48 homes in Lavendon were devastated by flooding during September's heavy rains, marking the third significant flood in just 12 years. After months without a Full Council meeting, Conservative Councillor Peter Geary is bringing a resident-led motion to tonight’s Full Council, demanding urgent action to prevent further incidents.
Following the significant floods this year, Cllr Geary attended a meeting with over 120 villagers who were frustrated that preventable flooding had once again overwhelmed their village and in many cases their homes. Residents unanimously called for action, starting with this motion to Milton Keynes City Council.
In his motion, Cllr Geary will outline the history behind the flooding in Lavendon and ask the Council to take some steps to build the already designated and permitted flood prevention measures, as well as the urgent provision of gel sandbags.
He will also request that the Council investigates why the flood prevention scheme has taken so long to complete. Flood mitigation work for Lavendon began a decade ago, with a number of flood mitigation measures recommended and agreed. Former Conservative MP Ben Everitt and local Councillors also fought for MKCC to receive £150,000 of dedicated government funding for Lavendon from the Frequently Flooded Allowance scheme. Yet, the Lavendon flood prevention scheme is yet to be completed in full.
Cllr Peter Geary said:
“One of the most fundamental duties of a councillor is to represent their residents and this is exactly what I’m doing here, bringing the concerns of Lavendon residents to Council, who have the power to do something to prevent the flooding that is destroying our residents’ homes and lives. This is a problem that can and must be solved, the designs have been in place for over a decade but despite funding agreement in 2014 and extra government funding in recent years, the scheme has not progressed from the paper plans. This is unacceptable.”
Cllr Geary added
“The Labour Cabinet Member has tabled amendments to my motion tonight, removing any commitment for action. While this might be politically expedient for the Labour administration, it adds insult to injury for the residents of Lavendon who have suffered enough. I would urge the Cabinet Member to reconsider. This is not about a battle with me; he is fighting against residents who need his help- the very people he should be serving. I urge him to think again, withdraw the amendment he has put in and work on delivering a scheme to protect the rural community from any more devastating floods”.
ENDS
