Flood Risk and Flood Defence Infrastructure: North-west England

Tuesday 18th November 2025 Westminster Hall

16:30

[Sarah Hall (Warrington South) (Lab/Co-op)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered flood risk and flood defence infrastructure in the North West.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. I asked for this debate because people in Warrington South are worn down by the constant risk of flooding. It shapes their day-to-day lives far more than most people realise. We need a frank conversation about what is happening and what needs to change. For my constituents in places such as Dallam, Bewsey, Sankey Bridges and Penketh, this is not about distant risks or statistical forecasts. It is about the reality of waking up to flood alerts, checking river levels whenever the rain starts to fall, and wondering whether the water will stop before it breaches the banks of the brook.

I have lost count of the number of people who have told me that they cannot sleep when heavy rain is forecast. Parents have told me that their children get anxious when storms are mentioned on the news. Older residents tell me that they keep a torch by the bed, just in case. It is those small details that show just how deeply flooding affects people long after the water has gone. That is no way to live. No family should have to brace themselves over and over again for another clean-up every time the water rises.

In Dallam, we now see a situation where people are effectively marooned. When Longshaw Street floods and the Hawley’s Lane bridge goes under, Dallam becomes an island. People cannot get to work, get their children to school or leave their homes safely. Older residents who rely on adult social care are cut off. Patients at Lea Court are placed at additional risk because the access routes simply disappear under the water. Those are serious safety issues. No community should find itself trapped because the infrastructure around it can no longer cope.

From Merseyside to Greater Manchester, and Warrington in between, communities are facing the same issues: extreme rainfall, overwhelmed watercourses and schemes that take too long to materialise. The north-west is carrying a growing share of the national flood burden. Our region contributes significantly to the national economy. We should not be left fighting year after year for the basic infrastructure needed to keep homes and businesses safe. For too long, flood resilience in the north-west has relied on a patchwork of bids, lobbying rounds and one-off pots of money. That is not a strategy. It leaves communities vulnerable, stuck in a cycle of uncertainty.

On new year’s day, I was out across Warrington South in communities devastated by flooding, down Higham Avenue, Tavlin Avenue, Longshaw Street and Southworth Avenue. Some families were only just returning to normality following the Storm Christoph floods in 2021. Others were already exhausted by the constant cycle of rain, flood alerts, worry and clean-up, and it has not stopped there.

[Andrew Cooper (Mid Cheshire) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend mentioned Storm Christoph. Both Northwich and Winsford in my constituency flooded twice in an 18-month period, most recently during that storm. Our section 19 investigation found that although Northwich’s flood walls held, the ancient Victorian combined sewerage system was not up to scratch. Does she agree that when we talk about investment in flood defences, it is about not just flood walls, but investment in our sewerage infrastructure?

[Sarah Hall]

I absolutely agree; my hon. Friend makes an important point.

In September, we came within inches of another major event. The emergency services set up a temporary command post, and we were preparing to evacuate homes again. Then, just last Friday, we had another flood alert, with modelling suggesting that we were heading for yet another breach. Residents can see what is happening: these events are coming closer together and they are becoming harder to predict, but none of that should come as a surprise.

I want to be clear that the areas most exposed to flooding in Warrington South are some of the most deprived, with some of the highest levels of disadvantage. They are the least able to shoulder the cost of repairs, the rising insurance premiums or months of disruption. Those communities are hit first and hit hardest, and they deserve the very best protection we can give them, not the uncertainty of waiting year after year for the infrastructure that they should already have had.

When I looked at an old Ordnance Survey map from the 1880s, I saw that the land around Dallam and Bewsey was clearly marked as liable to flooding, with mud flats shown across an area that is now full of homes. Much of the housing built in the pre-war and post-war decades went up before anyone talked about climate resilience or long-term hydrology. Those decisions were not malicious; they were just made in a different era. With the kind of extreme rainfall that we are now seeing, those early planning decisions are showing their limits. That history matters—it helps to explain why that area is so vulnerable and why modern infrastructure simply must catch up.

Nobody back then could have foreseen the level of rainfall now, but we cannot pretend that those planning decisions are not part of why we are here today. We have a responsibility to respond to the risks that are now so clear. This is not bad luck or a one-off winter; it is a pattern. The storms are heavier, the water rises faster and the ground saturates more quickly. Our infrastructure simply was not built for that pace or intensity of change.

People often ask me about dredging, clearing the gullies, reopening canals and maintaining the brooks. Yes, those things matter, and I will always push for better maintenance, but we need to be straight with our residents. Dredging, clearing gullies, reopening canals and cutting back vegetation cannot prevent flooding when we get an entire day’s rain in just a couple of hours. That is the scale of the challenge; no amount of clearing alone can keep the water back.

Flood events that used to be rare are now frequent. What used to be a slow rise in water levels can happen in the blink of an eye. The weather has changed, but the infrastructure has not. That is why the Sankey brook flood risk management scheme is so important. It is why I fought to secure the funding that finally allowed the outline design stage to begin. The contract has now been awarded and engineers are progressing the plans. Without securing that funding, we would still be talking about possibilities, rather than the engineers beginning their work. But I have to be honest: in the past, promises were made without a plan and people were let down. I will not repeat those mistakes. Sadly, even now, there are some making big claims about this scheme without understanding how complex it is. It is easy to say what people want to hear, but much harder to follow through and deliver. This is not a fast process and I will not pretend it is, but it is real progress after years of false starts.

My constituents are desperate, and they ask me the same question time and again: when will this actually be built? The honest answer is not an easy one. At the moment, construction is not due to start until 2029, with an expected completion date in 2032. For communities that have faced repeated flooding, that is a long wait. They understand that the scheme is complex and that it needs to be done properly, so that flooding is not simply pushed on to other neighbourhoods. But they also need reassurance that the project will not stall again because, right now, we still do not have all the funding required. There is an affordability gap that we cannot ignore.

In the north-west, we have already seen schemes fall behind when the funding picture is unclear. We cannot afford for that to happen here. Sadly, we all know that the Sankey brook scheme will not entirely remove the risk of flooding. With more extreme weather and a change in climate, that risk will always be there in some form. What we can do is take every practical step to protect the communities most at risk. We can identify the gaps, strengthen the early-warning systems and put better support in place while the scheme is being designed and built.

[Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend touches on an important point about early warning. My constituency experienced devastating flooding in 2005 and 2015. Last week, despite flood warnings, we mercifully escaped—though parts of the city were affected —when what had been forecast was not what transpired. The Environment Agency appears to lack access to accurate radar forecasting. Does she agree that we must equip the EA with exactly that type of early warning?

[Sarah Hall]

I absolutely agree. We have also experienced that. At the time of the last flooding event, certain levels were predicted that did not come to pass. The accuracy is not there at the moment.

I want to take a moment to thank the EA, Warrington borough council and our emergency services, because they have done everything they can with the limited resources available. Partners I have worked with have been open and honest about the challenges, and they care deeply about getting this right, but they cannot carry the burden without stability and adequate support from central Government on the ground.

I hope that the Minister will consider the following asks. First, schemes such as Sankey brook need funding certainty. Families who have lived with repeated floods should not be waiting each year to see if the next phase can go ahead. Short-term funding creates long-term uncertainty. It slows down planning, delays construction and leaves communities exposed.

Local choice cannot become a replacement for proper, national investment. It was never designed to plug repeated funding shortfalls. We need a mechanism that can close affordability gaps quickly for schemes that are already progressing. It is not good enough for a project to be technically sound, publicly supported and urgently needed, only to sit half-funded for years.

Secondly, we need faster approval and progress for schemes where the risk is clearly rising. Sankey brook is routinely flagged during heavy rainfall. The recent September near miss, new-year floods, Storm Christoph and this past Friday show how urgent that is.

Thirdly, we need better support for interim measures while the long-term scheme is built. That includes making flood alerts more reliable, especially at night and for nearby communities. It means property flood resilience grants, measures to protect people’s homes, and enhanced practical help that is routinely available for councils and landlords dealing with the aftermath of flooding. Our experience in Warrington shows that the current flood recovery framework and Bellwin scheme are not fit for purpose and do not go far enough to support communities or local authorities.

Fourthly, I ask the Minister to look seriously at the growing issue of insurance affordability. Local residents are finding that they either cannot get flood insurance or that the premiums are so high that they cannot afford insurance. I urge her to look for solutions to ensure that families are not left uninsured or financially exposed while they wait for long-term schemes like Sankey brook to be completed.

Fifthly, I ask the Minister to recognise the importance of the Sankey brook flood risk management scheme, give it the priority the project deserves and do everything in her power to ensure that the scheme progresses at pace. My constituents and I are desperate for this scheme. We have lived through years of flooding, near misses, evacuations and constant anxiety. This is not a “nice to have” for my constituents. It is essential infrastructure. We need additional funding, more resources, spades in the ground and defences built. We need certainty and a commitment that only the Minister can provide.

Across the north-west, we are seeing a pattern: more extreme rainfall, more frequent events, and infrastructure that simply was not built for that. Communities cannot tackle this alone. Warrington South is an incredibly strong and resilient place. People look out for one another—they always have—but they should not have to rely on luck every time the rain comes. Good will alone will not keep homes dry. People need proper infrastructure behind them.

[Jeff Smith (Manchester Withington) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend is making an excellent speech and I agree with all the things that she has asked for. Perhaps I can add one more ask of both the EA and the Government, which is for more of a focus on the upstream prevention activity, so we can stop the waters coming down on the Mersey—a number of colleagues here are based on the Mersey, and she described the floods coming down so well. Perhaps we could work upstream in the Goyt valley and bring some of the longer-term measures forward to cut the problem off at source. Maybe we can all work together. The MPs who represent constituencies along the Mersey could talk to the EA about how we do that.

[Sarah Hall]

I absolutely agree and would be more than happy to do that.

Residents across Bewsey, Dallam, Sankey Bridges and Penketh are doing everything asked of them. They sign up for alerts, check river levels, move furniture upstairs and support one another through the worry. But what they cannot do is hold back water that rises faster and more aggressively every year. We finally got the Sankey brook scheme moving. Now we need the reassurance that it will continue at pace with the funding and support required to get it over the line. If schemes like this stall, the ripple effects are felt from family homes to local businesses and transport routes.

The storms will not wait for 2032. The water will not wait for the next funding round. We have been lucky more than once this year, but luck is not a flood defence strategy. It is not good enough for communities who have already suffered through repeated floods. Behind every issue I have raised this afternoon is a principle: people deserve to feel safe where they live, supported when things go wrong and listened to when they speak up. My constituents in Bewsey, Dallam, Sankey Bridges and beyond have waited long enough. They deserve the right infrastructure to protect them, and I will keep fighting until they get it.

16:44

[Mr Tom Morrison (Cheadle) (LD)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Dr Murrison. I thank the hon. Member for Warrington South (Sarah Hall) for bringing this issue to the House today.

“Despite three section 19 reports identifying the issue of a blockage…nothing happens despite recommendations to do so.”

Those are the words of Stephen, a constituent of mine in Bramhall who has suffered bad flooding at his home for many years. Just this week, flooding on the A555 relief road under Hall Moss Lane bridge in Bramhall, just down the road from Stephen, led to accidents, a road closure and disruption to many people’s lives, yet the area is being bombarded with planning proposals, encouraged by Government policy that does not in any measure address flooding.

Every year, more and more houses are at risk. That takes a serious toll on people, not just financially but emotionally. Post-traumatic stress disorder, long-term displacement and lifetime debt are only some of the consequences of flooding events in our communities. One resident contacted me to say that every time they get the Environment Agency’s emergency alert on their phone, they break out into pure panic.

[Adam Dance (Yeovil) (LD)]

Flooding is a huge issue in south Somerset. Does my hon. Friend agree with the Somerset Rivers Authority and me that the Environment Agency’s plan to stop maintaining small rivers and streams due to Government funding cuts will only increase the risk of flooding?

[Mr Morrison]

I appreciate my hon. Friend’s intervention, and yes, there is a question of flooding here. According to the EA’s March 2024 report, 3.2 million properties are at risk of surface water flooding. The latest surface water flooding risk assessment carried out by the EA increased the flood risk rating of many of the homes in my Cheadle constituency. Residents need to know that the Government are taking such flooding seriously.

From working with residents, Stockport council and the EA after the awful floods in January, it is clear to me that serious clarification is needed. Stockport council did not receive any funding from the EA or the Government following January’s disastrous flooding, despite its serious and widespread impact and the lives it ruined. What is more, the EA’s long-term flood risk management strategy for the River Mersey has been delayed, which is arguably one of the reasons why Stockport council missed out on the funding.

[Phil Brickell (Bolton West) (Lab)]

The hon. Member is making a very good point. Does he agree that, notwithstanding the large drainage basins of rivers such as the Mersey, the Dee, the Kent and the Lune, which have systemic flood risk, there is also the issue of serious localised flooding across the region, which is often not tied to major drainage basins but connected to sewerage or groundwater?

[Mr Morrison]

The hon. Member makes a fantastic point, and that is the crux of the problem: we concentrate a lot on areas such as the Mersey, but we have a load of waterways and a load of issues around sewerage and drainage that need to be encompassed by our thinking.

Organisations responsible must be not only properly funded in the long term, but able to work constructively and effectively together to protect residents. As the Government force us to “build, baby, build”, new developments will only increase surface water flooding as more green belt gets built on and natural drainage is reduced. In the words of the National Infrastructure Commission itself, the Government’s response to the commission’s report on surface water flooding did

“not meet the scale of the challenge.”

The National Flood Forum receives more than 1,000 calls a year, often from vulnerable residents affected by recent developments causing flooding.

The Planning and Infrastructure Bill does not even refer to flooding or flood risk management, and the Environment Agency’s flood risk guidance is often ignored or legally challenged within the Bill. I was proud to support the Liberal Democrat amendments to the Bill that would have properly tackled flooding in relation to planning and required the implementation of sustainable drainage systems in any new development.

The EA’s own road map to 2026 suggests that, for every pound spent on protecting communities, we avoid around £5 in property damages. This is incredibly important, so now is the time to commit to long-term funding rather than shy away from it. That is essential to ensuring that my constituents in Cheadle, Bramhall, Woodford, Gatley and all the communities that have been impacted by flooding over the last 12 years can be supported in protecting their homes, their businesses and their communities, as well as reducing the impact of increasingly heavy storms, increased surface water and new developments that have not properly been considered.

I will finish with a remark from Karen, who lives near the Micker brook in Cheadle. She said:

“Planners and developers must take into account flooding when building. What happened at the mill in Stockport on New Year’s Day was simply appalling. The developer should be responsible for this.”

The Government must take urgent action that takes flood risk seriously and provides long-term, ringfenced funding for organisations such as the EA and responsible councils, and they must legislate without delay on the close connection between flooding, development and infrastructure.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Dr Andrew Murrison (in the Chair)]

Order. I shall begin calling the Front Benchers at 5.08 pm, so colleagues might like to titrate their contributions accordingly.

16:50

[Oliver Ryan (Burnley) (Lab/Co-op)]

It is a pleasure, as ever, to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Warrington South (Sarah Hall) for securing this critical debate, and praise her language, campaigning approach and resilience —that is really the buzzword for this topic.

When we talk about flood risk in the north-west—not just in Burnley but, more obviously, in Padiham and Brierfield—we are not talking about abstract theories or far-off scenarios. We are talking about real people with water in their homes and shops, and about destruction. In Padiham, many families still recall the shock of waking to rising water, the distress of damaged homes and businesses, and the long clean-up that followed the Boxing day floods of 2015. Those experiences stay with our community.

That is why the Padiham flood risk management scheme is so important and such a momentous project for Padiham. It is more than a construction project; it represents security, care and commitment to the people who live and work in our town. Once completed, the scheme will protect around 160 homes, businesses and public buildings in the centre of Padiham, and defend our community from the River Calder, the Green brook and the surface water that has caused so much destruction in the past.

We are now seeing clear progress: the new flood wall and gate at Bendwood Close is already finished, detailed design work for the wider scheme is nearly complete and full construction is planned to begin in spring 2026, with completion expected by winter 2028. The investment gives the town something very valuable: the ability to look to the future with greater confidence.

I put on record my recognition of the team effort that the scheme has been—it has spanned three Members of Parliament and 10 years of lobbying—and of the work of all involved, involving the Environment Agency, Burnley council, Councillor John Harbour, Councillor Barbara Dole, Councillor Alun Lewis and, indeed, the Minister, who I believe signed off the proposals last week, in her first week in office. I am proud that the Government have seen fit to fund the proposals, after the floods in 2015, and that residents and businesses can now have assurance that the scheme will be completed.

I ask that the Environment Agency, which I thank for the work so far, does its best to keep the scheme on track and get it delivered. For residents, the scheme is about not just engineering, but peace of mind. It is about being able to put children to bed on a stormy night without worrying that the streets, shops and homes will be flooded in the morning. On Christmas day last year, I was contacted by businesses on Padiham high street; people were texting me as they watched the water levels in the Calder while enjoying their Christmas day turkey. This is about keeping the heart of Padiham strong, vibrant and protected for years to come. Padiham is a reminder that investment in flood resilience is ultimately an investment in people, their wellbeing, and the secure future that they deserve.

16:53

[Jo Platt (Leigh and Atherton) (Lab/Co-op)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Dr Murrison. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Warrington South (Sarah Hall) for securing the debate, which is so important, especially with the winter months approaching.

As we have just heard, in January the north-west faced floods of such ferocity that they took everyone by surprise. Across Manchester, Cheshire and the Wigan borough, homes and livelihoods were devastated. In Leigh and Atherton, the damage was significant. For residents near Lilford Park, it was the second time they had endured a major flood in less than 10 years. To experience such destruction twice in a decade is unacceptable, and it is no wonder that people are asking whether our flood resilience measures are truly fit for purpose.

I witnessed at first hand the disruption and devastation that flooding causes to people’s lives—possessions lost and communities shaken. In the aftermath, the focus has rightly been on recovery. I am grateful to the emergency services, which responded swiftly at the time. I want also to acknowledge the support of local councillors, Wigan council officers and local businesses that gave their time and resources to those impacted. I thank the Minister for visiting the area to meet residents. I know her commitment to this issue; she is steadfast in wanting to support communities in their time of need.

People have gone above and beyond to support our neighbours, and we must never forget that spirit of solidarity. However, we owe it to residents to reduce the risk of this happening again. Since the incident, I have been working with the council, the Environment Agency and United Utilities on flood risk management in our area, particularly in Lilford and Higher Folds. Following our section 19 report, the Environment Agency is undertaking modelling of the Leigh East catchment area, which is expected to be completed in the summer.

Planting trees and promoting biodiversity are absolutely worthwhile, but they cannot replace the urgent need for proper flood storage—that goes back to the comment that my hon. Friend the Member for Warrington South made earlier. We need solutions that deliver real protection. Preliminary work has already identified potential water storage areas further upstream, but they need safeguarding from development at least while modelling is completed.

When they are done responsibly, developments can assist with flood prevention, but it is imperative that they are not looked at in isolation. Incorporating sustainable drainage systems, such as attenuation ponds, can drastically reduce downstream flooding. While they may not appear necessary for each development, the benefits downstream must not be underestimated.

[Phil Brickell]

As my constituency neighbour, does my hon. Friend share the frustration that I and my Bolton West constituents sometimes have about identifying who is responsible for the existing infrastructure and its maintenance? For example, we struggle to understand whether United Utilities or the council is responsible for localised flooding by Old Station Park and on Chorley New Road in Horwich, or on Lostock Junction Lane, and the source of the flooding.

[Jo Platt]

I could not agree more with my hon. Friend. As near neighbours, we share the same concerns. I do think that the Greater Manchester combined authority is leading on some really good work, pulling in all the agencies in order to work on the responsibilities of some of those partners, and we need to be part of that too.

We need decisive action now. Every household must be made flood-proof, not through quick fixes but through sustainable solutions that stand the test of time. That means that local and national policies must embed resilience at their core. Local authorities and the Environment Agency should be held accountable and given the resources to deliver.

Finally, I want to raise an issue that residents repeatedly bring to me. Many households find that insurance companies differ widely in the cover they offer for flood risk, leaving families vulnerable. What discussions has the Minister had with insurers and with the Build Back Better scheme to ensure fairness and consistency in cover for those affected?

Our community has shown strength in the face of adversity; now it is time for leadership to match that strength with action. We must build a future where homes are protected, families feel secure and flooding is no longer a recurring nightmare for Leigh and Atherton residents.

16:58

[Navendu Mishra (Stockport) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Dr Murrison. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Warrington South (Sarah Hall) on securing this important debate.

In January, there was flooding at Meadow Mill in my constituency, with almost 200 residents impacted. I thank the Meadow Mill residents association for all the work it has done in representing residents but also raising real concerns. I have corresponded with a number of residents, and I met the association just a few weeks ago in my office. One of the main issues they face is that the building’s owner is unable to secure insurance against the flood risk. That is quite concerning for leaseholders, who are liable to pay out of their own pockets for any future flood damage to Meadow Mill, which may run to hundreds of thousands of pounds, if not more.

Although none of the residential units was impacted by the flooding on new year’s day, the water filtration system, boiler and electricity substation were affected, which meant there was no water supply, heating or electric in the flats, so all residents had to evacuate. That should have been avoided, because the mill was only recently converted into flats. It is a serious issue.

Generally speaking, Stockport does not really suffer from flooding; it is usually the constituency of my neighbour, the hon. Member for Cheadle (Mr Morrison), that has the most significant issues. However, with climate change and a number of other factors, it is something we are increasingly facing. I do not want to repeat points that others have made, but the issue of funding for the Environment Agency is quite serious. I have met the agency, and I appreciate all the work it does, but it has no earmarked funding for work in my constituency, which is a concern.

We also have an issue in Reddish, where a bridge collapsed in January. It will cost more than £1 million to repair, and Stockport council tells me that it cannot facilitate the work without central Government support. Across the borough, which includes three constituencies, the cost of damage is around £4.3 million—a serious sum.

We need much better drainage systems and much more investment in the Environment Agency, but we also need more protection for residents, whether they are tenants or owner-occupiers, from the risks that come with insurance and the additional costs. On behalf of Meadow Mill residents, I want to raise that issue with the Government.

I thank the firefighters, North West ambulance service and Greater Manchester police, but also Stockport council staff who went above and beyond in supporting residents. I take this opportunity to refer to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, in particular with regard to the Fire Brigades Union, but I am very grateful to them for doing all they can. I will finish by inviting the Minister to come to Stockport to try some of our award-winning beer, but also to meet residents of Meadow Mill.

17:01

[Mike Kane (Wythenshawe and Sale East) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Warrington South (Sarah Hall) for this important and timely debate.

For my constituents in Wythenshawe and Sale East, flooding is a growing concern, severely affecting local communities on both sides of the river. On new year’s day, we witnessed one of the most severe flood events in recent memory: the River Mersey reached its highest level in 66 years following an intense downpour—70 mm of rain in just 18 hours. Emergency crews worked tirelessly and I join my hon. Friend the Member for Stockport (Navendu Mishra) in giving my thanks to them.

At Northenden golf club, helicopters dropped one-tonne bags of rock to plug the breaches in the embankments. My hon. Friend the Member for Manchester Withington (Jeff Smith) and I met representatives of our respective golf clubs, Northenden and Withington, a few days after the event. One of the nightmare scenarios now is that golf clubs cannot get insurance, and that is only spreading. That is what climate change is bringing to us. Manchester city council evacuated over 1,000 residents that day and closed footpaths and infrastructure near the river. The exact same thing had happened just a few years earlier; the then Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, visited a couple of days later—we thought we had averted disaster but clearly we had not.

Thanks to flood defences, nearly 12,000 properties were protected, but tragically 99 homes were still flooded because of the embankment breaches. On 1 January, the river at Northenden peaked at 3.76 metres, well above the property flooding threshold of 3.3 metres. That was not an isolated incident. When I was a young councillor growing up in Northenden that was a one-in-100-year event, but now it is happening annually because of climate change.

That is not all. The relentless discharging of untreated sewage into the River Mersey by United Utilities also points to a system under strain, as my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Cheshire (Andrew Cooper) mentioned. Storm overflows are designed to prevent sewerage systems from backing up during heavy rain. When they are overwhelmed, the environmental impact is profound. Polluted waters threaten wildlife, biodiversity and public health. The River Mersey becomes a wet wipe and tampon alley for weeks and months on end, making it unusable.

Yet in 2024 alone, United Utilities discharged sewage into the Mersey estuary 1,865 times, lasting for a total of 12,500 hours. That is the equivalent of 1.4 years of continuous sewage, at an average of five spills every single day. That is just the estuary. The combination of damage to homes and businesses and the environmental impact of sewage overflow caused by flooding has created a perfect storm in my constituency and right along the River Mersey estuary. We are paying for it in countless unsustainable ways.

What can we begin to do about the situation? Local action is extraordinarily important to stem the waters entering the Mersey in the first place. The South Manchester urban brooks project, in collaboration with the team at Biora, have come up with a plan to de-culvert Baguley and Fairywell brooks. We have to tackle these issues at the source.

De-culverting and freeing our buried waterways, restoring them to their natural, open-air condition, is transformational: it reduces pollution, improves water health, creates vital habitat for wildlife and lowers water temperatures. Most importantly, it slows the water course down before it ever enters the River Mersey basin at all. That is why that type of infrastructure upstream is critical for helping my hon. Friend the Member for Warrington South. It also creates recreation opportunities for residents; Baguley brook in my constituency runs by a cycle path, for example.

When we bring back our rivers and streams, residents gain access to improved green space, which in turn improves their own wellbeing. But more than that, de-culverting reduces the long-term infrastructure costs and acts as a natural form of green infrastructure, which, critically, slows down the flow of water and reduces peak flows during heavy rain, mitigating flooding further downstream.

Bringing back our brooks in a restorative course of action will reduce flooding, but it requires careful hydrological modelling and carries a high up-front cost. It needs funding and commitment from decision-makers to succeed. Will the Minister meet me to discuss the plans in my constituency, to make sure that we take action on the devastating impact of flooding all along the Mersey valley?

17:06

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Dr Murrison. I thank the hon. Member for Warrington South (Sarah Hall) for securing this important debate.

In recent years, communities across the north-west have repeatedly endured devastating flooding, most recently following Storm Éowyn, which brought with it devastation and a prolonged recovery. We have also seen that severe impact in Somerset, including when Storm Claudia reaped havoc right across the south-west and into Oxfordshire over the weekend. Extreme weather events are becoming more frequent, which means that it is even more important to ensure that robust flood resilience is in place, through both a national strategy and local community flood resilience strategies. These events underline the fact that we cannot continue building homes without ensuring that the necessary infrastructure is in place to protect communities from flooding.

My constituent Zoe moved into her new home in Martock in 2022 and then discovered that her property had been built without basic flood protection infrastructure. Her garden was built on clay without appropriate drainage and is also on a severe slope. Every time it rains, it floods. That is not an isolated case, more a consequence of a planning system that too often prioritises completion over responsibility. It is also a legacy of the former Conservative Government, who slashed flood protection plans for homes and failed to invest in flood defences, leaving communities to fend for themselves.

If the Government are committed to building the homes that people need, they must also ensure that new developments provide suitable flood mitigation measures, including sustainable drainage systems that properly manage excess rainfall. The Liberal Democrats have been clear: the Government must commit to implementing schedule 3 of the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 to legally require the installation of drainage systems in new builds to strengthen local flood resilience.

Furthermore, the Government have an obligation to ensure that all future housing developments are supported by upgrades to infrastructure to accommodate the expansion. Their current failure to do so is causing my constituents in Mudford, which floods regularly, to face the prospect of another 1,000 homes just outside their village. That is causing great anxiety. The proposals for that development would use the existing fragile sewerage system without any further enhancements, heightening the flood risk as the infrastructure will simply not cope with the increased capacity.

The Liberal Democrats have been consistent: the Government must ensure water companies are made statutory consultees during the planning process. That will help prevent future sewage spills and local flooding by ensuring that any increases in capacity are matched by suitable infrastructure upgrades.

The concerns are not limited to planning decisions; in fact, they are being weakened by the agencies tasked with protecting our communities. As my hon. Friend the Member for Yeovil (Adam Dance) mentioned, owing to a funding shortfall the Environment Agency recently issued withdrawal notices to ratepayers in Somerset regarding the cessation of maintenance on the designated main rivers. I thank the Minister, who met me last week to discuss the issue, for her commitment to come and meet me and Somerset stakeholders at some point next year.

The Environment Agency’s decision passes the responsibility on to riparian owners, who in many cases lack the financial ability or knowledge to undertake maintenance, and it will only heighten their anxiety around flood risk. Given the Environment Agency’s own modelling, which has shown that an additional 39,000 homes in the south-west could be at risk of flooding by 2050, that action is contrary to the urgent need to strengthen flood resilience in flood-prone areas such as Somerset.

Last autumn, we welcomed the Chancellor’s decision to commit £2.4 billion towards flood defences. However, with increasingly severe and frequent flooding, compounded by the Environment Agency’s budgetary constraints, the Government need to urgently commit to address longer-term flooding. The Liberal Democrats are calling for a further £5.3 billion to ensure that flood defences are built more quickly and provided to all necessary communities, to increase local preparedness and resilience.

As a Liberal Democrat and the daughter of a farmer, I recognise the invaluable role of farmers in flood management: they store flood water on their land to protect rural communities. For example, the Kerton family, based at Higher Farm in Chilton Cantelo, have repeatedly stored water on their farm, including having half of their farmland submerged for much of last winter. The current custodian, Nobby, told me that he is extremely concerned that the Government have no clear plan for supporting farmers who are sacrificing their land and livelihoods to plug the gaps in rural infrastructure. By acting now, we can protect homes, safeguard livelihoods and create greater flood resilience for rural communities.

17:12

[Dr Neil Hudson (Epping Forest) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. I congratulate the hon. Member for Warrington South (Sarah Hall) on securing this important debate and allowing us to address the important issue of flood risk and flood defence infrastructure in the north-west. We have heard powerful contributions from across the House today: from the hon. Members for Warrington South, for Cheadle (Mr Morrison), for Burnley (Oliver Ryan), for Leigh and Atherton (Jo Platt), for Stockport (Navendu Mishra) and for Wythenshawe and Sale East (Mike Kane).

The hon. Member for Warrington South started off by highlighting the key points about the mental health impacts of flooding and the anxiety and trauma that people face. As we face ever more extreme weather, it is right that we discuss the Government’s role in flood prevention, preparedness and management. The devastation brought in the past two years by Storms Babette, Kieran and Henk is a grim reminder that vigilance and forward planning remain essential. When thinking about the north-west, we remember the catastrophic impacts of Storm Desmond in 2015. Across the north-west and beyond, families, farmers and business owners know all too well the havoc that flooding brings to bricks and mortar but also the livelihoods and mental health of those living in fear of the next storm. Just this weekend we have had another named storm: storm Claudia. My thoughts go out to the people affected by the flooding, especially in Monmouth. As I said in the Chamber in the urgent question to the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, we cannot overstate the mental health impacts of flooding events and on behalf of His Majesty’s Opposition, I pay tribute to our emergency services, the Environment Agency, local authorities and volunteers who demonstrate extraordinary dedication time and again.

However, our compassion for those affected must be matched by decisive action. The previous Conservative Government took the responsibility of flood resilience extremely seriously. Between 2010 and 2020, four Conservative-led Governments protected more than 600,000 properties from flooding. Our record includes a £2.6 billion investment in flood defences between 2015 and 2021, followed by a further £5.2 billion commitment in 2020. We introduced the £100 million frequently flooded allowance and set out a comprehensive policy statement containing 40 practical actions and five ambitious policies for a more flood-resilient Britain.

Equally, the establishment of Flood Re created an essential safety net, making insurance viable for hundreds of thousands of homeowners. Today, I urge the Minister to build on that by expanding the eligibility. Many small businesses remain excluded, particularly where people live above their shop, and properties built after 2009 are ineligible. Will the Minister commit to reviewing those restrictions to enable fairer access to affordable flood insurance?

We Conservatives recognise that in our rural communities, flood management and environmental stewardship go hand in hand. Through the environmental land management schemes, we rewarded farmers for natural flood management. Farmers across the north-west and across the country have embraced these schemes, restoring wetlands and investing in sustainable land management, which not only reduces flood risk, but improves biodiversity, captures carbon and enhances soil health. Innovative tree-planting programmes, with the right tree in the right place, and river re-wiggling are brilliant examples of natural flood management.

I ask the Minister to confirm that these actions will continue to be funded under ELMS and that this Government remain committed to supporting nature-based solutions as part of our national flood defence strategy. Regrettably, many farmers and communities are now anxious and uncertain. They have been watching this Labour Government abolish the farming resilience fund, which was a lifeline for mental health, and introduce their heartless family farm tax—all at a time when many are still repairing the damage from last season’s storms.

The flood resilience taskforce was designed to co-ordinate national response and readiness, yet the answer to my parliamentary question shows that it has met only infrequently since Labour took office. Can the Minister tell us what tangible outcomes the taskforce has achieved so far? Given the increased frequency of severe storms, the taskforce must be proactive. Will it start to meet more regularly than at quarterly intervals?

I want to acknowledge the charities that provide vital support to those affected, such as YANA—You Are Not Alone—and the Royal Agricultural Benevolent Institution, Yellow Wellies and the Farming Community Network. The impact of flooding is not only physical or financial, but deeply emotional: the anxiety of waiting for the next storm, the trauma of seeing homes and businesses lost and the long path to recovery all leave scars that last for years. Too often, that is ignored. I ask the Minister what steps the Government are taking to deliver holistic support for flood victims not just in the immediate aftermath, when the water subsides and the blue lights leave, but for the long term.

In summary, communities who face the threat of flooding need certainty. They need reassurance that preventive measures will be sustained, that robust support is available when disaster strikes, and that their physical and mental wellbeing is taken seriously. I very much hope that the Minister will use this debate to provide that clarity and to guarantee that the Government will stand by our rural and urban communities, protect funding for flood defence and address the toll, both physical and mental, that flooding continues to inflict on our country.

17:18

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Emma Hardy)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Warrington South (Sarah Hall) on securing this debate on a highly important matter. Flood and coastal erosion risk has increased and is projected to continue to increase as a result of climate change. I hope that that is at the forefront of all the conversations at COP this week.

A priority for this Government is to protect communities around the country from flooding and to improve the resilience of the country. I recognise the challenge that all constituents, including my own, face during extreme weather events. I sympathise about the impact on households and businesses and, of course, on people’s mental health. Now more than ever, it is important to act to improve our country’s resilience to flooding, and that is exactly what this Government are doing.

Before I respond to Members’ remarks, I wish to raise the issue of Storm Claudia, which brought heavy rain and high winds to the UK over the weekend. The worst impacts were felt in south-east Wales. A major incident was declared in Monmouth because of significant flooding in the town and evacuations; The incident was stood down on Sunday, and I met my hon. Friend the Member for Monmouthshire (Catherine Fookes) this morning. My sympathies go out to all those affected by the flooding—I personally know the distress and upset that flooding can cause—and my thanks go to the Environment Agency, emergency services, local authorities, other responders who were volunteers and all the people who have worked together to protect and support communities and who continue to do so. As flooding is a devolved policy issue, I have contacted the First Minister of Wales to offer my support, and the Environment Agency has offered support locally, including any mutual aid that may be requested by Natural Resources Wales.

I now turn to the focus of today’s debate. I like the passion that my hon. Friend the Member for Warrington South brought to this conversation. It shows clearly how much this issue means to her and what an important issue it is to her constituents. I thank her for her continued engagement on the Sankey brook flood risk management scheme, which aims to reduce the flood risk to homes and businesses from Sankey brook, Dallam brook and Longford brook in Warrington.

We aim to announce in March 2026 the further list of schemes that will receive investment during 2026-27, but with further announcements to follow each year subsequently. This announcement will follow the regular statutory yearly process for allocating flood funding, with support from the regional flood and coastal committees across the country. The reason we do it in this way is to give local people some say over the money and the schemes that are happening in their area, so it is really important that the regional flood and coastal committees play their role in looking at how the money is best spent and helping to ensure that it meets local priorities.

In 2026-27, we are prioritising projects that are already in construction—we are basically just getting on with building stuff—so the money will be going into projects that are literally being built. I would say, “Build, baby, build,” but I think someone else may have used that in a different debate. We will be delivering flood projects. This will deliver flood risk reductions as soon as possible and will secure the best value for money for taxpayers by avoiding costs that would be incurred if these projects were delayed. We will just get on with doing it and get on with building them.

The EA remains committed to the long-term goals of Sankey brook flood risk management scheme and will continue to work closely with Warrington borough council and United Utilities on progressing the scheme. There will continue to be close working on that as it goes on, and I will update my hon. Friend with any information that I have.

I was quite excited about one point raised in this debate—I am probably the only Minister to get excited about pre-pipe conversations. We can continue to build defences larger and larger, but as so many hon. Members said during the debate, if we slow the flow, if we deal with what happens to the floodwater elsewhere, we do not need as many concrete defences when we reach the bottom of the hill. What is really interesting about the pre-pipe idea is looking at how we prevent lots of the floodwater from ending up in the combined sewerage system, because when these sewerage systems become overwhelmed, what happens? We have a pollution incident, we have flooding—we have something happening around the country.

The pre-pipe idea is so sensible, but the previous flood funding formula rules inhibited natural flood management and inhibited what we wanted, which was to do things in a more innovative way. Our water White Paper takes the issue of flooding and water more holistically to look at the pre-pipe idea. Basically, where is the floodwater going to go? The floodwater is going to go somewhere when we have a downpour, so where do we want it to go and how do we design it to be in the places where we want it, rather than the places where we do not want it? It is a really interesting idea.

We have also increased the weighting for natural flood management. Under the old scheme, there was a separate fund for natural flood management, but that was because the actual formula did not result in natural flood management outcomes. The reason was that with natural flood management, it is not an engineered solution. We cannot build natural flood management and say, “I guarantee this changes the flood risk bracket—I guarantee this natural flood management scheme will hold this much water,” because by its nature it is a natural flood management scheme. We have changed the rules and the system around them to enable us to have more natural flood management.

The other thing of real interest in how the flood funding formula works is that we have given a deprivation weighting, because we know that areas with higher levels of deprivation are often the last to recover from a flooding incident and find it the most difficult to recover. Adding a weighting for deprivation and an emphasis on natural flood management to the formula that allocates where the money will be spent enables us to have more nature-based solutions and protect those who are most in need and least able to respond to flood events.

The EA budget has increased, not decreased. Under this Labour Government, we increased it by £188 million this year, and our flood budget of £10.5 billion is a record investment—the most money that has ever been spent on flooding. As a Labour Government, we can proudly say that we are putting the most money ever into flooding and giving the Environment Agency the most money it has ever had.

[Oliver Ryan]

It is great to hear about the record funding to tackle flooding. I wonder whether I can copy the words of another Member and invite the Minister to my constituency to see some of the great benefits of that funding increase in Padiham.

[Emma Hardy]

That is very exciting. I was offered beer by my hon. Friend the Member for Stockport (Navendu Mishra), so perhaps I can come for a visit on the way.

The issue of forecasting was raised. We have improved our flood warning and informing system, with a new system going live on, I think, 21 October. The maps allow people to zoom down for more detailed information. Constant work is going on to make our forecasting more accurate. I encourage all hon. Members to talk to the specialists at the Met Office about how they do this work. It is more art than science, because they have to look at different predictions. If there are heavy downpours concentrated in one area, as we had last year, it becomes difficult to judge exactly, but they are continually working to improve the forecasts. Our flood forecasting in this country is some of the best and most accurate in the world, but there is always more that we can do.

Many hon. Members raised the issue of insurance. We had an insurance roundtable. As I have explained before, the floods resilience taskforce is a huge group of people who meet together, before creating action groups that go away and focus on particular issues. We have just had an action group to look into insurance—who is getting it, who is not getting it, how affordable it is and what information is out there. There is also the flood insurance directory, which I am happy to circulate among Members; it allows people to find something that is affordable. I have been pushing insurance companies to offer the Build Back Better scheme, which gives people an extra £10,000 to make their properties more flood-resilient, to as many as possible. Greater Manchester combined authority is doing great work, taking a combined look at how we tackle flooding: it is one of the best examples of that holistic working around the country. The authority sits on the floods resilience taskforce to offer advice.

I thank all hon. Members for their contributions. It was lovely to visit Leigh and Atherton and talk to people there. I have met the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) to discuss watercourse maintenance, and I stand by my promise to visit next year.

On insurance—I apologise if everyone knows this—I want to flag something about how Flood Re works. It puts a levy on everybody else who pays insurance, so every time someone asks that the scheme be increased or widened, or that more people benefit from it, I want to sound a note of caution, because that would result in people who are not at risk paying more for their insurance. That is how it works: it is a levy system. It would be wonderful to have lots more money for everything, but I hope that everyone who is asking me for extra money will support our Budget next week.

Finally, let me thank my hon. Friend the Member for Warrington South for securing this debate on the incredibly important issue of flood risk and defence. We should all encourage our constituents to sign up for flood alerts and warnings, have a flood plan and know what to do if there is a flood emergency. A pack has gone out to every Member of Parliament and was circulated again just last week with a “Dear colleague” letter. Will Members please use that information and share it as much as possible, so we can ensure that everybody is prepared for the winter ahead?

[Dr Andrew Murrison (in the Chair)]

I call Sarah Hall to wind up extremely briefly.

17:29

[Sarah Hall]

Thanks, everyone. It has been a fantastic debate.

[Dr Andrew Murrison (in the Chair)]

That was commendably brief.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered flood risk and flood defence infrastructure in the North West.

17:29

Sitting adjourned.