Committee publication · Special Report · 23 December 2025 · HC 1591
6th Special Report – Flood resilience in England: Government Response
From: Environmental Audit Committee
Inquiry: Flood resilience in England
Summary
This is the government's formal response to the Environmental Audit Committee's October 2025 report on flood resilience in England. The government affirms its commitment to flood resilience, detailing £10.5 billion investment through 2036 and October 2025 reforms to funding policy. It addresses 16 committee recommendations across themes including statutory duties, resilience standards, surface water risk, catchment planning, nature-based solutions, asset tracking, roles, investment fairness, planning alignment, and public awareness.
Key findings
- Government commits £10.5 billion in flood defence investment by 2036—the largest programme in England's history—with additional revenue spending to follow.
- New October 2025 flood funding reforms simplify rules, remove barriers to nature-based solutions (targeting 3–4% of investment), and guarantee minimum 20% of funds to the 40% most deprived communities.
- Government will review the Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management Strategy in 2026 and explore long-term flood resilience targets and standards, to be detailed in forthcoming water white paper.
- Government acknowledges surface water as the most common future flood risk and commits to standardised mapping and data sharing; new national standards for sustainable drainage systems issued June 2025.
- Government will assess statutory duties for Fire and Rescue Services in flood response by summer 2026 but declines to formalise Flood Resilience Taskforce oversight, citing clarity of accountability concerns.
Government position
The government partially accepts the committee's recommendations. It accepts the principle of long-term investment, resilience standards, catchment-based planning, nature-based solutions, asset visibility improvements, and equitable funding. It commits to reviewing national strategies and consulting on planning reform. However, it declines to formalise the Flood Resilience Taskforce, does not immediately commit to Schedule 3 (mandatory SuDS) or statutory Fire and Rescue duties, and will explore rather than mandate several proposals. The government frames most responses as ongoing study or future consultation rather than immediate legislative change.
Tone
ProceduralTopics
Key actors
Environmental Audit Committee, Environment Agency, Defra, Flood Resilience Taskforce, Lead Local Flood Authorities, Risk Management Authorities, Water companies, Fire and Rescue Services
Notable line
“Over the last year, the government has made significant progress by committing record investment in flood and coastal erosion defences and introducing the most significant change in flood and coastal erosion funding policy for nearly fifteen years.”
Key Quotes
“Over the last year, the government has made significant progress by committing record investment in flood and coastal erosion defences and introducing the most significant change in flood and coastal erosion funding policy for nearly fifteen years.”
“Despite a challenging fiscal context, the government recognises the need to invest in the long term which is why at least £10.5 billion will be invested up to 2036, delivering the largest flood and coastal investment programme in England's history.”
“The Environment Agency's latest assessment shows that surface water will be the most common flood risk in coming decades. We agree this needs to be better reflected in the actions of risk management authorities.”
“This equates to at least £300 million, the highest figure to date for the floods programme. Investment will be even higher, once natural flood management in combination with traditional engineered protection is included.”
“A minimum of 20% of investment will go to the 20% most deprived communities and a minimum of 40% to the 40% most deprived communities, combined over both the next three and ten years.”
“But we do not agree on formalising the role. It would complicate the responsibilities and accountabilities which should be as clear as possible, as set out in a previous recommendation.”
“Improved delivery of SuDS could be achieved by building on the current planning policy approach and exploring options to strengthen adoption and maintenance, rather than implementing Schedule 3 of the Flood and Water Management Act”
Source · parliament.uk record ↗