Select committee: Environmental Audit Committee
Conclusion 13
4th Report – Flood resilience in England
Published 13 Oct 2025
Environmental Audit Committee Flood resilience in England All items in this report Report on parliament.uk ↗ Inquiry on parliament.uk ↗
Conclusion (the committee's words)
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)
From: Environmental Audit Committee, 4th Report – Flood resilience in England (HC 550), 13 October 2025
Government response
The government responded to the whole report on 23 December 2025 (deadline 13 December 2025).
Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.The government says it shares the committee's view on the importance of flood resilience, agrees with some recommendations, and in some cases notes or considers them rather than accepting them, while declining to formalise the Flood Resilience Taskforce's role.
- On resilience standards, the government "notes" the recommendation and "will consider this as part of our existing commitment to explore a long-term target", with "a further statement next year".
- It does not agree to formalise the Flood Resilience Taskforce's role, saying this "would complicate the responsibilities and accountabilities".
- On making SuDS mandatory, it does not commit to commencing Schedule 3, saying improvement "could be achieved" by other means and it "will decide on which course of action to pursue in due course".
- On a statutory duty for Fire and Rescue Services to respond to flooding, it is "assessing the case", with the work "planned to conclude in summer 2026".