Scrutiny Meeting @CityWestminster Council where Thames Water promised Independent Review of the flash floods in London but no details

After watching two council scrutinies on the flash floods in London, a letter from the Consumer Council for Water (CCW) informs me what is happening with the Independent Review offered by Thames Water in both sessions.

Thames Water had reiterated in both scrutiny meetings that they will be commissioning an independent review which will look at the network’s performance in far more detail, to see what lessons can be learned and to identify what the most appropriate solution would be for the long term protection of local residents though the details where lacking. 

It appears the broad structure of the review is now in place and Mike Woolgar will be the chairman, the Director of WSP UK Ltd’s Water group, responsible for water strategy and technical advisory services. He will head a panel of three experts, with international experience of flood risk management, that will lead the review alongside separate consultants carrying out the work on the ground. These experts will be assisted by a group of representatives from organisations which have a stake in preventing flooding in London, including the Environment Agency, the Consumer Council for Water, London Councils, the London Drainage Engineers Group and the Thames Regional Flood and Coastal Committee. OFWAT will also be joining this group.

The review itself currently has five core objectives but these are being reviewed by the expert group which will have the final say:

• Establish what happened during the storms of 12 and 25 July
• Determine how well Thames Water’s network performed during those storms
• Identify other factors, such as the time of day, which potentially contributed to the flooding
• Recommend how Thames Water can achieve its responsibilities as a flood risk management authority and increase resilience to future extreme events
• Identify wider implications for London’s drainage infrastructure and make recommendations to all authorities with surface water management responsibilities to increase resilience across the capital.

As part of the review, residents, local authorities and MPs will be contacted to provide information throughout the process to get their essential input. Here it would be using to have the GLA involved as well. While they don’t have any responsibilities for water in London the way councils may do, its strategic perspective across London would certainly be useful. 

Thames Water has still not commit entirely to a strict deadline for the Review as some keenly wanted to know at the Kensington Scrutiny but it is believed that it will take approximately six months to complete. It is  of course reassuring that OFWAT is also going to be closely involved in this group and is clearly wanting to see it conducted in a rigorous and timely way.

What is surprising is that Thames Water have not informed their customers yet, particularly those affected by the flash floods in July, nor those of us who complained to them about their services in response to those event. This all the more surprising given the criticism is has received about its communications which it has readily accepted could have been a lot better!  

With flash floods in London partially caused by intense rains not seen before and likely to
increase in the future on the basis of the latest IPCCC Research Reports, some will be
asking how can all the discussion on climate change at the COP26 in Glasgow help?

Now you will be forgiven for thinking everybody is going to Glasgow, well almost everyone,
but it must feel like Manhattan during a UN General Assembly when all the world leaders
head for New York annually. But it is first worth remembering that there will be two COPs,
the official one and the fringe. The official one will have delegates from all the Conference of
the Parties (COP) with almost 200 countries registered with the UN Convention on Climate
Change, while the fringe will have a host of companies, cities and regions and NGO’s from
both here and from all over the world all working towards net zero by 2050. So in short, there
will be 10,000 thousands of people going to Glasgow for both the COPs.

At the outset, it is worth asking what needs to happen for a successful COP26 in Glasgow?
In this respect, we will not only need to raise the ambitions of the National Climate Plans but
support the climate vulnerable developing countries and also advance the Paris Rulebook.

That means all the countries updating or submitting their new National Climate Plans (NCP)
that collectively keep limited warming down to around 1.5C within reach, but it is very clearly
not the case right now.

At present all the total of all the announced NCP’s submitted do not equal 45 per cent
reduction by 2030 and net zero by 2050. It is more like a 16 per cent increase in gas
emissions and thus an actual temperature rise of more like 2.6C rather than the maximum of
2C aiming for 1.5C in the Paris Accord.

So we need to see a very real improvement in the NCP’s submitted particularly from the big
polluters and the historically big one’s in the developed world. No country escape’s the climate crisis but those emitted the least and the most affected. That is why we will need to deliver the $100 bn annually to the developing world as promised in Paris even before the COP begins as it has become an issue of trust.

So it is disappointing to hear that this will not now be satisfied before the COP26 but will take
another 3 years from all the last minute negotiations. This issue will run and run and there is
no doubt even more climate finance will be required for the developing world to adapt by the
end of the present decade and beyond.

And finally the rule book has to have a common time frameworks for reporting and action
required to help enhance pledges, and to hold every country to account. For example, China
has stated it will hit net zero by 2060, with their carbon emissions peaking in 2030. Clearly
this falls a decade behind the timeframe established. But after verification from the
International Energy Agency (IEA) it suggests it is likely that China will meet their targets
earlier than suggested by even them, highlighting the need for common time frameworks. So
with such common time frameworks, we can better investigate India’s declared aim this
week of net zero by 2070.

So while there will be many other issues and themes raised like those during the first week –
deforestation measures signed up again, methane measures from the US & EU, green
finance – to name a few over the past few days, l make my trip during the second week of
the COP26 in Glasgow with these above questions primarily in mind. Only when these are
satisfactorily answered can we say we have had a successful COP26 at Glasgow.

An updated version of this blog was published in the Westminster Extra on the 5th of November

Simon Jenkins is right to say “Big Cities can show us the way to a more climate-friendly …” world on the 22nd of Oct particularly with the level of urbanisation happening around the world now, with more people in the world living in urban than in rural settings since 2010, and many Asian Mega-cities with 20 million plus populations.

Unfortunately, they are not party to the official COP26 and maybe they should be in future, particularly when their nation states let us down with their National Climate Plans (NCP) . They could then come up with their own City Climate Plans for submission as City Conference of the Parties and be measured against their own targets and others as well.

So l trust the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) secretariat are listening.

Protesters at the Shaheed Minar, Altab Ali Park, Whitechapel, E1

The recent killings of Hindu worshippers during their Durga Puja celebration and the lead up to Diwali, is deeply shocking. These attacks on homes and temples of the Hindu community must stop immediately and the Bangladesh government needs to act swiftly and give justice to those attacked and their families. 

It is completely unacceptable that any violence should be levelled at any faith group. Not surprising the killing of Hindu worshippers has shocked many around the world and is the lived reality of the Hindu community across Bangladesh. 

Let us not forget Hindu Bengalis were the main victims of the Pakistani army atrocities during the liberation war of Bangladesh, 50 years ago. Where uncircumcised Bengali men in lungi’s and women with Bindis were their main targets. So the bloody war was fought and won to establish an independent Bangladesh based on secularism, pluralism and democracy. 

If nothing else Hindu lives should matter very much in Bangladesh as the land of the Bengalis should be protecting all as the secular and plural constitution emphasises, particularly in its fifty year of formation. We can not have the land of Bengalis persecuting Hindu’s in its 50th year of independence, undermining its secular tradition.  So quite simply the Bangladesh government needs to act in the strongest terms possible, otherwise we rise losing “Amar Sonar Bangla”  

It is not often l return to a blog with additions but the circumstances merit it in this instance. So can l say, that l welcome the attempt to return to the secular constitution of Bangladesh of 1972. This is long over due from the days when former military dictator HM Ershd and Ziaur Rahman incorporated Islam as state religion in the constitution. So l look forward to seeing progress at the Jatiya Shamsad on this front. 

But l also trust specific actions are taken by the government to prevent repeats of such atrocities against the Hindu community, including the following: 

• Investigate and trial of the perpetrators, by special tribunal if needed
• Put In place a minority protection act, making Hinduism a protected religion.
• and finally a minority Commission to look into ways to ensure opportunities for minority religious and ethnic groups in a overwhelming Muslim country.

Only then can we begin to deal with the huge damage done by these appalling attacks. 

As expectations of the Chinese not being there at COP26, we have to be careful it doesn’t lead to sinophobia

We should be mindful of the growing tide of sinophobia (anti-Chinese racism) in the world also creeping into the COP26 as the finger gets pointed at the Chinese being the biggest CO2 emission polluters in the world. 

Unfortunately, sinophobia has a long history as Chinese people have faced perceptions of being “unhygienic” and “dirty” long before coronavirus came along. As early as the 19th century Opium Wars, the Chinese nation was referred to as the “sickman of Asia” This slur took a literal turn as Chinese migrants around the world came to be associated with poor hygiene and proneness to disease. Are we about to see the same happen now with CO2 emissions as China gets painted as the “biggest polluter of the world” during COP26?  

The Chinese commitment towards net carbon zero in 2060 with carbon emissions peaking in 2030 has not only be verified by reputable third party like the International Energy Association (IEA) but its suggested by them that they will reach that net carbon figure much earlier than 2060. The IEA Director General Dr Birol states very clearly “This accelerated transition would put China’s CO2 emissions into marked decline after 2025, opening up the possibility of China reaching carbon neutrality well before 2060. This would be both good for China and good for the world.”

Furthermore alarm has been compounded by Chinese power cuts suggestions that will mean pushing them off their path. In fact some like Carbon Brief suggest the power shortages might accelerate China’s climate action as the State Council – China’s highest organ of state administration – issued six specific orders to deal with the power shortages in a meeting chaired by Premier Li Keqiang. 

This of course does not take on board, the historical levels of CO2 emissions already used per capita by countries. On this metric, using figures of the carbon emissions from fossil fuels per capita since 1850, we and he US have used more than our fair fossil fuel share, as the following diagram shows quite clearly. 

In this respect both China & India, the two largest countries in Asia, have not consumed more than 38 – 148 historical tonnes per capita so far. In comparison both the UK and US the figure ranges from 1,164-1,239 historical tonnes per capita. So both us and the Americans have already consume more than 8 times more than the Chinese have so far. Yet the there will a lot of pressure on the Chinese and India certainly on the coal front. 

So in light of these figures and being mindful of growing sinophobia, they should help stop the Chinese being seen as the “dirtiest polluter of the world”  

In red we have the critical drainage areas in RBKC and in green the area most affected by the July floodings

Last night RBKC investigated the flash floods that hit London in July particularly in their neighbourhoods where we certainly had more resident participation.  On top of which we had representatives from  OFWAT, the regulator of Water Utilities in the UK and the Consumer Council for Water as well as  course Thames Water defending themselves along with local councillors. 

But first the impact the floods had in the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea. Clearly the sewer system was unable to cope with the intense storms in July which was compounded by the high tide.  Altogether, some 25 streets were flooded, 220 residents re-housed with one block of flats completely surrounded by water and as well affected 3 schools. Some 25-50 local businesses were also affected and it has also had a major mental health toll as well. 

One of the popular demands of the evening from residents was why not enough FLIPs (Flooding Local Improvement Programme ) particularly pumps built into basement properties were not built into their homes after 2007 floods, a key element of the Counters Creek Sewer flooding Alleviation scheme proposal from 2014. 

It was interesting to note the tension between OFWAT and Thames Water and their recent performance is already an issue of concern for the regulator. Thames Water themselves accepted that their services were not good enough, largely due to its historic management and it would take some 8 years to turn it around again.  So watch this space! 

Finally the next borough scrutiny of the impact of the flash floods in West Central will be in Hammersmith & Fulham.  So far we have heard different stories of the impact of the flash flooding in West Central and how to deal with the many issues it highlights. 

The floods last night in Knightsbridge are another reminder of the adverse effects of the floods on the 12th & 25th of July and appear to have become a regular occurrence in London.

Last week’s Westminster Council Public Scrutiny meeting at Porchester Hall, W2 was an attempt to scrutinise the issues involved but raised for me more questions than answers.

After many councillors in Maida Vale and other affected wards in Westminster City Council reported the extent of the damage done to angry local residents we heard for the first time about the Council’s Section 19 interim Report; Thames Water and London Fire Service. This while we should not forget the council has responsibility for the local highway drainage, Thames Water manage the sewer network. 

As expected while Thames Water were sorry for what had happened but did not accept any liability for compensation on the matter, emphasising they independent enquiry into the whole matter. They readily conceded the response on the day of the floods was – to quote their corporate director – ‘bloody awful’ but deny liability for the damage caused. This while the councils have responsibility for the local highway drainage, Thames Water manage the sewer network. 

For example we heard about a man of 72 from Maida Vale just getting over cancer, who had lost everything in the floods won’t be get a penny in compensation. He has since the flooding become homeless and been moved around to six different hotels by the council!  What they did not tell us was who was going to part of the independent enquiry and how they will consult with residents adversely affected by the floods. It could quite easily by made up representatives of other private water utilities, and thus not likely to say anything which means the water industry needs to address. So let us watch this space for the make up the Board for the Independent Enquiry.

We heard 230 homes were flooded in Westminster altogether and it was one of the busiest day’s for the London Fire Brigade who help drain the floods down. The local borough Commander for Westminster gave us an excellent over all picture for London, but not the local one for Westminster. Something local residents should pursue clearly given the impact in Maida Vale, Little Venice and Pimlico. 

Hammersmith & Fulham council will be having a similar Public Scrutiny Meeting on the flooding in their borough soon. Here the Brackenbury Residents’ Association and LBHF among others are compiling a list of the properties affected, a similar exercise would be useful in Westminster as well.  As the exercise in H&F mirrors closely the properties affected in the last major flood in 2007. This is significant as Thames Water claim this is an exceptional (1:300 year) event that could not have been predicted or prevented. There was of course the major Counters Creek flood relief scheme cancelled as unnecessary in 2014 but many of the alternative mitigations (FLIPS and SUDS for those used to the jargon) were not particularly well completed. Whilst the Maida Vale Alleviation Scheme had been built out in W9, but to no avail on the 12th of July! 

The threat and how we deal with flooding is clearly not going to go away around London, so keep in touch on the website stoplondonfloods.com

Whilst l have had the double jab, I shall not be taking a booster!

As a doubled jabbed 50 plus year old Londoner, l won’t be taking a booster.

As l rather it be used for the global efforts against COVID19 pandemic particularly in the developing world. As the WHO chief tells us, COVID19 is no respecter of borders so when a virus is widely circulating in a population and causing many infections, the likelihood of the virus mutating and spreading increases. As the WHO warns, we need to do everything possible to stop the spread of the virus in order to prevent mutations that may reduce the efficacy of existing vaccines.

So jabbing the world is the priority for me, before the booster.