Hansard

Thank you, Presiding Officer.

Although I am a substitute member of the Public Petitions Committee, I was not involved in hearing the evidence on the topic. However, I have been substituting in recent weeks, because although David Stewart is incapacitated, so too is my colleague, Adam Ingram. We wish them both a speedy recovery.

I welcome the fact that the petitioner, Professor Crichton, has brought his considerable knowledge on the subject to the committee in highlighting the problems that are faced. I suspect that members do not have to be on the committee to know about the problems, because many people go to MSPs’ surgeries with flood-related problems.

I welcome the Scottish Government’s positive work with DEFRA, the other devolved Administrations and the Association of British Insurers to make flood risk information more widely available, so that those who are at risk can have affordable insurance. Insurance is a necessity, but it is a pain not only to organise insurance but to read the small print and then hope that everything is covered. That is why it is important that agencies such as SEPA work with the insurance industry to make things better for our constituents.

I understand that data sharing has been an issue, and that the ABI does not have access to the Scottish flood defence asset database when setting premiums. That makes it much more difficult for insurers to take into account flood risk when setting premiums for people in Scotland. SEPA has been working with the local authorities. I was pleased to hear the minister say that all 32 local authorities have now responded to the requests.

The Scottish Government has been proactive on the issue of reducing flood risk. “The National Flood Risk Assessment”, which was published in December 2011, provides for the first time a national picture of flood risk across Scotland. That is a major milestone towards Scotland targeting efforts to plan and invest in reducing the impacts in those areas that are most vulnerable to flooding. The sum of £8 million has been invested in developing a state-of-the-art national flood warning dissemination service. In addition, a joint Scottish flood forecasting service between SEPA and the Met Office has been established.

I want to make the case for prevention to be at the top of the agenda. By that, I do not simply mean putting in place flood defence systems; such systems are often extremely expensive and, as Elaine Murray and Stop Climate Chaos Scotland highlighted, their infrastructures are extremely carbon intensive. Other forward planning by councils and SEPA is also needed.

I am pleased, for example, that SEPA has relaxed restrictions on deepening straight watercourses. However, landowners must be encouraged to clear and deepen ditches and burns much more and to allow land to be set aside for upstream flooding. I know from helping a constituent in Portlethen, who has been flooded twice in recent years, how difficult it is to ascertain who the landowner upstream is and to contact them and encourage them to act. I am not sure whether the powers of enforcement exist with local authorities or SEPA to force landowners to act. Furthermore, when a householder is encouraged—as my constituent was—to build their own flood defences around their property, there seems to be a lack of agreement among the agencies about what is required for, or will be acceptable to, insurance companies.

Surely, councils have an obligation not to allow residential or commercial development on flood plains. I for one am not convinced that it is sufficient for the builder to put in earth defences between a development and the watercourse. Such developments simply should not be allowed.

New developments can disturb the water table and normal watercourses. That is a problem for my constituents at Checkbar, and near where I live in Durris a new development has disturbed the watercourse, so that existing properties are more liable to flooding. It is disturbing that no one seems to want to take responsibility for alleviating such problems. I have had to hold meetings to get builders, SEPA and the council round the table and knock heads together to see how problems can be resolved. Meanwhile, people are living with flood risk.

I am not sure that developers and local authorities adequately take account of the disturbance of existing watercourses and the water table when they consider proposed new developments. Does the minister know of anything further that can be done in that regard?

I understand that people in the merchant quarter of Kevin Stewart’s Aberdeen Central constituency have had difficulties with insurers because of constant flooding in the locale. Kevin Stewart told me that many affected businesses have had to wait ages for payouts and face the prospect of not getting insurance at all unless Scottish Water and the council resolve the problem to the satisfaction of insurance companies.

As members said, for many small and medium-sized businesses one flood is a tragedy that might tip them over the edge; more than one flood is often far too much for a business to bear, particularly when insurance companies leave people in the lurch.

Although some householders who experience flooding do not have a good experience with their insurers, some insurers try to help as much as possible. We need consistency across the industry, and we need something in place that can replace the statement of principles.

I hope that the flood risk assessment maps and plans that are produced under the Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009 will provide information that enables the insurance industry to offer premiums that more accurately reflect the lower risk in Scotland. I hope that the information that is held on databases can be shared with the industry, so that individuals’ premiums more accurately reflect the risk.