The River Thames Scheme Consultation is missing the point!

This is an email about the River Thames Scheme Consultation received from John Douglass 27-2-2024

Restore, maintain and improve the existing drainage
catchment BEFORE the construction of the new RTS Channels
Whether you agree or disagree with the new planned River
Thames Scheme (RTS) surely it makes sense to make the best
of what we already have?
Wraysbury and Datchet badly need the Wraysbury Drain
restored. There is sewage and impurities being discharged
into the streams and rivers. Restoration and dredging have
ceased. There is flooding to local businesses and homes due
to poor urban drainage and no ongoing maintenance.
Reading the RTS feedback form there is much being made of
the construction of the new channels and the benefits in
terms of biodiversity and recreational facilities for the
community, for example provision of biodiversity, play areas,
motorboat hire and showering facilities (all listed as options
amongst others within the RTS scheme literature), but no
mention of the maintenance and restoration of the existing
infrastructure which comprises the many small rivers, drains
and ditches of the Thames Valley. A comprehensive study
would also surely reveal potential improvements for example
installation of underground pipes to improve drainage at
strategic points.
Restoration and improvements to what is already in place can
deliver improvements to flood resilience far quicker than the
construction of the new channel and because the existing
channels are distributed across the many small water courses
the risks of flood and damage associated with a single point
of failure at the RTS scheme channel exit are greatly reduced.
Why is this not a priority for the RTS scheme?
It may be argued that the Environment Agency is responsible
only for fluvial flooding and Surrey County Council is the Lead
Local Flood Authority responsible for surface water and
groundwater drainage, so the parcel passes between the two.
But SCC is a partner and main contributor to the RTS scheme
using our ratepayers’ funds; they are both sat round the same
table! So why can’t a coherent scheme be drawn up to
accommodate both the catchment drainage and the RTS
scheme in one plan, with a suitable schedule to deliver the
most immediate results. SCC also has the necessary statutory
powers to issue enforcements to landowners to clear ditches
where appropriate.
There is another scheme being drawn up called the “Thames
Valley Flood Scheme” (TVFS) it is in the early stages of
development but include objectives such as:
1/ Improved urban drainage
2/ Flood water transfer
3/ River restoration
4/ River deepening and widening.
Very much in line with what I am proposing. So why can’t the
relevant objectives of the TVFS be incorporated into the RTS
scheme? If there is funding for wetlands, play areas and
motorboat hire then then there is funding for improvements
to the catchment drainage and hence improvements to flood
resilience.
There is a public consultation in place at present which closes
on the 4th March at midnight. If you share my view that the
maintenance, restoration and improvement of the existing
river and drainage system is more important than provision
of biodiversity, play areas, motorboat hire and showering
facilities (all listed as options amongst others within the RTS
scheme literature) then fill in the RTS feeback form (available
online here
https://www.riverthamesscheme.org.uk/consultation

Let you views be known before the deadline of 4th March midnight.
John Douglass
Date: 27th February 202w