaflet.
Member of Parliament (not up for election in May 2023)
Layla Moran MP (Lib Dem)
Below is Layla Moran MP’s May 2022 submission to the county council, still currently being used to state her views.
Flooding in Oxford West & Abingdon brings misery and disruption to many residents, so an effective flood alleviation scheme is critical for constituents and businesses.
Constituents do have serious concerns about the proposed scheme that I would like to bring to your attention for consideration as part of the consultation process.
Hinksey Meadow
Residents are very concerned that the scheme will impact negatively on, or destroy completely, Hinksey Meadow. The loss of 2,000 mature trees, established hedgerows, 100 hectares of agricultural land and 8 hectares of public space will have a serious impact on protected species such as badgers, otter, kingfisher and bats.
I am told that the proposal to transplant the rare MG4a grassland is problematic, with only approx. 25% of similar projects succeeding and that it may take up to 150 years for the majority of species to colonise the new meadow.
I understand that a number of alternative approaches have been suggested which could mitigate some of these problems. I hope that it will be demonstrated that these alternatives have been properly examined in line with the NPPF.
Cycle Route
The current proposal includes a “new maintenance track (that) will allow our field teams access, this will also form a new permissive path in the scheme area for walking and cycling.”
Residents highlight that this is a perfect opportunity to create a fully connected route between Old Abingdon Road and Willow Walk and ask whether this can be considered as part of the overall scheme. This would be in line with the County Council’s commitment to promote active travel.
South Hinksey Village
Whilst there are significant benefits for South Hinksey residents in terms of flood alleviation and protection, there are still a number of significant concerns about the construction phase of the project.
Local councillors have highlighted to me that the construction compound backs onto private gardens. They are concerned about noise pollution, light pollution from security lights and loss of privacy that will cause significant disruption that still needs further mitigation.
Impact on the A34
Residents tell me that the planning application has still not alleviated their concerns about the transportation of spoil.
The Environment Agency plans suggest that HGVs will move spoil from the construction compound onto the A34, about every 3 or 4 minutes. It is currently already difficult to filter onto the A34 from the village and, as there is no slip road at this junction with the A34, large, heavily-laden lorries will struggle to get up to speed to join the A34 traffic.
Any congestion at this pinchpoint of the ring road can have significant knock on effects on the wider Oxford highways network.
Local councillors and residents have asked for the option of the movement of spoil by rail to be fully pursued before plans are approved. This is in line with the County Council’s commitment to use more environmentally friendly forms of transport wherever possible.
Rights of Way
Serious concerns have been raised with me about the loss of the existing Rights of Way over adjoining fields. Given the County Council’s policy on promoting walking, I hope that this will be looked at and alternatives put in place that are at least as good.
Long term funding
Funding for ongoing maintenance of the scheme only appears to be budgeted for ten years. What will happen after this period? This needs to be clear.
Short Consultation period (7th April – 9th May)
Residents are concerned that a consultation period that runs over Easter of just 4 weeks is not enough time to allow people to read and understand the large number of documents within the consultation.
Summary
While it is clear that Oxford needs a flood alleviation scheme, and the current proposal meets many of the aims of the overall need, there is an opportunity to mitigate disruption to residents during construction, re-examine the impact on Hinksey Meadow and to create a valuable opportunity to increase active travel between Abingdon and Oxford.