Flooding - ABI calls for flood budget rethink

A spokesman for the Association of British Insurers has said that the government's proposed budget for tackling floods does not add up because it was calculated at the height of last year's devastating summer floods without "knowing what the truth is". Malcolm Tarling, spokesman for the ABI, said: "We need to know the potential impact of surface water drainage and to focus on reducing the risks of floods, and then accept that they are going to happen."

Tarling was speaking on the same day that the Pitt Review Lessons from the 2007 Floods was released. The review calls for a 25-year plan to deal with flooding, complete with its own Cabinet Committee. The review also demanded that: local authorities are called upon to decide who is responsible for maintaining drainage ditches and streams; a joint initiative be created by the Met Office and the Environment Agency to use information to provide more accurate flood warnings; and for utility companies to be more open about their key infrastructure sites.

Despite the warning from the ABI about a review of funding, Sir Michael Pitt believes that the changes can be achieved within the government's existing allocated budget, which will rise to £800m for the year 2010-11.

The review has been welcomed by insurers generally, however some strong reservations have been voiced. Alan Gairns, property insurance manager at RSA, welcomed the report but had this criticism: "(The report) does not address the key issue of minimising the flood risk for the 517,000 households at significant risk of flooding now."

The government's £1.8bn, three-year spending plans include increasing flood-protection levels for 145,000 households, of which 45,000 are deemed to be high risk. Gairns also called for a change in building regulations to stop construction on flood plains, however, Pitt was relaxed about this issue, suggesting that homeowners and housebuilders should include the risk of flooding in their Home Information Packs and saying that the lack of available housing in the UK meant it was inevitable that building on such areas would continue.