Water UK, the organisation which represents all the UK water companies, has called on both Government and water sector regulators to overhaul the existing arrangements for surface water management and address significant issues with regard to funding future investment.

The national water industry body was commenting in its formal response to the National Infrastructure Commission’s (NIC) Call for evidence on Surface Water Flooding Study.

According to Water UK, the most important improvement would be a legislative review with the specific aim of achieving better integration of all the flood risk management authorities and their work.

"Current regulatory frameworks constrain water industry’s ability to manage surface water flood risk"

The response also flags up concerns about current regulatory frameworks – which Water UK says constrain the water industry’s ability to manage surface water flood risk in a way that reflects the growing challenges posed by climate change impacts.

Water UK has flagged up a number of issues in its detailed response, including the overall management of surface water flood risk, describing this as "fragmented with several risk management authorities being responsible for differing elements which overlap and are difficult to separate." Collaboration is essential in order to fully understand and manage the risk - but no one body has powers to effectively convene all parties and data, the trade body says.

Water UK says that the differing approaches result in an inconsistent national picture that does not represent the true risk, commenting:

“There are a lot of unknowns which further exacerbates the uncertainties in the current data available.”

Central data repository neeeded to ensure all surface water assets can be captured

Water UK is calling for a central repository be established to help resolve this, so that all surface water assets can be captured and then incorporated within any future updates to surface water modelling for any given area. The response says the current asset register requirement (under the Flood and Water Management Act) does not go far enough, and the uptake of this duty is disjointed, with differing approaches being taken nationally.

Water UK suggests that the revised duty for a central repository would need to be managed and maintained by a national body and that the Environment Agency may be “well-placed under their strategic overview role.“ The response says a standardised approach to data and information-sharing among flood risk management authorities would facilitate better coordination and collaboration for surface water management. It would also assist water companies in the preparation of their Drainage and Wastewater Management Plans.

The response outlines the type of information that should be contained within the repository, including:

• Asset condition
• Private surface water drains and sewers
• Land drains or other riparian pipes and watercourses
• Highway drainage systems and associated structures (including boundary walls and kerbs which may direct overland flow)
• Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) or other underground storage in new/retrofit developments
• Nature-based interventions
• Other undertakers’ assets, such as railway trackside drainage and utility ducts, which often act as conduits for excess surface water flows
• Private company or individual property protection measures
• Local knowledge of previous flooding events
• Information on the interrelationship between networks (such as surface water outfalls into watercourses, or overland flows on highway drainage systems)

Key factors contribute to risk of surface water flooding

In response to the NIC’s question about key factors which contribute to the risk of surface water flooding, Water UK draws attention to:

• Ambiguity in roles and responsibilities – a patchwork of organisations with different and overlapping responsibilities - but still leaves gaps.
• Limited duties on other risk management authorities and the public to maintain and improve surface water assets (such as highway drains, private surface water sewers and watercourses)
• Inconsistent approach to the ownership of surface water assets
• Assets are typically designed to different return periods leading to no consistent level of protection for a community (e.g. highway drainage 1 in 5, sewers 1 in 30, fluvial networks 1 in 100, etc.)

Lack of funding and resources

Water UK is also emphasising that limited budgets and resources across all organisations with a responsibility for surface water management are having a significant impact how the issues are addressed, including:

• Differing funding cycles of the organisations (6-year Environment Agency programmes, 5-year water industry business plans, annual budgets of local authorities etc.)
• Relatively short-term focus of many of the risk management authorities which results in focussing on addressing issues immediately after flooding occurs. Typically, where authorities are better resourced, more proactive management work is undertaken
• Inconsistent approach to maintenance of drainage assets with the regular use of third-party organisations leading to lack of a joined-up approach
• Management and maintenance of highways drainage
• Maintenance (or lack of) on third-party assets/riparian ownership

Water UK is also calling for a legislative review of the current roles and responsibilities to be undertaken, with the specific aim of achieving better integration of all the flood risk management authorities and their work.

Water UK says work should be undertaken to ensure that funding mechanisms are fit for purpose which would allow the flood risk management sector to work in unison and ensure that communities (including riparian and private owners) can play their part.

Measures should also be put in place to provide more control for water companies over new connections, including powers and funding to adequately address misconnections.

Different challenges posed by surface water flood risk in urban and rural areas

Water UK has also drawn attention to the different challenges posed by surface water flood risk in the context of an urban and rural environment.

Growth in urban areas, which includes the uncontrolled impacts of urban creep and permitted development rights on legacy drainage systems is having an impact. In addition, new surface water connections (i.e. new housing developments) being made to networks, including the developers’ automatic right to connect, are also contributing to the problem.

Commenting on the degree of surface water flood risk in urban areas, the responses says the costs of increasing capacity are “exponentially higher” in urban areas due to the complexities of navigating buried utilities, working with multiple landowners, and avoiding buildings etc. The constraints also mean it is difficult to build in significant future capacity for growth or climate change.

In rural areas, Water UK says there is often more land available to build surface water solutions, in contrast with urban areas, commenting: “This increases the opportunity for certain nature-based solutions and can provide greater opportunities for delivering multi-beneficial schemes.”

Greater flexibilty needed to facilitate partnership working

Water UK has some interesting points to make in response to the NIC’s query about whether solutions are on the horizon to better manage assets to minimise surface water flooding and at more efficient cost.

According to the trade organisation, partnership working is critical to deliver flood risk reduction efficiently. Water UK is calling for recognition to be given both by Government and regulators to the fact that flexibility is crucial in order to facilitate partnership working.

This would include the flexibility to the right thing, which is not always the cheapest option e.g. using blue-green infrastructure over more traditional ‘grey’ options that have more established and understood cost/benefit models.

The response draws attention to existing funding mechanisms and is calling for these to be altered to account for the best overall value for money for customers, bill payers and taxpayers.

Water UK wants to see better alignment of funding cycles to ensure organisations can work together and navigate funding streams to provide the right outcomes (not just outputs) and multiple benefits (reduced flood risk, enhanced biodiversity and/or amenity)

On the NIC’s query about how funding for investment in surface water flood risk management should be split between consumers and taxpayers, Water UK comments:

“Until we have clearer roles and responsibilities for surface water management, understand the true risk of surface water flooding, and the costs and benefits of surface water management, it’s difficult to discuss how to split the investment.”

“……There is a clear need for coordination between the government departments, private organisations and individual landowners across which surface water management responsibilities are split. Innovation, collaboration and longer-term planning is essential to ensure there is adequate funding for surface water management and increasing climate resilience for our communities.”

According to Water UK, a better understanding of the true risk of surface water flooding, as well as where interventions are taking place would allow for an updated national picture on the investment need.

The response suggests that a single national body with responsibilty for the overall management of surface water could support improved collaboration and innovation and potentially bring efficiencies over time, reducing the burden on those providing the funding.

“Any changes to these funding arrangements would need careful analysis to ensure they are supported by communities in line with regulatory frameworks and do not impact on vulnerable consumers,” the response continues.

“Water companies play their own part in the current system, seeking to collaborate where possible, but would welcome legislative clarity on roles and responsibilities, and changes to provide powers to compel more integrated work and enable all parties to work in the common interest."

Click here to download Water UK response to National Infrastructure Commission Call for evidence on Surface Water Flooding Study