Consultation response- changes to flood funding rules

July 2025 --

Flooded People UK has submitted its response to Defra's consultation, "Reforming our approach to floods funding." The submission draws on more than 70 responses from flooded people across over 50 communities and has been formally endorsed by 11 flood action groups. You can read the full document below.

Flooded People UK Defra Funding Rules consultation respnse 2025.pdf

Download PDF • 289KB

Here's a short summary of what we said.

Why this matters

The way flood and coastal erosion risk management (FCERM) is funded shapes whether repeatedly flooded communities get real, lasting protection — or are left waiting. Our members told us, again and again, about the toll of repeat flooding: homes lost for months, declining health among elderly neighbours, and a deep erosion of trust in the system. That experience runs through everything in our response.

Key points

Maintenance must not come at the cost of new defences. We welcome commitments to maintaining existing assets and tackling surface water flooding. But our analysis suggests capital spending on new defence schemes could fall sharply in 2026–27, and we're concerned that maintenance and smaller-scale measures are being funded at the expense of the large-scale defences many river and coastal communities depend on.

A funding shortfall remains. With capital spending averaging around £790m a year against the National Infrastructure Commission's recommended £1.5bn, FCERM faces a shortfall of over £700m — before accounting for the long-term cost of relocating communities.

Property Flood Resilience (PFR) and Natural Flood Management (NFM) are valuable tools, but not substitutes. We support their wider use where appropriate, yet we hear too many accounts of PFR failing — and growing worry that these measures are offered when larger schemes can't be funded, rather than because they're the right solution. Used well, they build trust; used as a stopgap, they corrode it.

We broadly welcome the FDGIA reforms, including the first £3m of eligible costs being notionally covered and a simpler funding rate. But many communities need schemes well above £3m, and the changes must be communicated clearly so expectations aren't raised unfairly.

Prioritise repeatedly flooded and deprived communities. The harms of flooding compound with every event. We want prioritisation that reflects this, rather than pitting different intervention types against one another.

Make risk-creators contribute. Rather than taxing those who benefit from protection, we urge the government to explore resilience levies on sectors whose activities raise flood risk — development, water, and fossil-fuel-related activities — and to take a firmer line against new development in flood-risk areas.

Devolution only works if it's funded. Greater local and mayoral powers must come with statutory duties and the financial capacity to deliver.

"Imagine if you lived in a house that was flooded and you were told that the government would do nothing to stop it happening again. How would you feel?" — a flooded person, in our survey