MPs slam lack of clarity over responsibility for flood protection

Flood protection is a national priority but there is little clarity over who – the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the Environment Agency or local bodies – is ultimately responsible for managing the risk of flooding, an influential group of MPs has warned.

In a report published today the Public Accounts Committee said: “We were very concerned that the Department did not accept ultimate responsibility for managing the risk of floods.

“The Department told us it shared responsibility with the Environment Agency and local bodies. We are concerned that there is no clarity about where the buck stops. It is not acceptable that local people do not know clearly were responsibility for decisions lies and which body is answerable when things go wrong.”

The MPs also suggested that Defra’s expectations of a rise in local authority contributions to flood protection could well be “over-optimistic”. The Department is seeking to increase local contributions – from private companies and local authority levies – from £13m to £43m.

The committee added that the Environment Agency needed to improve how it involves local communities in the decision-making process and improve the skills of its staff in this respect.

“Localism is not just about devolving responsibility to local bodies but also about engaging the community in the decision-making process,” the PAC said.

“At present consultation arrangements on flood defence proposals are not consistent across the country and some people feel the Agency is not listening to their concerns.”

Other key findings from the report include:

• The annual cost of flood damage has been £1.1bn recently and is set to rise. Some 5.2 million homes are at risk of flooding;
• Defra spent £664m on flood and coastal risk management in 2010/11. Of this, 95% went to the Environment Agency;
• In 2009 the Agency projected that its flood risk management budget needed to rise by 9% during the 2011/12 to 2014/15 spending review period. However, during the same period, the Agency’s budget has been reduced by more than 10%;
• Defra relies on “inconsistent and unstructured” intelligence on local flood risk management performance. Local authorities are producing risk assessments but the Department does not have plans to assess their quality; and
• The government needs to come to an early revised agreement with the insurance industry in order to reduce uncertainty for affected householders. The current agreement ends in 2013.

PAC chair Margaret Hodge MP said: "The Department tells us that it is not ultimately answerable and shares the responsibility with the Environment Agency and local bodies. But the Department has no way of knowing whether local flood management systems are adequate or when it should step in.

“It is not acceptable that local people should be left in doubt about where responsibility and accountability lie.”

Hodge added that there was a “big mismatch” between what the Agency reckoned it needed to maintain current levels of flood protection and the budget being made available.

“The Department sees more funding coming from local sources – including businesses and local authorities,” she said. “We are sceptical that this will be possible when local authorities and businesses are themselves under financial pressure.”

Hodge suggested that this was fuelling uncertainty over the future availability and affordability of insurance cover for buildings in areas at risk of flood.

A new agreement between the government and insurers was needed urgently, she said.

Responding to the PAC report, the Town and Country Planning Association warned that there was an urgent need for a co-ordinated approach from national and local government, working with the private sector, to secure England’s future resilience to challenges such as flood risk.

Chief executive Kate Henderson said: “While the funding for improving flood defences is imperative, we must also recognise the importance of planning and local authority cooperation in tackling challenges which operate above the local level. The economic and social impacts of leaving potentially 200,000 homes without flood risk insurance are untenable. At present, England is badly organised to deal with the scale of these challenges.”

A copy of the report can be viewed here.