The minister responsible for flood defences is Elliot Morley. He answers your questions on flooding
Q: How do you feel about the ABI's Statement of Principles? Do you think they are fair?
A: I am pleased the industry is returning to a competitive market and that, in high-risk areas where defences are planned by 2007, availability of cover will continue. I note that cover will also be available for purchasers of domestic properties in these risk areas, subject to acceptability of other underwriting criteria, including claims record, with no blanket refusal to cover particular areas. I am confident that industry will manage the problems of undefended areas fairly. I understand they will deal with each case on its merits and consider a number of options to enable flood insurance to continue wherever possible.
Q: What happens to the policyholders who are not protected to the government's minimum standards? Have you considered creating a pool of resources for these people, much like the catastrophe pool in France?
A: For properties where flood defences will not be in place by 2007, the ABI has assured government that insurers will make their best efforts to provide cover, working on a case-by-case basis. The government welcomes this undertaking and hopes it will address the problem of property owners being unable to obtain cover.
Policyholders might consider investing in flood mitigation measures for their property and I would encourage insurers and policyholders to think about ways of constructing the insurance contract to share the risk. Some properties have never been insurable. An insurance pool which only catered for properties which were flooded frequently could not provide affordable cover. The whole catchment area studies we are funding may also help in identifying solutions.
Q: The ABI welcomed the increase of investment in flood defences. But the question remains as to how local authorities are held accountable to spend the money on flood defences. Shouldn't the money be ring-fenced so they can be held accountable for the funds?
A: I can see certain attractions to ring-fencing, but it does reduce flexibility in reflecting local needs. For instance, in recent years councils have paid levies to the Environment Agency that exceeded their standing spending assessment. Nevertheless we are currently reviewing the funding arrangements for flood and coastal defence, including whether funding currently delivered through the local government funding arrangements should be replaced by a more direct grant to those responsible for the flood defence service. We consulted on these arrangements earlier this year and I hope to consider recommendations shortly.
Q: In Scotland, there is legislation in place compelling local authorities to report if they update flood defences. Insurance companies in England are working from old data and if this legislation were in place, surely it would bring the process up to speed? Why is it not being done?
A: This issue has been brought to our attention by several insurers recently as well as the ABI in its statement and my officials are currently considering the position. However, we are actively seeking to co-ordinate information on flood defences throughout England and Wales through high level targets and the national flood and coastal defence database.
Q: Is the government working with the construction industry to regulate building and safety in terms of flooding? Is it offering guidelines to make building more resilient to flooding?
A: Government works with the construction industry indirectly through consultations on planning and building regulations, and directly by involving it in working parties and discussion groups developing new guidance. Government officials also participate in steering groups monitoring research projects relating to flooding that are being sponsored by industry. Its main response to ensure that occupiers of new buildings have minimum exposure to flood risk, is through planning guidance in the form of PPG 25, development and flood risk.
PPG 25 introduces a risk-based approach that encourages development in lower-risk areas. It also encourages the use of flood-resistant construction techniques. Although early days, the signs are that PPG 25 is clearly beginning to bite and certainly to make all concerned think about flood risk before permitting development
Part C of the Building Regulations (site preparation and resistance to moisture) is under review. However, building regulations can only deal with the health and safety of people in and about buildings; they cannot address protection of property.
The review of Part C has had input from many parts of industry including builders. The proposals for new guidance include information on direct flood risk and risks from overflowing drains and sewers. It offers the former DTLR publication, Preparing for floods, as a prime source of information. This includes guidance on flood resistant construction and repair of buildings after floods. If followed this guidance can reduce much of the distress and expense associated with flooding.
