Recommendations & Conclusions
20 items
1
Conclusion
4th Report – Flood resilience in England
Not Addressed
We are concerned that the current flood risk framework is underpowered and fragmented. The Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management (FCERM) Strategy lacks enforceability, and the National Adaptation Programme does not provide the standards, targets, or delivery mechanisms needed to embed resilience across government and infrastructure. Without national benchmarks, statutory …
Read more
We are concerned that the current flood risk framework is underpowered and fragmented. The Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management (FCERM) Strategy lacks enforceability, and the National Adaptation Programme does not provide the standards, targets, or delivery mechanisms needed to embed resilience across government and infrastructure. Without national benchmarks, statutory duties, and aligned long-term funding, communities remain exposed amid rising climate risks. The system as it stands is reactive and costly. Prevention is more effective and affordable but requires a fundamental shift to the strategic use of resources. (Conclusion, Paragraph 15)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government response provided is a general introductory text for the committee report and then shifts to the heading for a different recommendation (paragraph 16), failing to address the committee's concerns regarding the fragmented and underpowered flood risk framework in paragraph 15.
Read full response →
3
Conclusion
4th Report – Flood resilience in England
Not Addressed
We are concerned that there is still no agreed national standard for what constitutes a flood resilient property, system, or community. This absence undermines public understanding, weakens accountability, and makes 57 it harder to prioritise investment or measure progress. Without a clear benchmark, resilience remains a vague ambition rather than …
Read more
We are concerned that there is still no agreed national standard for what constitutes a flood resilient property, system, or community. This absence undermines public understanding, weakens accountability, and makes 57 it harder to prioritise investment or measure progress. Without a clear benchmark, resilience remains a vague ambition rather than a deliverable goal. We believe England urgently needs to define what flood resilience means, and commit to delivering it. (Conclusion, Paragraph 23)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government response acknowledges surface water risk and the importance of improved mapping, highlighting existing duties under the Flood and Water Management Act 2010. However, it does not commit to defining a national standard for flood resilient property, system, or community, which the committee stated …
Read full response →
4
Recommendation
4th Report – Flood resilience in England
Not Addressed
By 2027, the Government should develop and adopt clear, measurable national flood resilience standards that define the expected level of resilience based on the characteristics of the area or property. These standards should guide national and local investment, support planning decisions, and give the public confidence that resilience is being …
Read more
By 2027, the Government should develop and adopt clear, measurable national flood resilience standards that define the expected level of resilience based on the characteristics of the area or property. These standards should guide national and local investment, support planning decisions, and give the public confidence that resilience is being delivered consistently and transparently. These standards should be: • Embedded: the standards should be incorporated in the National Adaptation Programme (NAP), supported by long-term funding commitments aligned to those objectives. These commitments must extend beyond existing six-year budget cycles, reflecting the long-term nature of climate risk. Resources should be used more strategically, focusing on prevention and resilience rather than reactive spending. • Tiered: to reflect different types of risk (e.g., risk to life, property damage, infrastructure disruption) and levels of acceptable risk in different contexts (e.g., urban vs rural, critical infrastructure vs residential areas). • Comprehensive: applying across infrastructure, housing, and community planning. • Forward-looking: aligned with future climate projections and long- term adaptation goals. • Deliverable: backed by adequate funding, a clear implementation plan, and integration into planning, investment, and regulatory frameworks. (Recommendation, Paragraph 24)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government response discusses the importance of catchment-based planning, integrated water management plans, ongoing calls for evidence, and devolution opportunities. It also references a future Environment Agency strategy review as an 'opportunity,' but it does not commit to developing and adopting clear, measurable national flood …
Read full response →
5
Conclusion
4th Report – Flood resilience in England
Not Addressed
Surface water flooding is the most common source of flooding in England, yet it remains poorly quantified, inconsistently planned for, and often underestimated in development decisions. It is also one of the least understood and least coordinated aspects of flood resilience nationally. This represents a major gap in national flood …
Read more
Surface water flooding is the most common source of flooding in England, yet it remains poorly quantified, inconsistently planned for, and often underestimated in development decisions. It is also one of the least understood and least coordinated aspects of flood resilience nationally. This represents a major gap in national flood resilience that must be urgently addressed, though we acknowledge and welcome the Government’s commitment to improving surface water mapping and modelling. (Conclusion, Paragraph 30)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government response focuses on supporting and funding nature-based solutions, including specific investment targets for natural flood management projects. It does not address the committee's concerns regarding surface water flooding being poorly quantified, inconsistently planned for, and underestimated.
Read full response →
6
Conclusion
4th Report – Flood resilience in England
Not Addressed
We welcome the flood risk strategy becoming more dynamic and responsive to emerging risks. Surface water flooding, long underestimated, is now understood to be one of the most frequent and complex sources of flood risk. It must no longer be treated as a second-tier issue. By 2027, the 58 Government …
Read more
We welcome the flood risk strategy becoming more dynamic and responsive to emerging risks. Surface water flooding, long underestimated, is now understood to be one of the most frequent and complex sources of flood risk. It must no longer be treated as a second-tier issue. By 2027, the 58 Government should ensure that surface water flood risk is consistently quantified and fully integrated into national flood risk assessments. Defra, working with the Environment Agency and Lead Local Flood Authorities, should complete the standardisation of surface water mapping and modelling by the end of 2025, ensuring that dynamic, up-to-date data feeds into national assessments by 2026. The Water Regulator and water companies, supported by Defra, should develop a national framework for data sharing on drainage and sewerage infrastructure, including clear responsibilities for maintenance, capacity, and investment. These improvements must also support better planning, delivery, and maintenance of sustainable drainage systems as part of a coordinated, forward-looking approach to managing surface water. (Recommendation, Paragraph 31)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government response discusses the importance of understanding and tracking flood defence assets and the Environment Agency's existing asset information system. It does not address the specific recommendations for consistently quantifying surface water flood risk, standardising mapping and modelling, or developing a national framework for …
Read full response →
7
Conclusion
4th Report – Flood resilience in England
Not Addressed
Catchment-based planning is widely acknowledged as the most effective and integrated way to manage flood risk, improve water quality, and deliver nature-based solutions. However, despite years of policy support, it remains inconsistently applied, poorly coordinated, and underpowered by short- term, discretionary funding. Fragmented responsibilities and the absence of statutory oversight …
Read more
Catchment-based planning is widely acknowledged as the most effective and integrated way to manage flood risk, improve water quality, and deliver nature-based solutions. However, despite years of policy support, it remains inconsistently applied, poorly coordinated, and underpowered by short- term, discretionary funding. Fragmented responsibilities and the absence of statutory oversight continue to limit its reach and impact. If England is serious about long-term, preventative flood management, catchment-based planning must move from pilot to principle and be embedded as the default approach across the country. (Conclusion, Paragraph 38)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government response refers to the existing National Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management Strategy and the Environment Agency's legal duty for strategic oversight, noting the EA will review the strategy next year and restate responsibilities. However, it does not address the committee's concern about …
Read full response →
8
Recommendation
4th Report – Flood resilience in England
Not Addressed
Catchment-based planning must become the default approach, not a discretionary extra. By 2027, the Government should mandate catchment- scale planning and delivery through regional partnerships with defined statutory duties, long-term funding, and clear oversight. These partnerships should coordinate key actors across land, water, infrastructure and planning, and lead integrated water …
Read more
Catchment-based planning must become the default approach, not a discretionary extra. By 2027, the Government should mandate catchment- scale planning and delivery through regional partnerships with defined statutory duties, long-term funding, and clear oversight. These partnerships should coordinate key actors across land, water, infrastructure and planning, and lead integrated water management that delivers multiple outcomes, including flood risk reduction, water quality improvements, and environmental enhancement, at the scale and complexity the challenge demands. (Recommendation, Paragraph 39)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government response is entirely unrelated to the recommendation, instead discussing an assessment of a statutory duty for Fire and Rescue Services in England to respond to flooding, which is planned to conclude in summer 2026.
Read full response →
9
Conclusion
4th Report – Flood resilience in England
Not Addressed
Nature-based solutions remain undervalued and underutilised in England’s approach to flood risk management. Despite growing evidence of their effectiveness in reducing flood risk, improving water quality, and delivering wider environmental and social benefits, they are still treated as peripheral rather than fundamental to national strategy. We find it deeply concerning …
Read more
Nature-based solutions remain undervalued and underutilised in England’s approach to flood risk management. Despite growing evidence of their effectiveness in reducing flood risk, improving water quality, and delivering wider environmental and social benefits, they are still treated as peripheral rather than fundamental to national strategy. We find it deeply concerning that, in the face of escalating climate risks, nature- based solutions continue to be overlooked or deprioritised in policy and funding decisions. We welcomed the Minister’s suggestion that the current consultation will encourage nature-based solutions, and we look forward to the results of the consultation. Their long-term value is well recognised, yet current appraisal methods often fail to capture their full benefits, making investment harder to justify. Unless nature-based solutions are fully 59 integrated into planning and flood risk management, England risks missing one of its most cost effective, sustainable tools for building flood resilience. (Conclusion, Paragraph 42)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government response focuses on exploring stronger climate adaptation objectives and setting measurable objectives in the fourth National Adaptation Programme due in 2028. It does not specifically address the committee's concerns regarding the undervaluation, underutilisation, or deprioritisation of nature-based solutions.
Read full response →
10
Recommendation
4th Report – Flood resilience in England
Not Addressed
The Government should embed nature-based solutions as a core component of national flood and coastal erosion risk management by 2027. Defra, working with the Environment Agency, HM Treasury, and other key partners, should: • Reform flood funding appraisal and partnership funding rules, following the Government’s current consultation on reforming the …
Read more
The Government should embed nature-based solutions as a core component of national flood and coastal erosion risk management by 2027. Defra, working with the Environment Agency, HM Treasury, and other key partners, should: • Reform flood funding appraisal and partnership funding rules, following the Government’s current consultation on reforming the approach to floods funding, to better reflect the multi-benefit value of nature-based solutions. • Set national targets for the uptake of nature-based approaches in flood risk management by 2026. • Fully integrate nature-based solutions into flood, planning, and infrastructure policy by 2027, including economic support for landowners to incorporate flood resilience measures. (Recommendation, Paragraph 43)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government highlights its record investment in flood resilience and new general funding rules taking effect from April 2026 to optimise investment. However, the response does not specifically commit to embedding nature-based solutions as a core component, reforming funding appraisal to reflect their multi-benefit value, …
Read full response →
11
Conclusion
4th Report – Flood resilience in England
Not Addressed
We find that the absence of a comprehensive, up-to-date, and accessible record of flood resilience assets significantly limits England’s ability to manage flood risk strategically. The lack of visibility over third-party, locally delivered, and nature-based assets fragments responsibility, undermines coordination, and hinders long-term investment decisions. Without a full understanding of …
Read more
We find that the absence of a comprehensive, up-to-date, and accessible record of flood resilience assets significantly limits England’s ability to manage flood risk strategically. The lack of visibility over third-party, locally delivered, and nature-based assets fragments responsibility, undermines coordination, and hinders long-term investment decisions. Without a full understanding of where assets are, what condition they are in, and who is responsible for them, it is not possible to plan effectively, ensure reliable protection, or respond proactively to future risks. (Conclusion, Paragraph 50)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government details its existing financial oversight and assurance processes for flood and coastal erosion risk management investment programmes, and the high-level oversight provided by the Floods Resilience Taskforce. It does not address the committee's finding about the absence of a comprehensive, up-to-date record of …
Read full response →
12
Recommendation
4th Report – Flood resilience in England
Not Addressed
The Government should commission a national audit of flood resilience assets by 2026, encompassing both engineered and nature-based infrastructure. This audit should identify the type, location, ownership, condition, and maintenance responsibilities of all relevant assets, including those owned or managed by third parties. The process should be led by Defra …
Read more
The Government should commission a national audit of flood resilience assets by 2026, encompassing both engineered and nature-based infrastructure. This audit should identify the type, location, ownership, condition, and maintenance responsibilities of all relevant assets, including those owned or managed by third parties. The process should be led by Defra in collaboration with the Environment Agency and other relevant bodies, and should draw on lessons from the National Framework for Water Resources. The audit must be regularly updated and designed to inform strategic planning, guide investment, and improve coordination between local and national actors. (Recommendation, Paragraph 51)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government details its recently announced changes to flood and coastal erosion funding policy, aimed at simplifying rules and optimising funding allocation for new projects and existing assets. The response does not address the recommendation to commission a national audit of flood resilience assets.
Read full response →
13
Conclusion
4th Report – Flood resilience in England
Not Addressed
We are deeply concerned that even after more than a decade of reform, many communities still do not know who is responsible for managing flood risk where they live. A system that leaves the public unclear about accountability is not fit for purpose. Despite the original aim of the 60 …
Read more
We are deeply concerned that even after more than a decade of reform, many communities still do not know who is responsible for managing flood risk where they live. A system that leaves the public unclear about accountability is not fit for purpose. Despite the original aim of the 60 Flood and Water Management Act 2010 to clarify roles and support local leadership, responsibilities remain fragmented, coordination is inconsistent, and there is no single point of national accountability. This structural weakness is not simply a communications issue, it undermines trust, delays response, and obstructs long-term, strategic planning. England needs clearer leadership, stronger national oversight, and more effective coordination to build resilience at the pace and scale required. (Conclusion, Paragraph 58)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government reiterates its commitment to building homes with flood protection and plans to consider further changes to flood risk management as part of an upcoming planning reform consultation. The response discusses planning policy and Environment Agency support for local authorities but does not directly …
Read full response →
14
Recommendation
4th Report – Flood resilience in England
Not Addressed
Flood resilience must be planned, integrated, and accountable, not fragmented, reactive, or opaque. The Government should establish a clear national mechanism for strategic oversight and accountability in flood risk management. By the end of 2025, it should set out how it intends to deliver this, whether by strengthening the Environment …
Read more
Flood resilience must be planned, integrated, and accountable, not fragmented, reactive, or opaque. The Government should establish a clear national mechanism for strategic oversight and accountability in flood risk management. By the end of 2025, it should set out how it intends to deliver this, whether by strengthening the Environment Agency’s mandate, amending the Flood and Water Management Act 2010, or formally assigning oversight responsibilities to a permanent coordinating body, such as the Flood Resilience Taskforce. Implementation should begin no later than 2026. This mechanism should: • Provide strategic oversight across all sources of flood risk, fluvial, surface water, coastal, and groundwater, and set national priorities for risk management authorities. • Coordinate investment, standards, and adaptation targets across departments, sectors, and funding streams. • Support and equip Lead Local Flood Authorities with the powers, funding, and technical capacity needed to deliver locally. • Maintain and publish a national statement of responsibilities, setting out the duties of all relevant actors, including water companies, local authorities, infrastructure operators, and the public. • Ensure flood risk and climate adaptation are fully integrated into spatial planning and development decisions through strategic oversight and consistent national policy. (Recommendation, Paragraph 59)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response focuses on strengthening the delivery of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) and exploring options for their adoption and maintenance, referencing the FloodReady report. It explicitly states it will not implement Schedule 3 of the Flood and Water Management Act (2010), and does not …
Read full response →
15
Recommendation
4th Report – Flood resilience in England
Not Addressed
The Government should consult on introducing a statutory duty for Fire and Rescue Services in England to respond to flooding, supported by dedicated funding for training, equipment, and operational planning. This should be undertaken by the end of 2025. This would align England with devolved administrations and strengthen national flood …
Read more
The Government should consult on introducing a statutory duty for Fire and Rescue Services in England to respond to flooding, supported by dedicated funding for training, equipment, and operational planning. This should be undertaken by the end of 2025. This would align England with devolved administrations and strengthen national flood resilience. This should also look at making the Fire and Rescue Services a statutory consultee in planning decisions, to respond to local flooding situations. (Recommendation, Paragraph 60) 61 Embedding flood resilience across Government policy and public investment
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government highlights the Environment Agency's Flood Action Week and commitments to improving public communication, stating that a Floods Resilience Taskforce action group will explore options to improve public communication around flood reporting in 2026. This response does not address the recommendation to consult on …
Read full response →
16
Conclusion
4th Report – Flood resilience in England
Not Addressed
The evolving understanding of climate risk and growing data on economic losses make clear that resilience must become a central organising principle for public investment. Without a shift from reactive to preventive spending, and from loosely coordinated action to clearly mandated delivery, future climate shocks will continue to impose avoidable …
Read more
The evolving understanding of climate risk and growing data on economic losses make clear that resilience must become a central organising principle for public investment. Without a shift from reactive to preventive spending, and from loosely coordinated action to clearly mandated delivery, future climate shocks will continue to impose avoidable costs on communities, infrastructure, and public finances. (Conclusion, Paragraph 68)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government refers to a Defra report on flood risk management spending and subsequent reforms to the Local Government Finance Settlement (Fair Funding Review 2.0), aiming to introduce a fairer, simpler funding system for local authorities from 2026-2027. This describes changes in funding allocation but …
Read full response →
17
Recommendation
4th Report – Flood resilience in England
Not Addressed
By 2026, the Government should embed climate and flood resilience as a core test for all departmental spending and public investment proposals. This should be supported by clear resilience standards, measurable targets, and a requirement for every department to demonstrate how its spending aligns with these standards. (Recommendation, Paragraph 69)
Read more
By 2026, the Government should embed climate and flood resilience as a core test for all departmental spending and public investment proposals. This should be supported by clear resilience standards, measurable targets, and a requirement for every department to demonstrate how its spending aligns with these standards. (Recommendation, Paragraph 69)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response focuses on the importance of property flood resilience, referencing the independent FloodReady review and efforts to grow the market for such approaches. It does not address the broader recommendation to embed climate and flood resilience as a core test for all departmental …
Read full response →
18
Conclusion
4th Report – Flood resilience in England
Not Addressed
Experts have been clear: the UK is not investing at the scale required to keep pace with climate risk. This fragmented approach is leaving communities and infrastructure exposed and storing up greater costs for the future, and in real terms costing more than prevention measures due to disruption and damage …
Read more
Experts have been clear: the UK is not investing at the scale required to keep pace with climate risk. This fragmented approach is leaving communities and infrastructure exposed and storing up greater costs for the future, and in real terms costing more than prevention measures due to disruption and damage to infrastructure and property. (Conclusion, Paragraph 70)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government acknowledges the impact of climate change on insurance and commits to reviewing the viability of a price-reflective insurance market from 2039, including consideration of extending the Flood Re Scheme. This response does not address the committee's conclusion regarding the inadequate scale of UK …
Read full response →
19
Conclusion
4th Report – Flood resilience in England
Not Addressed
Flood investment must match the scale of risk. The Government’s flood budget should rise to at least £1.5 billion per year by 2030, as recommended by the National Infrastructure Commission to keep pace with climate impacts, and be explicitly tied to the delivery of measurable resilience outcomes. (Recommendation, Paragraph 71)
Read more
Flood investment must match the scale of risk. The Government’s flood budget should rise to at least £1.5 billion per year by 2030, as recommended by the National Infrastructure Commission to keep pace with climate impacts, and be explicitly tied to the delivery of measurable resilience outcomes. (Recommendation, Paragraph 71)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response focuses on the role of insurance in supporting flood resilience, highlighting efforts to promote the "Build Back Better" scheme and supporting the piloting of Flood Performance Certificates. This response does not address the recommendation to increase the government’s flood budget to at …
Read full response →
20
Recommendation
4th Report – Flood resilience in England
Not Addressed
We welcome the Flood Resilience Taskforce’s role in improving cross-government coordination, including between the Environment Agency, Cabinet Office, and Defra. Its convening power should now be strengthened to influence investment priorities as well as preparedness, ensuring lessons from past events drive decisive action for the future. (Conclusion, Paragraph 72)
Read more
We welcome the Flood Resilience Taskforce’s role in improving cross-government coordination, including between the Environment Agency, Cabinet Office, and Defra. Its convening power should now be strengthened to influence investment priorities as well as preparedness, ensuring lessons from past events drive decisive action for the future. (Conclusion, Paragraph 72)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government details Defra's existing financial oversight and investment programme for flood and coastal erosion risk management, including partnership funding and new rules for allocating benefits, but does not address strengthening the Flood Resilience Taskforce's convening power.
Read full response →
21
Recommendation
4th Report – Flood resilience in England
Not Addressed
The Government should strengthen the Flood Resilience Taskforce’s mandate by 2026 to provide formal oversight of investment priorities and preparedness measures, ensuring that lessons from past events are systematically incorporated into national flood resilience planning across Government departments. (Recommendation, Paragraph 73) 62 Making investment fairer and more inclusive
Read more
The Government should strengthen the Flood Resilience Taskforce’s mandate by 2026 to provide formal oversight of investment priorities and preparedness measures, ensuring that lessons from past events are systematically incorporated into national flood resilience planning across Government departments. (Recommendation, Paragraph 73) 62 Making investment fairer and more inclusive
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government details Defra's existing financial oversight and investment programme for flood and coastal erosion risk management, including partnership funding and new rules for allocating benefits, but does not address strengthening the Flood Resilience Taskforce's mandate.
Read full response →