To receive any verbal updates from Parish Councillors.

Councillor Larcombe conveyed that it was the fourth time that his friends, family and constituents were flooded and critically commented that the same process was being followed. Referring to the Section 19 investigation, he requested for the Section 19 investigation report from the 2014 flooding event to be circulated. Councillor Larcombe announced that he would advocate for the reintroduction of dredging of the River Thames as recommended Mechanisms of Flooding Report from Clive Onions, stating that the River Thames no longer had capacity due to the riverbed having risen. He also critically pointed out that building a new flood alleviation scheme would cost millions of pounds as well as take many years to establish.

ACTION:  The Section 19 investigation report from the 2014 flooding event to be circulated amongst Flood Group attendees.

The Chair requested for dredging to be added for discussion at the next meeting.

ACTION: Dredging to be discussed at the next Flood Group meeting.

Speaking for Wraysbury, Parish Councillor Andrew Spillane raised that around 10 properties in Wraysbury had been breached with many more experiencing power outages and contamination from spilled sewage. He asked if there was any clarity on the criteria to receive government funding for being affected by flooding.

Parish Councillor Andrew Spillane mentioned that Thames Water’s response had been good in regard to trucks and engineers at Wraysbury’s pumping stations nearly every day, crediting David Harding. With that said, he requested further potential support with the clear up, such as using fly-tipping trucks to help clear items which they lost in the flooding (e.g., fridge freezer or furniture in their garages), adding that Wraysbury Parish Council could help with that.

Speaking for Hurley, Parish Councillor David Burfitt expressed that EA and RBWM gave great support to Hurley during the flooding event, stating that the EA help line was helpful as well as regularly receiving reports from RBWM.

Parish Councillor David Burfitt then raised a couple of points. He raised that there was a motorboat stuck on the protective polls at the weir in Hurley for a fortnight. He also asked if there was an update on Temple Footbridge.

Concerning the stuck motorboat at Hurley weir, the Chair informed that it was not in the Flood Group’s remit but speculated that the EA would be working on this in the background if the lock keeper and nearby residents had reported it to them.

In regard to Temple Footbridge, Brianne Vally stated that this was discussed at Flood Group previously and had no further update form what was previously circulated. When the Chair asked Parish Councillor David Burfitt if he had access to the previous correspondence on this, to which he replied that he believed he had. She also shared a weblink on an update on the Temple Footbridge from Gov.uk in the Zoom chat.

Speaking for Datchet, Parish Councillor Ian Thompson raised some critical points in regard to flooding defence in Datchet. He first raised that there was a discussion and presentation from the EA in Datchet in November 2023 relating to the Datchet to Hythe End Flood Improvement Measures (DHEFIM). He stated that a number of residents conveyed that they did not understand what was going to be provided. He said that residents only knew what sort of flood defences were required in Datchet when he brought along his flood defence plan and that the EA’s provided material had no relation with his plan, alleging that the EA did not understand that the needs in the plan were required.

Parish Councillor Ian Thompson strongly expressed that the needs for Datchet flood defences had been forwarded to the flooding agencies (i.e., Environment Agency and Thames Water) since 2014 with little-to-no progress being made. He also critically brought up the promise of £10 million in flood defences which turned out to have never existed. He alleged t that the EA had already possessed the data for Datchet as shown from a survey they sent out based on this data.

From this, Parish Councillor Ian Thompson then pointed out the flooding which had taken place in Datchet, namely at Eton End, Southlea Road and Horton Road. He then criticised the issue at Horton Road in regard to Datchet Common Brook being rotated to various individuals at Thames Water over the years (with it now passing on between James Townsend and David Harding) and thus not being resolved. Regarding Southlea Road, he stated that the water flowed as expected from Poplars and alleged the EA was aware of this despite there being much data on this.

Conscious of the time, the Chair interjected to inform that the Flood Group’s remit and terms of reference would be reviewed and that he sought to push forward the required measures. While agreeing with his points, the Chair advised Parish Councillor Ian Thompson to push his points through the communication channels.

Continuing, Parish Councillor Ian Thompson then raised he was personally asked by David Belington from the EA in 2022 that Datchet Parish Council provide a document for consultation with the EA. He explained that while this was provided on behalf of Datchet Parish Council with agreement from the Parish Councils in Wraysbury, Old Windsor and Horton, he stated that he received no response or acknowledgement of this being reviewed. He then critically highlighted that there were plans for another consultation on the River Thames Scheme (RTS), despite having responded to one already, and asserted that action was required. He also lambasted that this new consultation did not list Datchet, Horton and Wraysbury as areas what could be affected.

Speaking for Cookham, Councillor Howard gave some complimentary feedback in regard to RBWM’s responsive measures in Cookham, particularly at the early stages. With that said, he then gave some points for improvement:

·       Improve communication which gave updates on the situation, particularly the EA SMS text alert system which appeared to not work properly.

·       Some individuals on the ground appeared to be unaware of the detailed parts of the RBWM Emergency Plan and suggested that this needed to be improved upon.

·       Revisit some parts of the Local Flood Risk Management Plan, stating that it needed to be updated.

Councillor Howard then raised that large hay bales covered in plastic sheeting and fencing across Battlemead Common impeded the flow water, whereby the hay bails would float to a single spot at the river and block water flow. He requested for this to be rectified, such as removing the plastic wrapping. He then highlighted that a 6-inch wire fencing had been trapping debris which then formed little dams across the common areas of Cookham. As a result of all this, the water in Cookham remained for a longer period. He stated that Cookham would like to engage with the agencies at Cookham.

Councillor Howard’s final point was that manhole covers at pressure sewage systems needed to be watertight and airtight, finding that the system kept filling up with water.

Speaking for Bray, Parish Councillor Louvaine Kneen requested for how the discharge of the tributary rivers going into the River Thames were managed as a topic from the EA to be discussed at the next Flood Group meeting, explaining that river water sometimes discharged in some areas, such as Ascot Road, Bray. She then briefly thanked the work of the flooding agencies.

The Chair reiterated the request to Laurence Ellis for the topic to be added to the next meeting, in which the latter suggested that it could be part of the EA update item.

ACTION: The management of discharging the tributary rivers going into the River Thames to be covered at the next Flood Group meeting.

Parish Councillor Malcolm Beer commented that flooding issues would not be resolved unless Surry County Council contributed and was brought into DHEFIM scheme, stating that they needed to be included in the partnership as Windsor and Maidenhead would not be able to financially afford the scheme on their own (and that Surrey would also receive considerable benefit from the Scheme); otherwise, he argued, time would be wasted. To reinforce his point, he added that some flooding place had taken place along the A308 and A30 roads, which included within Runnymede Borough (and therefore under Surrey County Council’s jurisdiction). Agreeing with Parish Councillor Ian Thompson’s comments, there was little action taking place despite much discussion.

While slightly disappointed with Parish Councillor Ian Thompson’s critical comments on how public engagement in Datchet was received, Brianne Vally nevertheless took it on as informative feedback. She stated that the EA were mindful that some residents may not find the engagement events and panels they had arranged as helpful as they could be. She hoped that Stuart Mollard’s earlier update on DHEFIM Scheme showcased to the forum that progress was taking place. While agreeing that there had not been much ‘on-the-ground’ flood mitigation measures for Datchet and Wraysbury since 2014, Brianne Vally hoped that the EA's updates and the background work to set up the Community Liaison Groups would go a long way to ensure communication channels open with communities. She also offered to answer any queries through direct email outside of the meeting.

In response to Parish Councillor Malcom Beer’s comment, the Chair agreed with the point on funding and was conscious of this in midst of the Borough’s financial situation. Nevertheless, he reassured that there were plans in place which he hoped would go forward.

The Chair reiterated that he wanted to positively move Flood Group forward and ensure change was being made.