The inquiry, launched in December 2024, aims to understand the steps authorities are taking to combat flooding events, the actions required to future proof against flooding, and what support is necessary to boost the resilience of householders and businesses.
Rachel represented the NFU alongside panellists from the Chartered Institute of Water and Environment Management and the Town and Country Planning Association.
Subjects discussed during the session included whether flood resilience in the NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework) has been given sufficient weight, if communities are sufficiently empowered to engage in flood resilience decisions in their local areas, and how land in England is used for housing, infrastructure and farming and what impact that has on the nation’s flood resilience.
What did the NFU ask for?
The Flood Recovery Fund and data transparency
Rachel began by welcoming the FRF (Flood Recovery Fund) and highlighting the benefit it has had to those eligible for payment.
However, she went on to outline issues faced by some NFU members including the length of time between the announcement of the fund and when payments were received, as well as questions over the methodology used to calculate payment eligibility.
“We cannot consider solutions in silos.”
NFU Vice President Rachel Hallos
The NFU is seeking to understand the methodology used by the RPA (Rural Payments Agency) to calculate those who were eligible for payments from the FRF due to some flooded landowners being ineligible for payment.
Taking this into consideration, Rachel stated that the NFU would like to see a committee recommendation specifically seeking greater clarity and transparency over the rationale behind the methodology used to calculate payment eligibility for the FRF.
Maintenance of existing infrastructure
Rachel shared concerns that many of the issues NFU members continue to face are caused by a lack of maintenance of flood management infrastructure. Therefore, the importance of maintaining existing defences must be at the forefront of the government’s flood risk management strategy.
“Government needs to seriously consider how it maintains existing defences and put in place a proactive management plan for EA (Environment Agency) controlled watercourses and flood defence,” she said.
In addition, she highlighted that farmers and growers need to have confidence in any NFM (Natural Flood Management) project taking place on their land, and that currently there is a lack of confidence within ELMs to enable land managers to plan long term and be confident they will receive support.
Integrated water management and catchment-based approaches
Rachel stated that it is absolutely essential all the different approaches involved in integrated water management are underpinned by a central strategy that unites each segment and ensures a clear, transparent strategy for water management.
She also emphasised that the NFU would like to see the government introduce a long-term strategic plan for managing water scarcity and flooding events, taking a whole catchment integrated approach.
The NFU’s Integrated Water Management Strategy challenges government and its agencies to end silo thinking when it comes to managing this crucial resource and its related risks across the country.
“We cannot consider solutions in silos,” Rachel said.
When asked about local authorities and developers’ engagement with communities to improve flood resilience, Rachel said that it is often local communities that understand the water in their area best.
She went on to explain that it is the catchment-based solution that is often the best answer to these problems. The NFU would like to see greater engagement with local communities and more emphasis placed on catchment-based solutions.
Greater guidance and support needed on riparian responsibilities
Although the EA has produced updated guidance on the rights and responsibilities of riparian owners, this only covers main rivers, not ordinary watercourses.
The NFU is hearing more and more from members who are concerned about what they can and cannot do when it comes to watercourse management.
Rachel concluded that greater outreach from the EA is required to reassure and educate members on the permitting process and their responsibilities.
