October 2024
Introduction
Flooding is often thought of as a natural disaster, and it is true that we cannot prevent flooding from happening altogether. However, the questions of who is protected from flooding and who bears the brunt of its consequences are answered by the decisions of people, not the blind force of nature. As flooding gets worse over the coming decades, it is our job to ensure that those decisions are taken in ways that meet the needs of our people.
To protect our communities from the risks flooding presents, we are calling on national and local government to make the following changes:
- Fund organisations like ACORN to deliver community-led flood resilience projects.
- Make more money available for property-level flood resilience grants, and force housing providers to make full use of them.
- Provide funding for flood resilience projects based on the human, social and environmental costs of flooding.
- Put proper flood risk strategies in place for all residents, including renters and those on low incomes, with at least one member of staff who is responsible for liaising with flood-affected communities.
- Introduce a freeze on evictions and rent rises during any post-flood repairs and after they have been completed for a certain period, to ensure tenants feel empowered to assert their rights and to make sure that costs are not passed onto them.
Consequences of flooding
Flooding can be disastrous for anyone, but it particularly affects renters and people on low incomes. These groups are less capable of installing flood defences in their home, less likely to have flood insurance, and more likely to live in flood-prone areas than homeowners and people on higher incomes. Despite this, there is no national voice for tenants on flooding.
Flooding can have significant economic consequences. Those affected by flooding may have to shoulder the financial burden of replacing their belongings, staying elsewhere while their home is uninhabitable, missing shifts at workplaces that are closed due to flooding, or missing shifts at work to deal with the disruption brought by flooding.
There are also significant physical and mental health effects, including the risk of drowning, infection from contaminated water, injuries from debris, mental health consequences and respiratory diseases from mould, post-traumatic stress disorder, and a reduced sense of safety in one’s home.
Flood Action Groups
One of the main ways that we try to achieve flood resilience in the UK is via flood action groups (FLAGs) – groups of residents in flood-prone areas who lobby for flood defence schemes in advance of floods, and run warning systems and action plans when they occur.
These groups typically form in the wake of a flood, and will often have significantly dropped off or disintegrated altogether by the time the next flood comes around. They are also self-selecting, and often end up becoming dominated by middle-class homeowners.
ACORN could be effective at performing the function of Flood Action Groups. Because we are a multi-issue organisation that focuses on recruitment and leadership development, we could build groups that are more able to sustain between floods and that include a more representative group of people.
Our demand: The state should make funds available to community organisations like ACORN for community-led flood resilience projects.
Property-level flood resilience
Property-level flood resilience (PFR) measures include things like anti-flood air bricks, gates designed to prevent flood waters from entering a property, and non-return valves that prevent sewage water from entering homes. These are expensive, and require regular maintenance to keep functional.
One problem with making PFR a focus of flood resilience is that it moves the burden of responsibility away from the state and towards individuals. With that in mind, our focus around this issue is on housing providers.
Our demands: DEFRA should make more money available for PFR grants. Housing providers in flood-prone areas (including councils, housing associations and private landlords) should be compelled to make full use of grants for PFR.
Flood Defence Grant-in-aid
The Flood Defence Grant-in-aid (FDGiA) is the central government fund for managing flood risk in England. It is harshly criticised by organisations like the National Flood Forum. The FDGiA’s funding criteria focuses on an economic assessment of the costs and benefits of flood prevention.
Under this system, small/rural places and deprived places struggle to meet the criteria for funding – even if the human, social and environmental costs of flooding there are profound – while places with more properties or that are more economically prosperous find it easier. Arguably, this targets funding away from where it is most needed.
Our demand: The FDGiA should change its funding criteria to emphasise the human, social and environmental costs of flooding over the economic costs, and to give more weight to smaller communities.
Lead Local Flood Authorities
Lead Local Flood Authorities (LLFAs) are bodies within councils that coordinate flood risk management in a local area. These bodies do not have a great deal of power, but demands can be made where LLFAs are not making the best of what they have e.g. where local flood risk management strategies do not sufficiently protect renters or low income residents, or where the local authority does not have an adequate number of staff to deal with flood-affected residents.
Our demands: Local flood risk management strategies should have proper protections in place for all residents, including renters and those on low incomes. Local authorities should have at least one member of staff who is responsible for liaising with flood-affected communities.
Renoviction
In England, landlords are responsible for making repairs to a property after flooding, and tenants can claim for a rent reduction while the repairs are carried out. While this is a good thing in principle, it is gravely undermined by the lack of protection from eviction for the tenants through this process. People will stay in terrible conditions because they are worried they will be evicted if they get the landlords to make the necessary repairs. Tenants should not have to choose between living in a potentially dangerous property and risking eviction.
Our demands: There should be a freeze on evictions and rent rises during any improvement works and after they have been completed for a certain period, in order to ensure tenants feel empowered to demand repairs and to make sure that costs are not passed onto them. Until such national protections are in place, housing providers with properties in flood-prone areas should introduce policies that guarantee no evictions or rent hikes in the event of flooding.