Source · Select Committees · Public Accounts Committee
Forty-Fifth Report - Managing flood risk
Public Accounts Committee
HC 931
Published 26 February 2021
Recommendations
4
Short-term funding cycles are impacting on the Agency’s ability to manage flood risks effectively.
Recommendation
Short-term funding cycles are impacting on the Agency’s ability to manage flood risks effectively. The Agency has a six-year capital funding settlement for investment in flood defences (2021–22 to 2026–27), but only a one-year settlement for revenue funding (2021–22). Revenue …
Read more
HM Treasury
View Details →
Conclusions (29)
2
Conclusion
Scarce local authority resources and low levels of private sector investment are barriers to the effective management of flood risks, especially given the impact of Covid-19. Lead local flood authorities (unitary authorities or county councils) are responsible for managing local flood risks. Their funding for this is not ring- fenced …
3
Conclusion
In 2014 the NAO report on strategic flood management found there was a profusion of plans that often duplicate across geographical or administrative areas. Defra and the Agency have not followed the NAO recommendation to review their strategies and plans with a view to rationalise them to reduce the burden …
5
Conclusion
The current indicators used to monitor national flood risk do not cover important elements such as risks to agricultural land, business premises, and infrastructure. The Agency uses the number of homes ‘better protected’ as the main performance indicator for its capital investment programme. It also uses its National Flood Risk …
6
Conclusion
The Department has not ensured that all regions, deprived areas in particular, get a fair share of the available funding. The Agency uses the level of risk in an area and the readiness of projects to go ahead to decide where to invest in flood defences. The Agency’s own research …
7
Conclusion
We are not convinced that the Department has yet done enough to address the difficulties those recently flooded have in getting affordable insurance. Some people who have recently been flooded still face difficulties in obtaining affordable insurance. The Department states that the existence of Flood Re should ensure that affordable …
8
Conclusion
Despite the known risks, there are still plans to build houses on flood plains. While government policy is not to build on flood plains unless unavoidable, the Agency’s analysis indicates that there could be a large increase – of up to 50 per cent - in the number of houses …
1
Conclusion
On the basis of a Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General, we took evidence from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (the Department) and the Environment Agency (the Agency) on managing flood risks.1
9
Conclusion
Lead local flood authorities (unitary authorities or county councils) manage the risk of surface and ground water flooding, and flooding from ordinary water courses which are not main rivers. The funding local authorities receive for flood risk management is not ring-fenced. The National Audit Office reported concerns about the uncertainty …
10
Conclusion
The amount of funding local authorities receive for flood risk management is determined by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government’s (MHCLG) local government funding formula. The Department told us that, taken as a whole, local authorities are spending more on flood risk management than they are allocated through …
11
Conclusion
The Government introduced partnership funding in 2011, requiring many flood schemes to be part-funded from sources other than government grant-in-aid. The cost of individual schemes is shared between national and local sources of funding, to allow more schemes to go ahead. The Agency told us that partnership funding had been …
12
Conclusion
The EA Strategy highlights the role of Community Interest Companies (CIC) including the East Wash CIC in partnership funding. Following questioning in the hearing, Defra confirmed that parish councils precept income can be used to fund flood and coastal erosion risk management activities.12
13
Conclusion
Nearly all this partnership funding has been obtained from public sector sources, with only £39 million (7% of the total) being secured from the private sector. This is significantly lower than the 25% of partnership funding secured from the private sector between April 2011 and March 2015.13 The Department wants …
14
Conclusion
The government has a record of providing the Agency with long-term capital funding settlements, with two six-year settlements covering 2015–16 to 2020–21 and 2021–22 to 2026–27. However, the Agency only has a revenue funding settlement covering the next financial year (2021–22). Revenue funding covers people and running costs including the …
15
Conclusion
The Agency told us that multi-year revenue funding settlements are preferable and help it to plan in areas such as staffing. The Agency has skills shortages in some specialist areas like engineering that are critical for flood defence. It explained that this is largely due to the disparity between the …
16
Conclusion
The Agency explained that on-going maintenance costs are increasing for three main reasons. First, as a result of more extreme weather due to climate change, both more extreme flooding and more extreme droughts. Second, some flood defences in England are quite old, having been built in the 1960s and 1970s. …
17
Conclusion
The Agency is already seeing the impacts of climate change through the increasing strain on existing flood defences. In March 2020, the government gave the Agency £120 million to repair the defences damaged in the 2019–20 winter floods. At that time, the 12 https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/4520/documents/45720/default/ 13 C&AG’s Report, para 2.19 14 …
18
Conclusion
The Agency is on track to better protect 300,000 homes as a result of its capital investment programme for 2015–16 to 2020–21. While this a clear and easily understood measure, it does not provide any indication of what has happened to flood risk for non- residential buildings, agricultural land and …
19
Conclusion
The Agency also uses its National Flood Risk Assessment (NaFRA) model to estimate the number of properties at risk of flooding each year. Due to changes in methodology over the 2015–16 to 2020–21 period, a direct comparison between years is not reliable. The Agency is due to update NaFRA in …
20
Conclusion
When we asked the Agency how it assesses overall national flood risk for non- residential buildings, agricultural land and infrastructure it said that it does not measure this unless it is part of a particular flood scheme. So, for example for agricultural land, the Agency does not know what has …
21
Conclusion
The Agency recognised that the way flood risks are often described, using percentages and probabilities of being flooded, are not very meaningful for the public. It described 18 Q 27: C&AG’s Report, para 16 19 Letter dated 27 January from Environment Agency to Committee 20 Q 30; C&AG’s Report, para …
22
Conclusion
The Department has committed to developing a new national set of indicators on flood risk by spring 2022. It confirmed that these new indicators will be measurable and will enable the tracking of national flood risk over time.25 24 Q 54 25 Qq 49, 55–56 14 Managing food risk 2 …
23
Conclusion
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (the Department) told us that the responsibility for deciding which flood defence schemes to invest in is delegated to the Environment Agency (the Agency). The Agency explained that it decides which schemes will form part of its six-year capital investment programme based …
24
Conclusion
The Agency published a report in 2020 which showed that people from more deprived areas faced greater flood risk than those living in less deprived areas, although the gap had narrowed in the last 15 years. The report also showed that the proportion of all homes ‘better protected’ as a …
25
Conclusion
We also asked the Agency about the reasons for the wide variation in the level of flood defence investment per property at risk between regions. The Agency explained that the level of flood risk will determine where investment is made. It also said that the timing and size of flood …
26
Conclusion
We asked the Department why some people faced difficulties in obtaining affordable insurance after being flooded, particularly those in social housing. The Department said that Flood Re, a joint initiative between the insurance industry and the UK Government, was established to ensure affordable flood risk insurance is available, regardless of …
27
Conclusion
The Department’s research, following the floods in Doncaster in November 2019, suggests that some people were still unable to obtain affordable insurance despite the existence of Flood Re. The research report made a number of recommendations which the Department is considering.31
28
Conclusion
Written evidence from the Association of British Insurers (ABI) and Flood Re emphasised the importance of property-level flood resilience measures such as flood barriers and doors. Such measures can reduce the cost of repairs and the recovery time of affected properties. Both the ABI and Flood Re welcomed the government’s …
29
Conclusion
The Agency told us that the government’s current strategy was not to build houses on flood plains unless there was no alternative and that any developments on flood plains should not increase the risk of flooding. The Agency is a statutory consultee on planning applications that may increase flood risk. …
30
Conclusion
Written evidence from Flood Re highlighted that the Agency does not have responsibility for surface water flooding and it has concerns about the impacts of developments in dense urban areas where surface water flood risks are high. It also has concerns that there is an inconsistent approach to climate change …