Francie Molloy (Sinn Féin)

The proposer of the topic for debate will have 15 minutes in which to speak. All other Members who wish to speak will have approximately 10 minutes.

Wallace Browne (DUP)

For the second time in slightly over two years it is necessary for an Adjournment debate in the House to highlight the repetitive flooding in my constituency of East Belfast.

On 31 August 2009, homes and property in East Belfast were once again damaged by rainfall. In contrast to previous occasions, however, the rainfall was restricted — [Interruption.]

Francie Molloy (Sinn Féin)

Order. Members should either resume their seats or leave the Chamber.

Wallace Browne (DUP)

In contrast to previous occasions, however, the rainfall was restricted to a period of a few hours in mid-afternoon, yet it caused substantial flooding. The relevant agencies had argued that the rainfall in July 2007 was exceptional and they, therefore, presumed that to be the main cause of the flooding. However, no one could reasonably argue that that was the case on 31 August 2009. Yet again, the severe flooding in East Belfast made the headlines in the newspapers and other media. Among the worst-hit areas were Sydenham, Cregagh, the Woodstock Road, Castlereagh, Belmont and other areas in East Belfast.

However, without repeating the well-presented arguments that were made in the previous debate, I will highlight the main issues that need to be addressed as a matter of extreme urgency.

There is an urgent requirement to address the need both for a joined-up Government approach to flooding issues and for short-term flood-protection solutions as part of an overall strategic programme. Furthermore, there is a need to improve communications and information sharing. That could be done through a stakeholder group, because it is essential that stakeholders have an input to defining the problem before the Government try to resolve it.

Each of the drainage agencies must co-operate in providing joined-up approaches to mitigate recurrent flooding and to develop long-term prevention measures. There is an obvious lack of joined-up thinking and working among the drainage agencies in the areas in question. Until that is resolved and adequate resources are devoted to such work, flooding will, unfortunately, recur.

Of course, we know that many short-term initiatives can be implemented. Those include installing larger street gullies, increasing the availability of sandbags and fitting sewer line de-silting mechanisms in alleyways that are adjacent to homes that are likely to be affected. However, it is essential that the Departments that are involved implement, as quickly as possible, the strategy to prevent flooding recurring in parts of East Belfast.

The EU floods directive of 2007 requires transposition into domestic law by November 2009. I understand that the draft Water Environment (Floods Directive) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2009 have been produced in order to implement that directive. In fact, the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD) has been appointed as the competent authority for Northern Ireland for the implementation of that EU directive on the assessment and management of flood risk. Therefore, I would appreciate it if the Minister would confirm whether the Rivers Agency, on behalf of DARD, will take the lead in implementing the directive. I would also appreciate it if the Minister would confirm whether legislation will be in place by the appointed date.

In East Belfast, as in the rest of Northern Ireland, the historical approach to managing storm water and foul water has been to use a combined system that transports storm water and foul effluent to a treatment works. However, in recent years, installing separate systems has been the practice in new developments. Foul sewage is now collected in a dedicated sewer and goes to a treatment works, while storm water is directed into a watercourse in instances where little or no treatment is necessary.

Unfortunately, a large number of dual sewers are still in operation. That is particularly the case in built-up urban areas such as East Belfast where the population has grown. Of course, there has also been a reduction in permeable surfaces, which means that the sewers are increasingly unable to cope with the storm water.

The situation has also been exacerbated by the legal requirements to comply with the water framework directive and the EU floods directive and by the intense rainfall that we have experienced over the past number of years. Indeed, issues of climatic change need to be fed into any assumptions that are made and into the models that are used to assess future flood risk.

To address those issues, and in response to commitments that were made in the Northern Ireland sustainable development strategy to have sustainable drainage systems, Government have developed a strategy, which is known as SuDS, for promoting the use of sustainable drainage.

Sustainable drainage systems are hard and soft engineering solutions that are designed to mimic closely natural catchment processes in the management and treatment of storm water. Source-control SuDS seek to reduce storm-water discharge from developments by dealing with the run-off close to the source, whereas permeable-conveyance SuDS slow the velocity of the run-off, and then reduce its volume via filtration, infiltration and evaporation.

In developing the SuDS strategy, the Government established a working group comprised of representatives from all relevant Departments and agencies. I would appreciate the Minister’s updating the House on the progress of that group. The Northern Ireland Environment Agency’s consultation document ‘Managing Stormwater: A Strategy for Promoting the Use of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) within Northern Ireland’ raises interesting and challenging issues.

For example, it is accepted that traditional drainage systems may be inadequate to deal with storm water in new developments, especially with apparently more intense and increasingly frequent rainfall. However, the real problem could be that, although individual buildings are now designed, as I said, on a twin system, that system may merge into a single, combined system at the main drain. The loss of permeable surfaces that can absorb rainfall is exacerbating existing drainage problems and creating new flooding problems in urban environments, particularly in areas where large houses are harvested and replaced by multi-apartment buildings with car-parking spaces and little or no gardens.

Alternative, viable options to the traditional drainage systems, including SuDS, must be considered. However, all alternatives and additional methods of dealing with storm-water drainage to supplement or replace existing systems should be seriously considered. A holistic approach that involves developers and all the relevant agencies from the earliest stage of the planning process is also imperative to enable SuDS to be integrated into site designs, thus maximising the flood alleviation and water pollution benefits of SuDS.

It is crucial that all Departments and all the relevant agencies, including local government, co-ordinate and communicate before, during and after flooding episodes. It is vital that all possible steps are taken at the stage at which flooding might be prevented.

Although we should debate the need for joined-up Government thinking, action and strategy to rectify flooding in East Belfast, we should never forget the human suffering that many constituents have had to endure over the years. I know of a 93-year-old woman who has been greatly affected on no less than six occasions over the past four years. That would be an extremely difficult situation for anyone, never mind a lady of 93.

The time has long passed for talk and debate on this subject: it is time for the Assembly to deliver so that our people will not have to endure the hardships of flood water and sewage contamination in their homes time and time again. It is important to remove the fear that many of my constituents experience every time it rains. Many confine themselves to their homes when they get adverse weather warnings because they are afraid to go shopping; some feel that they have to return from holidays. Those people are suffering trauma and they need reassurance. Therefore, I call on the Minister to ensure that we are not back here in a year’s time to debate flooding and the hardship that it causes in East Belfast. It is time for action.

Reg Empey (UUP)

In his opening remarks, Lord Browne referred to the previous debate, so it is déjà vu all over again.

On 26 June 2007, we made the same points that Lord Browne made in his speech this afternoon. There were several factors in recent events; over the summer, there was not just one, but a series of events. I spent several hours out in my constituency, and it was impossible to get through on the flood line. On ringing the traditional numbers, one was told that it was someone else’s responsibility. That issue has not been resolved.

The same places are affected again and again and again. Maintenance, which should not be a huge logistical problem to overcome, is still not being carried out properly. I saw blocked gratings in places that we know are liable to flooding. Simply applying a six- or twelve-month maintenance schedule for the hot spots may not be adequate. The local Roads Service office knows where the hot spots are. I know that people park cars over gullies, etc, but those problems have to be overcome.

Every time it rains heavily, people are terrified. Even then, sandbags cannot be distributed until flooding occurs. We also asked for local people to be provided with signs that they could put out to stop people in 4x4s driving past and causing a backwash that brings water into their homes. Some housing associations have experimented with putting plastic or metal barriers over doorways and ventilators to stop water getting in.

The fact remains that the same people are suffering time and time again. I plead with the Minister to ask the Roads Service to review its maintenance schedules. I know that there is major expenditure in the area on Belfast’s sewerage system — it is one of the biggest investments ever made — but that is no good if street gullies are unable to accept the water. It is clear that a lot of them are blocked. Sometimes builders are careless, and they leave sand and cement, which is washed down drains where it solidifies. There are lots of people who can contribute to the problem; however, the fact is that it is happening in the same places again and again.

I refer members to the debate in June 2007. Although the focus then was on getting cheaper block insurance for people in such circumstances, Members made the same points. To be honest, the matter has not resolved itself. We are told that some of the main channels require additional maintenance and that they are silting up, but that is normal in such a system. Upstream of all this, so much development has been allowed that the system is inadequate; infrastructure has not kept pace with development.

None of the infrastructure will be of value unless it is maintained to an acceptable standard. Given that there are 10 or 11 hot spots in the area — we all know where they are; the Roads Service knows where they are — why is extra-special attention not given to them? Why do we have to ring up all the time? Why is the maintenance of those hot spots not put on an additional rota for extra-special attention? At least that would give people in those areas some confidence that their plight is being taken seriously. At the moment, many of them are in despair.

Mr speaker is in charge of proceedings of the House of Commons in..." class="glossary">Deputy Speaker, you well know what it is like to have a place flooded; it is almost worse than a fire. Everything is ruined, including the electrics; there is the smell; sewage mixes with storm water; and the place is in a terrible state. I appeal to the Minister to ask the Roads Service to redouble its efforts and concentrate on the hot spots, so that those people can be given some relief and confidence that their homes will not be flooded in the future.

Naomi Long (Alliance)

I thank Lord Browne for raising this issue again, although I regret the fact that we are having to have this debate.

I thank the Minister for meeting me on a number of occasions to discuss the ongoing and serious problem of flooding in East Belfast, including flooding that occurred during the past week. I apologise to him that, as a result of that, some of what he will hear now he has heard already. I am sorry that it is repetitious, but so is the flooding, and I will continue to repeat what I am about to say until I see a resolution to the problem. Most of my colleagues will agree that that is necessary.

I want to preface my comments with recognition that not all the responsibility for this situation lies with the Minister who is present to respond to the debate. Road drainage, the sewerage network and our rivers are interconnected, and, particularly in flooding conditions, there is surcharging and flooding as they interact with each other via combined sewer overflows (CSOs) and other linkages. Although he is here to respond, I trust that the Minister will ensure that his colleagues take note of what is said in the Chamber and that it is considered and acted on.

I will deal first with the strategic issues associated with flooding, and then I will comment on issues connected with the response, because those are two separate areas. We all recognise that the sewerage and drainage network, including rivers and culverts, is ageing and that its upgrade and refurbishment has failed to keep pace with development. We must be conscious that, in the case of rivers, upgrading is often restricted by development. Therefore, the system is under increasing pressure, and the issue of development is one that we must carefully consider. For example, in a combined system, where foul and run-off rainwater are in the same pipes, the problem is not just the number of housing units but the extent to which areas previously available to act as soakaways are being paved. In addition, it is not just the volume of run-off rainwater but the speed at which it reaches the system that can lead to flooding, particularly of the flash nature that we have experienced in East Belfast in recent years.

I want to highlight three measures concerning development that must be considered in the short to medium term. First, there must be an obligation on all developers to use sustainable urban drainage systems for any new development, including attenuation tanks to enable the slow release of run-off and rainwater. Rainwater recycling, which is not only environmentally sound but will reduce the amount of run-off that is reaching the system, must also be considered.

For a number of reasons, the introduction of such systems makes sense. It puts the onus on the developers to deal with the infrastructure pressures that their development creates. Economically, that is sound judgement. It is also environmentally sound and tackles issues around water quality, in that it should deal with the problem of CSOs triggering very rapidly. It will also maximise the life and capacity of the existing network and buy a little time for the Department to invest. Building Control Northern Ireland and the Planning Service have an important part to play in that.

The second issue that I want to raise in the context of planning is the quality of response from Northern Ireland Water when it comes to proposed new develop­ments that are going through the planning system. When the Planning Service refers applications to Northern Ireland Water, Roads Service and other agencies, we must be confident that sufficient attention is being paid to the flooding history when responses are made. I have specific examples, as do other Members present, of situations in which there is a flooding history, yet Northern Ireland Water raises no objections to those developments. That is not acceptable. Furthermore, it is not simply a matter of someone’s looking to see whether a specific location or address has flooded. Rather, it should involve consideration of the system downstream to see whether there is pressure there, and then consideration of whether the new development can be accommodated without exacerbating that problem. In responding to current and future applications, that must be carefully considered.

Thirdly, there have been examples of where under-capacity in a treatment works has caused the introduction of a moratorium on new upstream developments that connect to it. I am not aware that that has ever happened in a case in which the network is under capacity. I acknowledge that it is much harder to identify accurately the capacity of the network because of its complexity and the interconnections. A ban on development upstream of flooding points is no one’s plan A, and we would much rather see the infrastructure improved. However, if, in the short term, we cannot get the investment to allow the infrastructure to be brought up to suitable standards, we cannot rule out the option of declaring certain locations completely unsuitable for development in the short term.

I also want to talk about the definition of “development”. Paving in grassed areas is currently not counted as development, so people can pave their gardens. In a number of locations in East Belfast, Roads Service has paved features such as grass verges. As I said, that is not classed as development, but it should be, and to do it should require the consent and intervention of Northern Ireland Water before it goes ahead, because it has a direct impact on the network.

I want to move on to the medium to long term: the drainage area study and the plan that will come from it. A lot of energy has been invested in that work, and the recommendations that are developed from it will clearly alleviate some of the issues that we are discussing today and will plan for the future. Again, I raise my concern that the drainage network for East Belfast is being planned in the absence of an agreed Belfast metropolitan area plan. It is ludicrous that the infrastructure is being planned in a planning vacuum. However, that is a longer-term issue and a resource-intensive process.

In the meantime, I would like to see the implementation of flood alleviation schemes accelerated in areas where flooding is happening on a repeat basis. The argument that those floods are due to exceptional weather conditions no longer holds water — pardon the pun. Given that some locations have flooded three or more times this summer alone, it is no longer exceptional. Having suffered repeatedly, people are weary of the situation.

Accelerated flood alleviation schemes are crucial. In the meantime, residents continue to live with the stress, cost and disruption of not only the flooding itself but the threat of flooding. In those circumstances where it is repeated, it can be either impossible or unaffordable for people to insure against flooding; unlike in England and Wales, there is no public intervention on that. It also opens the Department and Northern Ireland Water to claims for compensation where they are aware that there is an underlying problem and have not acted to address it in a timely fashion. I would rather see money spent on prevention than cure; I would rather see it invested in the system.

With that in mind, and recognising the budgetary pressures, I will digress slightly to talk about how we spend money in relation to this. I want to highlight the £1,000 payment to assist those whose homes were flooded, which was welcome in the context of reassurances that it was as a result of exceptional weather conditions. However, that has now been invoked three times in the past three years, to the tune of around £3 million. That raises serious questions about how exceptional such flooding is and whether the payment is a good use of scarce resources.

A number of residents in East Belfast, who have been eligible for the payment on more than one occasion, have indicated to me that they would rather see money invested in measures to deal with the underlying causes. To put it in context: £16,000 to £20,000 could pay for storm water separation in some localities or provide assistance for scores of people to protect their properties against in-house flooding, both of which would address not only risk but consequent access to insurance. That is something that needs to be looked at. In relation to strategy, the maintenance of gullies and culvert grills needing to be cleared is also a serious matter.

I want to look briefly at the issue of response to flooding. I acknowledge the Executive’s efforts to improve the response, but, despite those efforts, it remains woefully inadequate. The creation of the single line to report flooding was a welcome development. However, I had hoped that it would not be a single person answering that line. I believe that at the peak of the flooding on the bank holiday in August, there were two people answering the phones. It was the first test of the system, and Sod’s Law dictated that it happened on a bank holiday weekend and without a severe weather warning. Nevertheless, the service was abysmal. It took upwards of 25 minutes to get through on the flood line, and people did one of two things: they gave up completely or they circumvented the system through elected representatives using other numbers. With the latter, we have no guarantee that those calls are being recorded and followed up in the same way as other calls.

There was a unified number, but not a unified response. People are still coming out on the ground telling residents that the water that they are standing ankle-deep in is not their problem; that adds insult to injury. We have to accept that responsibility is spread over a number of Departments, but we should not have residents left to cope alone. We also need co-ordination of other services. A number of Members have talked about road closures, for example. I hope that that is something that we will see better co-ordinated in future, as well as the follow-up and investigation.

However, if we are to have that level of co-ordination in strategy and response, we need the inter-agency flood working group, which was to be convened by DARD, as the competent authority via the Rivers Agency, to meet more regularly and to work intensively on the problem. I am disappointed by the flood working group’s lack of activity and progress. I believe that no meeting was called until August or September. I hope that the Minister can reassure us that his colleagues will be putting that at the top of their agenda.

It is not acceptable or sustainable that our constituents live with the threat of flooding on a repeat basis. I hope that the Minister will be able to offer them and us, as elected representatives, some comfort that action will be taken to alleviate it as soon as possible.

Robin Newton (DUP)

I thank my party colleague Lord Browne for securing this Adjournment debate on what is an ongoing and serious problem in the East Belfast constituency. As Lord Browne said, this is the second time that flooding in East Belfast has been the subject of an Adjournment debate in the House, and the matter has also been raised during Question Time, in face-to-face meetings with Ministers and by delegations of residents and business owners whose properties have been affected by flooding. Those who are suffering would not forgive us if the matter were not raised again and again. Members who have spoken in this Adjournment debate have made the point that until the problem is sorted, our constituents will expect us to continue raising the matter.

I thank the Finance Minister and the Environment Minister who took time out of their busy schedules to visit residents who were affected by the floods in the East Belfast constituency. I pay particular thanks to the Finance Minister for making the flood relief payment available on 31 August.

Over the past three years, we have seen East Belfast suffer what are probably the worst floods that have been experienced throughout the whole of the Province, and we have witnessed homes in areas such as Cregagh, Clonduff, the Castlereagh Road, Clarawood, Hamel Drive, Ardgowan Street and Hillsborough Drive being flooded. The names of those areas roll off the tongues of representatives of the East Belfast constituency, because for the past three years, we have had regular contact with the residents of those areas every time that heavy rain is forecast or when there is heavy rainfall.

Robin Newton (DUP)

I thank Dr Paisley for his intervention. The situation that he described, with gardens being flooded, is replicated in the Finchley Park area, where two houses flood regularly every year. In fact, when we held a meeting with representatives of the statutory agencies in the back garden of one of those properties, the gentleman concerned produced a file, which was about two inches thick, on the correspondence that he has had on the flooding issue.

I referred to the areas in which homes had been flooded, and people in those areas are concerned. Such is their concern about the potential of being flooded out of their homes, some folk store sandbags on their driveways as a precaution. Having met a large number of residents from the areas affected and representatives from the Rivers Agency, Roads Service and the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development over the past months, I can understand residents’ frustration. I look forward to the publication of that report, and also to the report on the Loop, Knock and Connswater rivers. It is important, though, that action is taken as a result of those reports.

There appears to be some confusion as to which of the Departments is responsible for responding to flooding in East Belfast and for the maintenance of the rivers and the tributaries that contribute to that flooding. Indeed, statutory officials have told me that several very small rivers in the Clonduff area are unmapped, and although the officials know that those rivers exist, they do not know who is responsible for them. That lack of knowledge of who is responsible has contributed to the problems suffered by one lady in the Clonduff area whose home has been completely flooded four times in the past 11 years, and who is afraid to leave her house for a weekend or for a holiday for fear that it will be flooded again. The statutory authorities are aware of the problems, but we must reassure those residents that we are going to take action to tackle them.

Deciding who is responsible for the problem is difficult, but of equal difficulty is bringing about a solution. Action has been taken on the ground, and the various agencies want and are willing to help to find a solution to the problem. Indeed, when those agencies arrive, and see at first hand the difficulties that householders are having, there is a willingness among them to try to solve the problem. However, the problem can only be solved by the Departments taking a joined-up approach, the lack of which is not unique to this problem. Indeed, it runs through other issues and problems that are debated regularly in the Chamber.

There is confusion in the minds of those who are affected by the flooding, and for those who are seeking a solution to it. Those people know that there is a need for a joined-up approach, but they do not recognise that there is a problem between the Departments; they simply want a solution to the sporadic flooding.

The argument for a joined-up approach has been made by other Members. That approach was also emphasised by Belfast City Council, which, through its flood group and health and environmental services committee, compiled a number of proposals to deal with the flooding in East Belfast.

The first of those proposals highlights a need to improve communications between the various agencies and the public on what improvement works are being undertaken or planned. Furthermore, Belfast City Council has suggested that there is a need to develop a Government scheme to help those householders whose insurance premiums have been increased because of the risk of flooding. Indeed, I recently took a group of businesspeople to meet the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development to discuss that issue. Those people’s businesses had been flooded on several occasions due to an overspill of the Loop river, and, as a result, they now find it virtually impossible to insure their businesses.

Belfast City Council also identified the need for the Housing Executive to consider flood protection measures, and that further joined-up working on the provision of sandbags was required. I pay tribute to the organisers of an initiative in the Orangefield area where approximately 15 homes were completely flooded two years ago, and in addition to cleaning the river adjacent to the houses, a large container of sandbags was placed close to the houses and residents were given the telephone number of the person responsible for that container. That means that, in the event of flooding reoccurring, those sandbags can be distributed in perfect condition very quickly to allow residents to prevent the spread of the flooding. We need to have more such initiatives.

I welcome the fact that the Minister is in the Chamber; that is a good sign. I hope that, as a result of this and previous debates, some solutions will be found.

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the proposer for securing the debate, and I welcome the opportunity to participate in it. I also welcome the comments of the Members who contributed to the debate.

I recognise, quite understandably, why people express frustration at the reoccurrence of flooding in East Belfast over a number of years. However, many responsible and helpful suggestions and solutions have been put forward. I will ensure that a record of the debate is distributed among the various agencies, some of which are under my authority in the Department for Regional Development, and some, as Members have recognised, are outside my authority. Nevertheless, I will ensure that all the agencies have a copy of the Hansard report of the debate so that they will be aware of the issues that were raised and the helpful and productive suggestions that have been made. If Members have raised particular points that are not covered in my response, I will ensure that I respond in writing.

I appreciate fully that flooding causes great distress to people in addition to the damage it causes to homes. I also appreciate the frustration that Members have expressed when trying to deal with those matters.

During the latest flooding incident on 31 August 2009, the Met Office estimated that approximately 6 mm of rain fell in approximately 20 minutes. I accept what the Member said about that not being the type of exceptional rainfall that we had previously, and, therefore, it is all the more disappointing that, in those circumstances, areas continue to flood. The surface water accumulated rapidly during the middle of the day on 31 August, which resulted in surface flooding in the Carrington Street area and other areas of South and East Belfast. As a result, the design capacity of the drainage network was exceeded and, in some cases, was totally overwhelmed.

The flooding that occurred on 31 August was not caused by any failure to maintain the operational effectiveness of storm-water gullies or the road drainage system. The road drainage infrastructure was simply overwhelmed by the deluge of rain that fell in a relatively short time. Members will be aware that the responsibility for the drainage infrastructure is shared between the three main drainage organisations: the Rivers Agency, which is an agency of the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, Roads Service, and Northern Ireland Water (NIW).

Procedures for liaison and co-ordination of emergency responses between the three drainage organisations are set out in the inter-agency flooding information pack, and that information pack is currently being revised. I note people’s concerns about what they considered to be the lack of a joined-up approach.

There is also a shared flooding hot spots list, which identifies those areas at greatest risk of flooding and the lead organisation for each location. Those organisations also take the lead in the development and implementation of measures to reduce the likelihood of future flooding of those hot spots. In addition, hot spot lists are held by each of the drainage organisations, and they have their own programmes for dealing with those on a priority basis.

In the case of Roads Service, the problems encountered at flood locations are not always easy to resolve, as a solution may be prohibitively expensive or not immediately obvious. Even with the most careful and thorough planning, gullies, road drains and watercourses can simply be overwhelmed by a deluge of rain falling in a short time. Roads Service has plans in place to deal with roads-related flooding incidents, which ensure that a response is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

As far as possible, Roads Service co-operates and works alongside NI Water, the Rivers Agency and other responding organisations, including the PSNI, local councils, the Fire and Rescue Service and other statutory agencies, to ensure that a quick and appropriate response is made to flooding incidents. In its response to flooding, Roads Service seeks to restore normality to flooded roads, having regard to the safety of the public and Roads Service personnel, the prevention of traffic disruption and the protection of homes and property.

When Roads Service becomes aware of roads that have flooded, signs are erected, where practical, to advise road users of the possible risks. However, in the event of widespread flooding, resources will be targeted to the busier routes that carry the greater volume of traffic.

Roads Service aims to inspect and, where necessary, clean all gullies in urban areas twice a year. That policy ensures that a reasonable level of maintenance is carried out to drainage systems, taking account of the Department’s finite funding and staff resource levels. In addition to that scheduled operation, further cleaning is carried out to deal with blocked gullies, particularly at locations where falling leaves represent an ongoing problem at certain times of the year, or where there has been a history of gullies becoming blocked for other reasons.

Naomi Long (Alliance)

I thank the Minister for giving way on that particular point. There is an ongoing issue, which I think was raised by Sir Reg Empey and others, of cars being parked over gullies when the cleaning cycle is ongoing. In other countries, residents are notified in advance of the day on which their gullies will be cleaned, and vehicles that are blocking those gullies on those days can be towed away. Residents are advised not to park on those roads, which are marked on that day, so that the gullies can be cleaned. Can we not consider introducing similar measures here to ensure that gullies are properly maintained?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin)

I am content for Roads Service to examine that suggestion. The difficulty is that, although residents may be informed and may co-operate, there may be other people either doing business or visiting a street who may not be aware of it. I do not doubt that, if someone who was visiting a sick or elderly relative had their car clamped or towed away, other representatives would be saying that the Roads Service was being heavy handed. There are always contrary arguments —

Robin Newton (DUP)

Will the Minister give way?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin)

I will give way in a moment. It would probably be better to ascertain the level of the problem caused by parked cars before we introduce measures to deal with it, but I am quite happy to explore that suggestion with Roads Service.

Robin Newton (DUP)

I thank the Minister for giving way. He makes a valid point about visitors, and so on, but does he not agree that it would be common sense not to create the gullies in designated car parks so that the problem does not arise. I raise that point because it was a contributing factor to the flooding two years ago in the Clarawood estate, where vehicles were parked. The residents live in the high rise flats, and the gullies were actually created in the car-parking spaces.

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin)

I will ask Roads Service to examine that particular issue, but I accept the Member’s point. We often inherit systems that were built some time ago, and we try to make the best of them. I will ensure that note is taken of that particular issue, and will come back to the Member.

Since the flooding in East Belfast in 2008, Roads Service has carried out drainage-improvement schemes in Orangefield Lane, Merok Crescent and Tudor Drive. New gullies have been installed at Sandhill Park and Earlswood Road, and a number of replacement gullies have been installed in the lower Ravenhill Road area. In addition, further works are planned for Clonduff Drive, as has been mentioned by some Members, and Wynchurch Road, and investigatory work is continuing in Carnamena Avenue and Rosetta Road.

The Rivers Agency also has a regular inspection and maintenance programme for designated water courses in East Belfast to ensure the free flow of water. That includes the weekly clearance of urban grilles where blockage may cause a flood risk. The Rivers Agency has advised that, prior to the 2007 flooding, it had already been taking forward two flood-alleviation studies in East Belfast. Those studies have been concluded, and it is proposed that, subject to the availability of funding, substantial flood-alleviation works on the reaches of the Loop, Knock and Connswater rivers will be incorporated into the Connswater community greenway project. That multi-million pound urban environmental project is scheduled to commence in 2010-2011, and the flood-alleviation scheme is designed to manage the risk of flooding from rivers, but will not address the capacity of the road-drainage and sewerage network.

In advance of the proposed flood-alleviation works, the Rivers Agency has liaised with Northern Ireland Water, Roads Service and Belfast City Council to provide mitigation where possible. NIW has advised that its officials attended a site meeting with residents and elected representatives of Cooneen Way on Friday 4 September, and remedial work to reduce the risk of flooding has since been undertaken. NIW has undertaken a major de-silting operation at Carrington Street. Work commenced on 25 August and is expected to be completed by the end of this month. Investigations are also ongoing into the condition of the sewerage network in Cregagh Street, Willowholme Drive, Ardgowan Street and Hillsborough Drive, and an upgrade at Ravenhill Avenue is being considered in order to relieve the catchment.

NIW undertook a CCTV survey of the combined sewer in Sydenham Avenue to check for possible blockages, and some root intrusion was found. Work to resolve that problem has recently been completed. I understand that, during an investigation into localised flooding problems in Hawthornden Road, NIW discovered a cable that was partially impeding a sewer. The cable was relocated and the operation of the sewer has returned to normal.

All those measures are intended to prevent further flooding, pending the outcome of the ongoing drainage area study on the East Belfast sewerage network. The study will determine the condition of the infrastructure and identify any improvements that are required. The study is expected to be completed by late 2009, after which a drainage area plan, incorporating any improve­ments that the study recommends, will be developed. Completion of the plan will take a further six to nine months, and any planned improvement works will subsequently be included in NIW’s capital works programme. The implementation of any proposals that are part of the plan will, of course, be dependent on the availability of funding.

After the flooding in August 2008, a flood improve­ment action plan was developed. That is being implemented by all three drainage organisations for emergency planning, actual response and the clean-up and recovery phases.

Over the past 12 months, the three drainage organisations have put considerable time and effort into developing the flooding incident line. The phone number was released into the public domain on 29 January 2009, and the new service is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week. I fully appreciate that, when a person’s house is flooded, it is important to know who to contact and from whom to seek help. Members of the public do not now have to decide which organisation to ring; they simply contact the flooding incident line, where the details of the incident will be recorded and passed to the relevant agency.

I am aware, as has been raised today, that some residents reported difficulties with contacting the flooding incident line on 31 August. Members will recall that Minister Wilson explained that, on 31 August, the forecast weather conditions did not trigger a Met Office alert. However, an incident did occur, and the flooding incident line received a surge of calls: 42 calls were received between 2.00 pm and 2.30 pm, while only three calls had been received in the previous six hours. The number of staff was quickly increased, but, in the initial half-hour, some of the people who called to report incidents had to queue to have their calls answered.

Roads Service is involved in the implementation of the draft Water Environment (Floods Directive) Regulations as a preventative strategy for flood management. Those regulations establish a framework for managing flood risk that is aimed at reducing the adverse consequences on health, the environment, cultural heritage and economic activity. The regulations place an obligation on Govern­ment to identify areas of potential significant flood risk by undertaking a preliminary flood risk assessment of all river basin and coastal zones by December 2011.

Flood risk management plans must be produced by December 2015. Those plans will focus on prevention, protection and preparedness, and will detail objectives and measures to reduce the significant risk in those areas. The Rivers Agency will take the lead in implementing the directive here. The directive represents a shift to a more integrated, proactive and holistic approach to reducing flood risk and places an emphasis on the use of sustainable flood management.

I assure Members that the circumstances of, and my Department’s response to, the flooding incident of 31 August 2009 will be investigated to identify any opportunities to reduce the risk of further events and to improve the standard of the inter-agency response. As with all such incidents, it is essential that lessons be learned for the future. I thank Members for the opportunity to speak in the debate. Go raibh míle maith agat.