Opinion: Guildford Cannot Afford to Delay Decisions on Flood Alleviation

Published on: 11 Mar, 2026
Updated on: 12 Mar, 2026

John Rigg

By John Rigg

former Residents for Guildford & Villages borough councillor and chair of the Guildford Vision Group

Guildford faces a decision that could shape the future safety and prosperity of the town for decades.

The proposed Guildford Flood Alleviation Scheme, being developed by the Environment Agency, offers the chance to significantly reduce flood risk to homes, businesses and key parts of the town centre.

Even more importantly, the scheme could attract substantial national funding — potentially up to 90 per cent of the cost through central government flood defence funding.

Opportunities of this scale rarely arise.

Yet despite the importance of the project, it is not clear that Guildford Borough Council has ever formally taken a clear position on whether it supports the scheme in principle.

That should concern residents.

The council has already invested around £2.5 million of public money on the town centre masterplan known as Shaping Guildford’s Future, a project that examined how Guildford’s riverside could be improved and better connected to the town.

Flood protection and riverside regeneration are naturally linked. One enables the other.

Yet while the Environment Agency is progressing a major scheme and millions have already been spent on related planning work, there appears to have been no clear political leadership and no formal decision about how these things fit together.

Residents are entitled to ask why.

Some of the explanation may lie in the impending reorganisation of local government across Surrey. But that cannot be an excuse for paralysis.

Until reorganisation happens, Guildford’s current council remains responsible for decisions affecting the town.

What is increasingly frustrating for many residents is the sense that Guildford has spent years discussing, consulting, planning and commissioning reports — but too often fails to translate those discussions into decisions.

There is also a suspicion that some within the council view externally led projects with caution simply because they were not conceived locally. That kind of “not invented here” thinking can quietly stall progress.

If that is happening here, it would be deeply disappointing.

Flood protection is not a political branding exercise. It is a matter of public safety, economic resilience and responsible stewardship of public money.

Allowing a once-in-a-generation opportunity for national investment to drift away through delay or indecision would not simply be disappointing. It would raise serious questions about governance and accountability.

This matters not only to residents whose homes may be at risk from flooding, but also to the long-term vitality of Guildford’s town centre.

A well-designed flood alleviation scheme could help unlock improvements along the River Wey, strengthen the town centre economy and provide a safer environment for future development.

But opportunities like this do not remain open indefinitely.

As Guildford approaches local elections in May, residents may reasonably expect their councillors to demonstrate that they are capable of making clear, responsible decisions about the town’s future.

This is not about party politics. It is about competence.

Guildford deserves leadership that recognises when a rare opportunity is in front of us — and acts before it is lost.

Share This Post