As Storm Bert costs mount, Labour must get serious about flood-proofing homes

One thing most people would agree on: Britain urgently needs new homes. But the misery inflicted by Storm Bert underlines an important point; it matters where you build them – and it matters how you build them.

A press release that emerged in the wake of Rachel Reeves’s Budget loudly trumpeted the £5bn earmarked for “housing reform” and the building of thousands of new homes. While such figures have to be taken with a pinch of salt when they come from governments, the chunky numbers and the tone (the Budget will “turbocharge the delivery of 1.5 million homes”) were nonetheless a statement of intent. A welcome one.

But as Bert’s victims survey the wreckage of their homes, commence meetings with loss adjusters and face up to the cold and damp reality of just how long it can take to make a water-damaged property liveable again (up to a year in some cases), it still doesn’t appear that the government has learned the lesson of this – and the storms that came before it.

Instead, the attitude appears to be: “Let’s get ’em built and hope the insurance industry picks up the pieces when waters pour in”. As they inevitably will.

That’s not going to work. We don’t yet have an estimate for how much Storm Bert is going to cost. It’s early days, and the focus is (rightly) on supporting people in desperate situations. However, Louise Clark, general insurance policy adviser at the Association of British Insurers (ABI), points out that the UK experienced 11 named storms in 2023 alone. The claims for just three of them – Babet, Ciara and Debi – amounted to £352m.

The trade body says “weather-related damage” was the main driver for a nearly 10 per cent increase in home insurance payouts. Now imagine what thousands of new cookie-cutter homes thrown up on flood plains will do to those costs in future years (and to our home insurance premiums while we’re at it). The industry would justifiably be in revolt.

Flood Re was set up, funded by a levy paid by companies offering home insurance, to provide affordable cover for those in at-risk areas. At the same time, the government was supposed to do its part by investing in flood defences and working on prevention.

Prevention, Clark says, is “key”. And so it is. However, she adds: “We continue to wait for the government consultation – promised in 2023 – on measures to implement sustainable drainage solutions and remove the automatic right to connect to the sewers, both of which will help reduce surface water flooding and water pollution.

“Flood prevention and resilience measures must also be considered in all planning decisions and building standards – to make sure properties are fit for the future. If we invest in climate-adaptation measures now, and build climate-resilient homes, everyone will save in the long run.”

This ought to be taken as read because it is a statement of the bleedin’ obvious. But, as the absence of that consultation shows, it’s still not getting through. Perhaps the ABI might like to consider buying a job lot of flatscreens for the Treasury, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, and the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Just have them installed, pre-tuned to a 24-hour news channel running pictures of the damage, and then let them play on a continuous loop.

Of course, I jest. But it seems as if we have this same conversation every year the waters pour in – we really don’t need any more crocodile tears from ministers adding to it.

There are solutions and they aren’t even terribly complicated. An emerging risk is that of surface water that has nowhere to go. So you build permeable driveways. Open spaces, which make new estates more desirable places, can be designed as water traps. Sockets? Put them higher up the wall so the electrics don’t get ruined.

Prevention doesn’t come free of cost. But spending a bit now would save a lot more further down the line. The benefits won’t just be financial.

The human misery of people who find their homes underwater is heartbreaking. If the financial devastation of Bert won’t concentrate minds – and it ought to – perhaps that will help?

Britain needs to build. But it needs to build better. Angela Rayner, and the other ministers responsible for that, should try bringing the insurers and other interested parties in before this becomes a runaway train. I’m sure they’d be only too happy to advise. They should then sit on developers and give local authorities the resources to ensure commitments to build sensitively are followed through on.

This problem isn’t going away – to the contrary. Climate change threatens to make the costs I quoted above look like chump change if action isn’t taken.