The government is failing to protect communities at risk of flooding according to the Environmental Audit Committee.

A lack of long-term strategic planning to manage flood risk from the government, and their subsequent reactive approach to funding for flood defence is highlighted by the Committee. They found that there is a fluctuation in funding saying that in the last Parliament, funding was initially cut and only increased after the winter 2013/2014 floods.
Mary Creagh MP, Chair of the Environmental Audit Committee, said:
“We know that flooding is projected to get worse and occur more frequently because of climate change, so it just isn’t good enough for Government to react to flooding events as they occur. Communities at risk deserve certainty from Government.”

The condition of critical flood defences is also in decline according to the Committee. The independent Worsfold review demonstrated a relationship between flood maintenance spending and the good condition of critical flood defences. As the money required to maintain these defences was cut, the number of defences which met the Environment Agency’s required condition also declined.

Creagh said:
“The Government needs to put money into the upkeep of existing flood defences as well as investing in new defences. Failure to do so can have terrible consequences for residents and businesses when defences fail.

“Any decline in the condition of critical flood defences represents an unacceptable risk to local communities in flood prone areas. We urge the Government to go beyond its current target and aim to have virtually all its critical assets meeting the Environment Agency’s required condition by 2019.”

Friends of the Earth flooding campaigner Guy Shrubsole said:

“After every flood politicians stride about in welly boots, throw a bit of money at the problem and commission a review.

“The real test for ministers after last winter’s super-charged floods is whether they prepare the UK for extreme climate change, and re-wild our rivers and uplands to slow the flow of water downstream.

“Will Rory Stewart and Oliver Letwin be remembered for completely rethinking how we tackle flooding – or will their reviews sink without trace?”

The NPPF also came under fire as the number of approved local plans is low with the government not seeming to support local authorities in their development. There is a concern that the government does not know how prepared local authorities are for mitigating future flood events or whether their flood plans (if they have them) are fit for purpose. The extent to which the Environment Agency’s advice on whether, or how, to build in high flood-risk areas, is not systematically monitored, reported or followed up through the planning system.

The Committee also recommended that infrastructure companies should be mandated to report their target flood resilience level, why this target is appropriate and what progress they are making to achieve it.
They also recommended that the government produce an annual national flood resilience review accompanied by an action plan. It suggested that the government’s current National Flood Resilience Review would be a good place to start.
Mary Creagh said:
“It is critical the government undertakes its current review in an open and transparent way to allow stakeholders, including Parliament, to monitor its progress and hold it to account.”