North Norfolk candidiates respond to a number of key questions on issues suggested by readers
(North Norfolk News, 21 April 2005)
What are your views on the Shoreline Management Plan as it affects North Norfolk's coastal defences?
Phil Harris - Labour
We need to tackle the problems of a rising sea level. labour will continue to lead internationally on climate change and to strive for wider acceptance of the science and the steps needed to combat the problem. Labour will look beyond Kyoto and promote an international dialogue to reach agreement on the long-term goals and action needed to stabilise the level of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The Labour Government will develop a more strategic and integrated approach to managing coastal flooding and erosion risks, while ensuring democratic input into the decision-making process. We also need to tackle factors that could have an effect on coastal erosion. There should be an immediate study into the effect of dredging on coastal erosion.
Iain Dale - Conservative
I am unequivocally against the Shoreline Management Plan. My party is committed to a fundamental rethink of coastal policy. We will abandon Labour's points system for allocating funds, look at putting coastal defence under a single agency, and immediately commission a full geomorphological study into the effects of dredging. If a link is proven, we will halt it altogether or impose a levy on the dredging companies which would pay for proper sea defences. We will examine the best way to establish and fund a compensation scheme for any property lost to the sea, which will help remove property blight. Sea defences should not be a party political issue, but Labour's policy is to abandon the coast and the Lib Dems admit (EDP, March 3) they have no policy at all, and won't have one before the election. Only the Conservatives have a workable, thought out approach.
Norman Lamb - Liberal Democrats
I secured a debate In Parliament to tell the minister how strongly local people feel about the SMP. This plan should be withdrawn; it is fundamentally flawed. It falls to analyse the cost to local communities, local economy and the road infrastructure of abandoning the coastline. More work must be done on studying the impact of dredging on coastal erosion and there should be a more robust environmental impact assessment before dredging licences are granted. I want compensation scheme for those who lose properties to the sea. This would encourage people to buy homes in these communities, thereby tackling blight. It would force the Government to think more carefully before abandoning a stretch of coastline. It is wrong people could lose everything as a result of a change in Government policy.
Stuart Agnew - UK Independence Party
The Conservatives called it "managed retreat". The big risk of the policy is that if we see a repeat of the 1953 floods there will be utter devastation a little further inland. It is important to get qualified advice on the effect of the aggregate extraction going on a few miles out to sea. (It might be argued that deepening the sea bed will reduce the risk of water sloshing over the coast). UKIP feels Britain is worth defending whether it be from the sea or the EU. Coastal defence is an environmental measure giving the EU the final say on this. It has produced something called Marine Integrated Coastal Zone Management, and a body called Eurosion has produced a brochure called "living with coastal erosion In Europe". The EU "recommend" that their own guidance is sought on this issue which will form part of the sixth Community Environment Action Plan.