Westminster Hall Debate, Flooding, 6 February 2024

• Successful flood and coastal erosion risk management requires increased cooperation and cross-border partnerships. The Environment Agency (EA) and water companies must engage more frequently and at senior levels with local authorities.
• Long-term plans, developed in collaboration with directly impacted and neighbouring Local Authorities, need to be flexible enough to address local flooding issues promptly.
• The main capital funding for flood risk management comes from the EA flood defence grant in aid, which is found to favouring urban over rural areas due to the underpinning calculations. Councils find it challenging to use this funding for surface water projects due to the complexity of the application process. 
• The LGA is calling for a more flexible funding model, combining capital and revenue funding into a single place-based pot. This allows local areas to support diverse outcomes aligned with local priorities rather than nationally set measures.

Nationally, the successful delivery of flood and coastal erosion risk management and property flood resilience is only going to be successful with increased cooperation and cross border partnership working. The EA and water companies need to factor in more frequent and senior engagement with local authorities into their business model immediately. Long term plans should be developed with the Local Authorities both directly impacted and neighbouring and need to be flexible enough to respond to local flooding issues when they occur. 

EA flood defence grant in aid funding (also known as partnership funding) is the main source of capital funding for flood risk/coastal erosion management. This is generally helpful, but the funding formula tends to favour urban over rural areas. Councils report that it is difficult to use grant in aid funding for surface water projects. For example, the cost of putting together the business case and data needed to support a funding application for surface water can cost more than the grant award. EA have made some helpful adjustments to the application process but there is still more that could be done to reduce bureaucracy.

Investment in flooding and coastal erosion relies heavily on public sector contributions. Private sector and community contributors are more likely to come forward if public funding models are fit for purpose and deliver local, place based solutions. We are calling for a more flexible funding model, and for capital and revenue funding to be devolved into a single place-based pot to allow local areas to support a more diverse set of outcomes that meet local priorities, instead of prioritising funding according to nationally set outcome measures. 

A CIWEM survey found that only a third of risk management authorities (RMAs) have a full complement of staff to deliver surface water management and three quarters of RMAs are struggling to recruit new staff. In light of these resource pressures, we welcome clarification from government on the timetable for the implementation of Schedule 3 of the Flood and Water Management Act. This would create a new role of SUDs (sustainable drainage) approval body for local authorities and removes the automatic right to connect surface water runoff to public sewers. We want to work with Defra to ensure that the resource implications for local authorities are fully understood and fully funded. 

The LGA maintains a Severe Weather Hub, this has information for councils on how to respond during extreme conditions. The resource is designed to help local authorities prepare for, and react to, bad weather and ensure effective communication with your residents.

Elliot Gregory, Public Affairs and Campaigns Advisor 

Mobile: 07766252833 | Phone: 020 7664 3059 Email: [email protected]